1

Introduction

This chapter sets out the context of the study, the Statement of Task, and the organization of the report. It provides succinct background information on the nature of recreational fisheries, the federal fishery management framework, and the role of catch data in management. This background provides essential context for the Statement of Task, for the approach taken in addressing the task, and for the structure of the report.

RECREATIONAL FISHERIES, MANAGEMENT, AND DATA

Marine recreational fishing is a popular activity enjoyed by more than 9 million Americans annually and is a positive driver of the growing American marine—or blue—economy. Recreational fishing is estimated to have had an economic impact of $73 billion, supported 487,000 jobs, and contributed more than $41 billion to the nation’s gross domestic product (GDP) in 2017, all increases over the previous year (NOAA, 2020). In 2018, the economic impact of marine tourism and recreation activities, including recreational fishing, grew to $227 billion and contributed $143 billion to the U.S. GDP—more than any other blue economy sector (Nicolls et al., 2020). Marine recreational fishing activities are conducted nationwide.

Defined as “fishing for sport or pleasure” in the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA),¹ recreational fishing has multiple characteristics that set it apart from commercial or subsistence fishing. Motivations of recreational anglers are diverse. Harvesting of fish is only one of several possible motivations, with others including, for example, spending time in nature, escaping the daily grind, spending time with friends and family, and self-actualization. Some anglers can attain satisfaction without harvesting any fish at all, and certain recreational fisheries are managed primarily for catch and release. Recreational fishing is further characterized by large numbers of participants who typically spend only a small fraction of their time fishing and individually harvest only a small number of fish. Commercial fishing, by contrast, tends to involve

___________________

¹ Fishery Conservation and Management Act of 1976, Pub. L. No. 94-265 (see https://www.congress.gov/94/statute/STATUTE-90/STATUTE-90-Pg331.pdf).

fewer participants fishing on a full-time or part-time basis and harvesting much larger amounts of fish per individual for the primary purpose of providing seafood for consumption by others and generating income from the sale of product.

Even though individual recreational anglers may harvest very few fish or no fish at all, collectively they exert substantial pressure on many marine fish stocks. This is the result of both direct harvest (which remains an important motivation for many marine anglers) and elevated mortality suffered by fish that have been captured and released alive. For example, it has been estimated that recreational fishing is now the greatest source of removals and fishing mortality in oceanic fish stocks in the Southeastern United States (Shertzer et al., 2019). In some marine fisheries, the demand for recreational fishing is so high that anglers reach the sustainable limits of their harvest a few days after the fishing season begins. It is therefore important for marine recreational fisheries to be managed effectively so as to maintain the quality of the recreational fishing experience and ensure its ecological sustainability for the present and future generations.

The MSA requires fisheries in federal waters to be managed using annual catch limits (ACLs) to ensure their sustainability. ACLs are determined on the basis of scientific stock assessments and represent the maximum amount of fish that can be harvested without exceeding the exploitation rate that is estimated to provide the maximum sustainable yield (MSY) from the stock while accounting for scientific and management uncertainty. The stock assessment methods used to inform ACLs vary in complexity, from assessment models that integrate many different types of data to simple approaches based on landings histories, with the choice of method depending largely on data availability and the importance of the fishery.

Determination and implementation of ACLs is reliant on fisheries catch data. Data on past catches are an important input for the stock assessment models used to determine ACLs. Data on catches in the current year are crucial for implementing the ACLs (i.e., ensuring that catches do not exceed them). Catch data for commercial fisheries are collected through such systems as reporting by seafood dealers, logbooks, and other means that provide a near-complete census of catches in an accurate and timely manner. These systems are enabled by rigorous licensing and reporting requirements for fishers and seafood dealers and by the limited numbers of fishery participants. Because commercial catch data tend to be both accurate and timely, they not only support fisheries stock assessments but also facilitate in-season management in which catches are monitored in near real time, and the fishing season is closed when the ACL is reached.

Catch data for recreational fisheries, on the other hand, are more difficult to collect because of the large numbers of participants and access points and the lack of universal mandatory catch reporting. Recreational fisheries are also challenging because of the great variability across those many anglers in fishing techniques or practices, trip goals or satisfaction drivers, and target species. Although recreational data for the for-hire sector (e.g., charter vessels, headboats) are now increasingly dependent on electronic logbook reporting for a census of permit-holding vessels, catch data for the private recreational sector—which has by far the largest number of participants—are ultimately collected using sample surveys that cover only a small proportion of anglers and rely on angler recall and direct observation of catches. Recreational catch data therefore tend to be more uncertain, more sensitive to details of survey design, and less timely relative to the data collected for commercial fisheries. For example, the Marine Recreational Information Program (MRIP), the most widely used recreational fishing survey in the United States, provides catch estimates with coefficients of variation (CVs) of 20–40 percent (compared with 0–5 percent for commercial catch data). Point estimates changed dramatically, sometimes by factors of 2 or 3, when the design of the survey was modified to improve the representativeness of samples and response rates.² The lag

___________________

² This change in survey design, implemented in 2018, was due to the transition from the Marine Recreational Fishery Statistical Survey to the new and improved MRIP.

between the time at which recreational catches occur and the catches being quantified in MRIP is about 3–4 months on average. These characteristics of recreational catch data have consequences for the assessment and management of recreational and mixed-use (where both commercial and recreational fishing occur together) fisheries.

