TIME TO REDUCE BLACK SEA BASS DISCARDS

Black sea bass have become an increasingly important part of the recreational fishery in New England and New York.  In 2020, black sea bass harvest in that region was a mere 750,000 fish, weighing about 975,000 pounds.  That number increased to about 2.9 million fish weighing nearly 5.6 million pounds by 2010, and to almost 3.7 million fish, weighing 6.9 million pounds, last year. 

While such numbers are significant enough on their own, they gain added importance when compared to landings of other recreational species, particularly summer flounder (5.4 million fish in 2000, 1.2 million in 2010, 0.9 million in 2019) that have declined over the same period.

Black sea bass landings have been buoyed by an extremely large year class produced in 2011, and another smaller, but still very large, year class in 2015, they are beginning to decline again along with black sea bass abundance.  While the spawning stock biomass was around 240 percent of the target level at the end of 2018, the 2017 year class was the smallest recorded in the past thirty years.  As a result of fewer new fish entering the population, projections show the spawning stock biomass continuing to decline, at least in the near term, to about 160% of target this year and 145% of target in 2021.

At the same time, revised estimates of recreational landings show that such harvest is higher than previously believed; managers’ decision to leave 2020 regulations unchanged from those in place throughout 2019 is likely to result in the recreational catch limit to be exceeded by about 23%, while the acceptable biological catch recommended by the Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council’s Scientific and Statistical Committee, which is supposed to set the absolute upper limit of landings, is expected to be exceeded by 12 percent.

Given the relatively low summer flounder recruitment through at least 2018, along with the fact that striped bass and bluefish are both overfished, it’s likely that black sea bass’ importance to the recreational fishery in the northeast isn’t going to wane at any time soon.  And given that black sea bass are what might be deemed a “meat” fish—that is, a fish that is sought primarily for food, as opposed to a “sport” fish such as striped bass or bluefish, that is most often caught and released—high levels of fishing pressure also mean high levels of landings.  Thus, it makes sense to regulate the fishery in a way that best allows anglers to take fish home, without resulting in large numbers of fish being returned, dead or dying, to the ocean.

That poses a problem for black sea bass, which are often caught in deeper waters, and suffer barotrauma when brought up to the surface.  Barotrauma, which can be roughly translated into “wounded from pressure” and occurs when a fish is brought up from deep water to the much lower-pressure environment at the surface, is a common problem in deep water fisheries on every coast, where high release mortality rates have resulted in more restrictive recreational and commercial harvest regulations.

Currently, when proposing regulations, fishery managers assume that about 15 percent of released black sea bass die from various angling-related causes, including barotrauma.  

That’s probably an accurate estimate when fishing in relatively shallow water, but significantly understates discard mortality of fish caught on deeper structure.  

A study conducted by the Partnership for Mid-Atlantic Fisheries Science, released for the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission’s August 2019 meeting, suggests that black sea bass caught on deep (roughly 150 feet or more) structure experienced a release mortality rate slightly in excess of 50 percent, if no efforts were taken to counter the impacts of barotrauma.  On the other hand, fish that were properly vented—had their swim bladders pierced to allow the escape of gasses that prevented the fish from returning to the bottom—experienced a release mortality rate of slightly over 20 percent, not too far off the 15 percent mortality estimate currently being used.

Thus, if fishery managers want to maximize the number of black sea bass that anglers may retain, and minimize the number of such fish that die after release, they would be well-advised to require both private boat anglers and those on for-hire vessels to carry and employ devices that will, if used, allow released fish to return to the bottom after release.

While that would be something new in the black sea bass fishery, and in the New England and Mid-Atlantic regions, the precedent has been set elsewhere.  In the Pacific, rockfish anglers faced a situation that would seem very familiar to recreational black sea bass fishermen in the northeast.  As described in a study produced by Duke University,

“Recreational anglers were facing closures, shorter seasons, and coming close or exceeding harvest guidelines.  As recreational fishermen experienced more restrictions through regulations, the initiative and the drive to address the regulations grew…

“In addition to closures and shorter seasons, participants described the frustration of fishermen perceiving regulatory discards as a wasted resource.  It is frustrating to fishermen to throw a fish overboard that they knew would not survive.”

Such problems led recreational anglers to voluntarily begin using descending devices, and resulted in fishery managers adjusting the discard mortality estimates in response.  It was a win-win situation, that lowered the number of rockfish that died after being released, and led to more liberal regulations that, at the same time, allowed anglers to take more rockfish home.

In the Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic, the same sort of barotrauma concerns arose in the deep water snapper and grouper fisheries.  The South Atlantic Fishery Management Council has adopted Snapper Grouper Regulatory Amendment 29 which, if approved by the National Marine Fisheries Service, will require all vessels bottom fishing in more than 50 feet of water to carry descending devices onboard. 

