RED DRUM: ANOTHER TROUBLED, STATE-MANAGED FISHERY

 

Back in 2014, a coalition of fishing industry, boating industry, and anglers’ rights organizations seeking to weaken the National Marine Fisheries Service’s power to constrain anglers’ harvests issued a manifesto.  It was called “A Vision for Managing America’s Saltwater Recreational Fisheries,” and was based on the premise that the federal fishery management system, which relies on science-based annual catch limits to maintain the long-term health of fish stocks, was not suited to managing recreational fisheries.

The various organizations argued that, while the poundage-based federal management system was fine for managing the commercial fleet, anglers were better served by state fishery managers, who established regulations that were more aspirational than prescriptive; that is, while such managers hoped that state recreational regulations would protect stocks from excessive harvest, such regulations weren’t tied to an annual landings limit, and regulators weren’t required to reduce landings if overfishing occurred or the stock became overfished.

The “Vision” statement argued that

“Many state natural resource agencies, especially those in the South, recognize the benefits of a vibrant recreational fishing community and have managed to promote it while conserving their saltwater resources.  Striped bass, red drum, black drum, summer flounder, sheepshead, snook, spotted seatrout, and tarpon are examples of successfully managed state fisheries that sufficiently meet the needs of recreational anglers while providing extensive economic benefits to their state and the national economies.”

Nearly nine years have passed since the manifesto was issued.  In the years since, we have seen the same coalition of industry-affiliated groups continue to harp on the “statemanagement is best” theme, particularly with respect to Gulf of Mexico redsnapper, a species that federal regulators are doing their best to rebuild in the face of continued recreational overharvest.  We have seen passage of a watered-down “Modern Fish Act,” which wasoriginally intended to weaken the federal recreational fishery managementprocess, but was rendered more-or-less harmless before it reached thePresident’s desk. 

There is no evidence to suggest that their efforts to undercut the federal fishery management system will abate in the foreseeable future.

Thus, it’s probably worth analyzing how well their central premise—that state managers are successfully managing recreational fisheries—has held up over the past few years.

We can start with the fact that striped bass are overfished, and summer flounder are federally managed (states do set local regulations, but abide by NMFS’ annual catch limits), while snook are overfished on Florida’s Atlantic coast (but not in the Gulf).  There is no stock assessment for tarpon, making it difficult to convincingly argue that the fish are doing well, although one scientific paper noted that

“multiple lines of evidence suggest that populations of M. atlanticus [ the Atlantic tarpon] appear to have declined from historical levels throughout their range…Using a generation time of 12.7 years for tarpon, the estimated decline in FAO landings over three generations (38 years) is >80%.”

So tarpon probably aren’t doing all that well, either.

It’s harder to tell about sheepshead, since no one has yet established reference points to denote overfishing or an overfished stock, although Florida wildlife managers think that the species is probably doing OK.  Black drum are in a similar situation.   As of 2015, Louisiana deemed the stock healthy; on the East Coast, the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission believes the stock to be healthy, although “declining slowly.”

When we get to speckled trout or, more properly, “spotted seatrout,” the news isn’t as good.  The ASMFC lists the stock’s status in the Atlantic as “unknown,” Texas admits that it can only sustain its current recreational harvest level by introducing hatchery-produced fish into state waters, and Louisiana is only now reluctantly addressing its badly depleted speckled trout stock, which it has allowed anglers to overfish for years—and some of the same folks who have loudly praised state managers are nonetheless objecting to the size limit proposed to rebuild that badly overfished population.

So, out of the eight popular recreational fisheries that the “Vision” report held up as examples of successful state-level fishery management, we find one stock that actually sees NMFS, not the states, establish the annual catch limits; three that are overfished in all or part of their range; one that is unassessed, but seems to be depleted; one that lacks the reference points needed to determine stock status, but might be OK; and another that, while healthy, is in long-term decline over a substantial portion of its range.

The "Vision" report might call that sort of record a success, but I--and I suspect many others--disagree.

Red drum are the last of the state-managed fisheries praised in the "Vision" report.  As it turns out, that species is having its problems too, particularly in the Gulf of Mexico, the very place where the “Redfish Wars” of the late 20^th Century, which outlawed the commercial fishery in a number of states, took place.  Which means that the drum's current decline can be laid directly at the recreational fishermen’s door.

News of the red drum’s troubles came in a stock assessment recently performed by the State of Louisiana, which revealed that

“Management thresholds have been established, through the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council (GMFMC), for Red Drum in the state of Louisiana as a 20% spawning potential ratio, which is based on a 30% escapement rate from the inshore fishery.  Based on results of this assessment, the Louisiana Red Drum stock is currently not overfished, but is experiencing overfishing.  The current spawning potential ratio estimate is 40% and the current escapement rate estimate is 20%.  The recent downturn in recreational landings are [sic] due to a series of below average annual recruitment to the stock where the most recent annual recruitment estimates are the lowest in the time-series examined.  Management actions will be needed in order to prevent future overfishing and prevent the stock from becoming overfished.”