Assessments of fisheries with large recreational components are more uncertain and may change substantially when survey methods are adjusted. Implementation of ACLs in such fisheries is further challenged by the lack of timeliness in survey data (which typically lag actual catches by weeks or months). Therefore, in-season management of recreational fisheries (and recreational components of mixed-use fisheries) is rare. Instead, recreational fisheries are managed by setting regulations that are projected to restrict recreational catches within the ACL and determining, after the event, whether this has been achieved. If catches turn out to be below the ACL, that underage in catch is normally lost to the anglers, and the associated benefits are forgone. If catches exceed the ACL, accountability measure regulations may require that any overage be repaid in the following season by modifying future harvest limits. The inability to implement the ACL precisely may therefore result in lost fishing opportunities within either the current or the following fishing season and associated dissatisfaction among anglers. It should be noted that underages can occur for reasons other than the implementation uncertainty of the ACL—for example, inclement weather or regulatory closures unrelated to the stock in question, or unexpected declines in stock abundance—and that such underages can have different management implications. The focus in this report is primarily on underages or overages caused by the implementation uncertainty of the ACL in recreational fisheries.

The difficulties of estimating recreational catches in a precise and timely manner can cause direct management problems for recreational and mixed-use fisheries. They also contribute to an erosion of trust in the management system among recreational fisheries stakeholders. Other factors affecting trust in and satisfaction with fisheries management include perceptions that the management system offers limited opportunities for engagement by recreational fishing stakeholders and is unresponsive to their inputs (Crandall et al., 2019). Criticism of the federal management of marine recreational fisheries has been brought into the political arena by representatives of the recreational fishing industry. The influential Morris-Deal Report (CSRFM, 2014), developed by a committee convened by Bass Pro Shop founder Johnny Morris and then-president of Maverick Boats, Scott Deal, argued that recreational fisheries are inherently different from commercial fisheries and so need to be managed differently. Partly in response, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) established the National Saltwater Recreational Fisheries Policy (NOAA, 2015). Starting around the same time, NOAA undertook an extensive revision of the MRIP survey methodology; the MRIP survey and its recent improvements have been evaluated in a previous National Academies study (NASEM, 2017). Subsequently, the Modernizing Recreational Fisheries Management Act, or Modern Fish Act (MFA), was signed into law on December 31, 2018. The MFA amended specific portions of the MSA to highlight the differences between management of commercial and recreational fisheries. The MFA requires the federal management agency, NOAA, to implement certain changes, studies, and reviews aimed at reforming the federal management of recreational fisheries. This report addresses one of the requirements of the MFA: to “evaluate … how the design of the Marine Recreational Information Program, for the purposes of stock assessment and the determination of stock management reference points, can be improved to better meet the needs of in-season management of annual catch limits.”

The characteristics of recreational fisheries pose unique challenges to management, but they do not obviate the need for these fisheries to be managed effectively, both for their own benefit (maintenance of sustainable fishing quality) and the conservation of national resources and ecosystems. It is therefore crucial to assess how management systems can be reformed in ways that improve management outcomes for recreational and mixed-use fisheries. Management outcomes, in this

context, are not limited to regulatory compliance or the ecological sustainability of fisheries, but also encompass economic and social dimensions (Abbott et al., 2018; Asche et al., 2018). That is the fundamental challenge addressed in this report.

STATEMENT OF TASK FOR THIS STUDY

This study follows on the above-referenced National Academies study (NASEM, 2017) focused specifically on the MRIP program and the precision of catch estimates derived therefrom. The current study is concerned specifically with the use of MRIP-produced estimates and alternative or supplementary surveys and ancillary information for in-season management of recreational fisheries and with alternative management measures that may relieve the issues encountered in managing recreational fisheries with ACLs. The Statement of Task for this study is given in Box 1.1.

REPORT ORGANIZATION

Chapter 2 of this report provides an expanded description of the U.S. fisheries management and assessment framework, including the various components and legal requirements of the federal fishery management system and detailed descriptions of the MSA and MFA. This chapter also contains descriptions of the stock assessment process and determination of reference points, ACLs, and accountability measures and evaluates fisheries management and stock assessment needs. Chapter 3 details the existing recreational fisheries survey programs and approaches to ACL-based management for the Northeast, Mid-Atlantic, South-Atlantic, Gulf, and Pacific regions. Chapter 4

explores how MRIP-produced catch estimates, supplementary survey data, and ancillary data can be combined and optimized for in-season management. It also provides survey design and methodology options for improving or supplementing the program. Chapter 5 outlines alternative management strategies for recreational fisheries for which MRIP data do not adequately serve the needs of in-season management. It provides suggestions for multiple alternative management options that hold potential to address the ACL management challenges while also serving broader social and economic management objectives.

REFERENCES

This page intentionally left blank.