WHAT DO THE RESULTS OF THE GREAT RED SNAPPER COUNT MEAN?

The National Marine Fisheries Service has issued its final report on the so-called “Great Red Snapper Count,” a comprehensive, state-of-the art survey designed to determine the red snapper biomass in the United States’ portion of the Gulf of Mexico.

As I reported last fall, when the preliminary report on the Count came out, researchers had determined that there are about three times as many Gulf red snapper than previously believed, largely due to the fact that about two-thirds of the fish are found on low-profile, sand or mud bottom, and not on the high-profile pieces where most people fished, which were the focus of previous surveys.

Now, the big question is figuring out what the new data means.

NMFS expressed cautious optimism, saying

“The discovery of additional biomass is good news which may help ease some management restrictions.  [emphasis added]”

Others have expressed more certainty.  Senator Bill Cassidy (R-LA), a co-sponsor of the bill that appropriated 9.5 million dollars for the Count and, along with universities’ matching funds, made the research possible, declared that

“This study shows that there is three times more red snapper in the Gulf than previously thought.  This new information should translate into greater access and longer fishing seasons for families.”

Rep. Garret Graves (R-La) made an even more aggressive prediction.  The (Raleigh, North Carolina) Herald-Sun has reported that Rep. Graves is

“hoping for a substantial increase in quotas for red snapper in the Gulf,”

and has said that

“Anything less would be a disservice to the American public.”

Those legislators could be right. 

But…

Everyone needs to remember that, while the results of the Count represent very valuable data, that’s all they are—data to be used in a stock assessment, and not an end in themselves.  As noted by Dr. Greg Stunz, the lead researcher on the Great Red Snapper Count project,

“This is just the beginning of future assessment meetings and activities with managing agencies, Scientific and Statistical Committees, the NOAA Southwest Fisheries Science Center, and the Gulf of Mexico Fisheries Management Council.  These activities will facilitate direct incorporation of these data into the management process.”

That sort of cautious, science-forward approach may not please all red snapper stakeholders.

The Coastal Conservation Association, an “anglers’ rights” group that is based in Houston, Texas and has members throughout the Gulf, has long clashed with federal scientists over red snapper management.  CCA is already challenging, without factual basis, efforts to calibrate state recreational red snapper data into a “common currency” that will allow it to be used in conjunction with the federal Marine Recreational Information Program.  The organization was one of the prime movers behind getting federal funding for the Great Red Snapper Count, and clearly wants to use the results of the Count in a way that allows anglers in some Gulf states to avoid being held accountable for exceeding their states’ red snapper allocations.

That became clear in comments made by CCA Vice President Ted Venker who, before the final Count report was released, was already saying,

“The hope is between now and April, NOAA will manage to plug the new numbers into an interim analysis to avoid penalizing Mississippi and Alabama so severely in the short run.  Using the new data to prop up NOAA’s broken system is not how the results of the count should be used, but it could help solve NOAA’s latest self-manufactured crisis.  There is a lot of flexibility to avoid crushing those two states that the agency seems unwilling to use.”

And it’s not impossible that, when the Count data is incorporated into the current stock assessment model, it will allow the recreational harvest limit to be substantially raised, and reveal that none of the states actually exceeded their recreational red snapper quotas.

But it’s not certain that will happen, either.

According to Clay Porch, the Director of NOAA’s Southeast Fisheries Science Center, the Count data is currently being peer reviewed, and scientists will present their findings to the Gulf of Mexico Fisheries Management Council next month.  After receiving the data, the Council might well decide to revise red snapper quotas, although anyone hoping that quotas will triple are very, very likely to be disappointed.

Right now, no one is guessing how large any quota increase—assuming that there is one—might be.

There are a number of reasons for that.

Red snapper management is based on maintaining an adequate spawning potential in the population.  Biologists previously believed that red snapper had a relatively high level of fecundity—that is, they believed that a fairly small snapper population was able to produce enough eggs to not only withstand the current level of landings, but also increase snapper abundanceer at the same time.  

If the population of adult red snapper is actually three times as large as previously believed, it follows that the species might also be less fecund than previously believed.  If it takes more fish to sustain the current level of removals, then the target fishing mortality rate—the level of fishing mortality that will produce maximum sustainable yield—may well be significantly lower than believed as well. 

If that is the case, any increase in quota will probably not be as large as people expect.

In addition, tripling the estimated number of adult red snapper doesn’t necessarily translate into a tripling of spawning stock biomass.  An “adult” red snapper is defined in the Count as a fish that is two or more years old, and many of the newly discovered red snapper are apparently younger, smaller individuals.  While some two-year-old fish may be sexually mature, most red snapper don’t reach maturity until four years old, and both spawning frequency and egg production increase with age.  A pamphlet issued by the State of Louisiana states that a young female may only produce 30,000 eggs, while an older fish may produce 75,000,000.

If most of the snapper “found” by the Count are smaller, younger individuals, then they may represent far less spawning potential than anglers and legislators expect.

And there is also the possibility that anglers currently hoping for a big quota increase won’t be too happy if they get what they wish for. 

Right now, under the current recreational quota, most fishing takes place on high-profile reefs, banks, and artificial structures such as oil rigs, which are easy for weekend fishermen to find; all they need is one of the publicly-available compilations of fishing spots, a depthfinder, and a GPS.  But the majority of the fish are spread out over various, small

“remnant oyster reefs, salt domes, holes scoured out by currents, shipwrecks, fallen shipping containers, and other bottom features”

that, in many instances, might only be a few feet across, aren’t marked on any NOAA or commercial charts, and only rise a very small distance above, or fall the same distance below, the general bottom contours, making them difficult to spot on a depthfinder screen in a hundred or more feet of water.

Thus, it’s likely that even if the quota is substantially increased, most recreational fishermen will continue to target the red snapper that relate to obvious structure, a behavior that could see most of the fish, and particularly the larger individuals, quickly stripped off such structure once the season begins.

The Herald-Sun revealed that Southeast Fisheries Science Center Director Porch has already warned that

“A big quota increase could deplete the natural and artificial reefs where most fishing occurs,”

and noted that the fish found on the scattered, low-profile structure won’t immediately move to repopulate the depleted reefs.

The same concern was echoed by Sepp Hekubo of the Environmental Defense Fund, a conservation group, who reported that even under the current quota, recreational fishing pressure is already depleting the number of snapper on frequently-fished structure.

“At the end of last year’s season a lot of popular fishing spots were pretty beaten down…If you showed up at the beginning of the season there was great fishing, but by the end people couldn’t catch fish big enough to keep.”

Thus, the impacts of the Great Red Snapper Count aren’t as easy to predict as some people would like to believe.  The Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council’s Scientific and Statistical Committee will meet with independent experts later this week, in an effort to formulate some guidance that can be provided ahead of the next Council meeting.

Right now, it’s impossible to predict what such guidance might be. 

Whatever it is, one thing remains true.

The Great Red Snapper Count represents a big step forward in scientists' understanding of the Gulf red snapper resource.  And good science, which it certainly seems to be, is always a good thing, even if it doesn’t lead to the results that some people had hoped for.