While the stock assessment is specific to red drum “occurring in [Louisiana] and adjacent federal waters,” it has implications for the broader Gulf of Mexico population, as adult red drum may migrate 700 to 900 kilometers (approximately 450 to 500 miles) from their natal estuaries.

Louisiana deserves credit for conducting the stock assessment and concluding that management action is needed to end overfishing and to prevent the stock from becoming overfished, although it’s probably also worth noting that the reference points used to evaluate the health of the red drum stock were developed by federal fishery managers and not by the state.

The next question is what Louisiana is going to do to correct the problem.

If red drum were a federally-managed species, the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act would require that annual catch limits, set low enough to prevent overfishing, be established each year; Magnuson-Stevens would also require that anglers be held accountable should they exceed such catch limits.  Louisiana fishery managers are not bound by any such requirements.  While they may, in good faith, intend to adopt rules that prevent recreational fishermen from overfishing the red drum resource, they have no legal obligation to do so, and their efforts to end overfishing could be stymied by angling organizations that employ political influence to avoid harvest reductions.

We’ve already seen that happen with Louisiana’s speckled trout.

All the way back in 2016, I noted that Louisiana’s speckled trout population was overfished, with abundance only about half of the target level.   More than six years have passed, yet Louisiana regulators have yet to adopt management measures that will end overfishing and rebuild the stock; potentially effective regulations have been proposed, but are meeting resistance from some members of the angling community.

Given how important red drum are to Louisiana’s inshore anglers, it is likely that more restrictive red drum regulations could follow the same trajectory, although Louisiana fishery managers are talking about having such rules in place for at least part of the 2023 season.

How strict must the new rules be?

The current escapement rate of red drum is only 20%, just half of the escapement target.  Because too few fish are entering the adult population, the spawning stock biomass is decreasing as well; fisheries managers expect that, unless landings are reduced, spawning stock biomass will fall below the level needed to maintain the 30% spawning potential ratio by 2025.

Once that occurs, it will take a 35% reduction in landings to return to a 30% SPR by 2050.  A 40% reduction will cut 10 years off the rebuilding time, while a 50% reduction would probably achieve the 30% target by 2034.  Further reductions would only speed up the recovery by a few years; even a 65% harvest reduction would only slice another three years off the rebuilding period, achieving 30% SPR by 2031.

The target 40% escapement rate could be achieved far more quickly.  As 30% harvest reduction is likely to achieve 40% escapement by 2028, a 35% reduction by 2026, and a 45% reduction by 2024. 

Louisiana fishery managers believe that they could achieve a 35% reduction by imposing a 16- to 22-inch slot limit and 2-fish bag, including an over-slot fish.  Other combinations that would achieve the same result might include a 16- to 20-inch slot and 3-fish bag, a 17- to 26-inch slot and 2-fish bag, a 17- to 20-inch slot and 5-fish bag, an 18- to 25-inch slot and 3-fish bag, or a 19- to 27-inch slot with a 4-fish bag; for all possible combinations, one over-slot fish might be retained.

A 50% reduction could be achieved with, among other combinations, a 16- to 24-inch slot and 1-fish bag, a 17- to 20-inch slot and 2-fish bag, and 18- to 20-inch slot and 4-fish bag, or a 19- to 21-inch slot and a 5-fish bag, again with one over-slot fish included in each of the possible options.

Removing the over-slot fish from any of the slot size/bag limit options would significantly increase the resulting reduction.

All of the above size and bag limit options are significantly more restrictive than Louisiana’s current 16- to 27-inch slot and five fish bag limit, with one over-slot drum included.  Louisiana will soon be seeking public input on the proposed management measures, but there is no reason to believe that adopting new regulations for red drum will be any less controversial, or take any less time to adopt, than the proposed speckled trout rules.

While federal law includes a legally enforceable requirement to prevent overfishing, as well as legally enforceable deadlines for rebuilding overfished stocks, such features missing from most state management systems; without such legal requirements to guide their actions, state managers are far more susceptible to, and too frequently are guided by, political and economic concerns.

So why does the angling industry, and industry-affiliated angler groups, insist that state management is the superior system?  The answer might lie in the "Vision" statement paragraph quoted above, which claims that state fishery managers “sufficiently meet the needs of recreational anglers while providing extensive economic benefits to their state and the national economies. [emphasis added]”

In other words, state fishery managers do a good enough job of providing fishing opportunities for anglers, while providing extensive benefits to the angling industry.

Anglers might not want to settle for "good enough," but given that the “Vision” document was produced by an industry coalition, and released at an industry trade show, it’s not surprising that promoting economic activity, rather than healthy and abundant fish stocks, was its primary goal.  And there is little doubt that state fishery managers are more aware of, and more responsive to, economic concerns than their federal counterparts.

On the other hand, state managers don’t have a very good record of maintaining fish stocks at healthy and abundant levels over the long term.  Evidence of any such success is difficult, perhaps close to impossible, to find.  Gulf red drum provide just one more example of state managers failing to adopt management measures that prevent overfishing and the decline of an important fish stock.

And so long as state managers eschew firm catch limits, and are not legally bound to prevent overfishing or rebuild overfished stocks, that “one more” example will be far from the last.