Amendment 29 may finally permit NMFS to open a meaningful red snapper season in the South Atlantic region, an effort that has been frustrated by the number of still-depleted red snapper that die as a consequence of barotrauma when caught and released in other fisheries.  

While the use of descending devices does create a minor burden for anglers, who must take more time away from fishing while safely releasing their fish, Amendment 29 has garnered strong support from the angling community. 

Even Jeff Angers, President of the anglers rights-oriented Center for Sportfishing Policy, enthusiastically supported the amendment, saying

“The science is clear that the use of descending devices increases the survivability of these deep-water fish.  Although many anglers are already using descending devices, we look forward to Secretary Ross implementing the descending device requirement for all fishermen targeting snapper and grouper in the South Atlantic to better conserve the resource and allow for more opportunity for public access in the future.”

There’s no reason to believe that the use of descending devices, which have already been shown to reduce Pacific rockfish and South Atlantic snapper and grouper survival, wouldn’t benefit black sea bass as well, although they wouldn’t need to be deployed in water as shallow as 50 feet.

In my experience, in the case of black sea bass, 90 feet is the critical juncture.  Fish released in shallower water have no trouble getting back to the bottom on their own, but once you begin taking fish off even slightly deeper structure, you begin seeing floaters, and the number of such floaters quickly increases as the depth increases.  

I frequently fish on a few pieces that lie in 80 to 85 feet of water; except for a couple of sea bass that had lost their tails to predators, and were trying to swim with healed stumps, no released fish ever had trouble getting back down to the bottom.  But when I move just 10 feet deeper, to wrecks in 95 feet of water, that begins to change.  Perhaps 25 percent of the black sea bass suffer from barotrauma, and float on the surface after release.

To deal with the situation, I’ve started to use a “SeaQualizer” descending device, which automatically releases the fish at a pre-set distance below the surface (50, 100 or 150 feet, depending on how deep I am fishing).  The use of such device makes me far more comfortable fishing on deeper wrecks, and extends my sea bass season into months when most of the larger fish are on deep structure.

There’s little doubt that the widespread use of such devices could substantially cut back on black sea bass mortality, and lead to more fish being available for anglers to take home. 

The question is whether such use should be voluntary, or whether it should be required by the Mid-Atlantic Council and NMFS.  The Pacific and South Atlantic fishery management councils split on that issue, with the Pacific Council preferring voluntary adoption and the South Atlantic opting for mandatory use.

So which would be best for black sea bass?

The Duke University report notes that the Pacific Council preferred voluntary use out of concern that

“if use was made mandatory, fishermen participating in dockside surveys might over report their use of descending devices…

“We kind of decided to make it work with the fishing community in order to get them to use them voluntarily and have more accurate information on the frequency of use…

“It was hard to get compliance in the beginning, because they weren’t counting the use of descending devices to reduce the mortality; it became extremely difficult…when the change in the mortality came to the council then the fishermen were told, ‘if you do this, then we are working now on getting you credit for doing it,’ and that changed the whole thing…like a lot of people, they were looking for a return on investment.”

Would northeastern black sea bass fishermen be equally cooperative if they believed that voluntarily using descending devices would lead to longer seasons and/or higher bag limits?  

It’s hard to say.  There is a level of venom among some black sea bass anglers that makes it hard to believe that they consistently comply with existing regulations, much less that they would voluntarily use a descender.

On the other hand, if the use of descenders was made mandatory, is there any hope that such rule could be enforced?  The fishery takes place far from shore, where it’s highly unlikely that law enforcement could know what went on.  The proposed South Atlantic rule gets around that by requiring that descending devices be on board any vessel participating in the snapper/grouper fishery, whether the devices are used or not.

But that is physically a very different fishery; most of the time, fish come aboard at a more relaxed pace, unlike the black sea bass fishery, where anglers use two or three hooks, and often bring up two or three fish at a time.  Under such circumstances, having only one descender on board would be only marginally better than having none on board at all.  

To be effective, one would need something closer to one descender per angler, and not merely one descender per vessel.

Given the cost of the devices, that makes mandating descenders for sea bass far harder to do.  Perhaps it makes more sense to ease into the issue slowly, and only require descenders for boats fishing between November and April or early May, when the sea bass are on deeper structure, and barotrauma becomes a much bigger issue.  

How effective that would be is open to doubt, given that most sea bass are caught between July and October, when plenty of boats are fishing beyond the critical 15-fathom line.

In the end, there would be plenty of things that need sorting out before descenders become a part of the fishery.  But there is little doubt that descenders would make for a better managed black sea bass fishery, and make more black sea bass available to anglers.

If it is an idea whose time has not quite yet come, it is nonetheless and idea whose time is coming up very soon.