Ever wonder where these guys who make the fisheries management decisions get their numbers from? I sure do, as often times, especially in the case of fluke, they seem way out of whack with what I (and others) see on the water. Below is a very brief explanation.
While catch info on commercial fisheries has long been collected, data on recreational fishing was not really gathered in a systematic manner or on a continuing basis until 1979 when the Marine Recreational Fishery Statistics Survey (MRFSS) was created to gage the effect the growing number of anglers were having on the stocks. MRFSS data is collected by two independent, but complementary, surveys: a telephone survey of households in coastal counties, and dockside interviews, or “intercept” surveys conducted by trained interviewers stationed at fishing access sites such as boat ramps, marinas or
fishing piers. The telephone survey is used to collect data on recreational fishing effort (number of trips), while the “dock-side” surveys are used to make estimates on the actual catch (species identity, number, and both weights and lengths of fish caught). Data from the two independent surveys are combined to produce estimates of fishing effort, catch, and participation.
So, from the dockside interviews they generate catch per trip data. The phone interview gives them “number of trips” data. You might be asking how they know who to call. The answer is that they don’t. They just try and call coastal areas and then make an estimate on the of traveling anglers. In fact there seems to be an awful lot of estimations going on here… Have any of you guys ever been called? Have any of you guys seen or heard about a NMFS rep performing a dockside survey in your area? I sure haven’t.
The MRFSS is a poll based on a very limited sampling, unlike the actual count they have in the commercial fishery. As with any poll there is error associated with the estimate. One never really knows if it’s accurate or not. Depending on the sample size it can be very precise, meaning the estimates do not vary much. CCA ASMFC coordinator Dick Braim explains it like this: it’s “like a rifle shooting at a bull’s-eye, you can be a foot low and a foot to the left but have a 1/2"
group at 100 yards, very precise but not very accurate. Alternatively you can have your bullets group in a circle around the bullsye such that the group is 6" at 100 yards - not very precise but pretty accurate.”
The accuracy of this data is a big problem as we saw with the fluke issue this year. Despite the bad weather, the decrease in tackle sales, the decrease in marine fuel sales, the decrease in charter and head boat trips etc. in 2003, the MRFSS data said that there was a significant increase in fluke landings compared to 2001 and 2001 and that NY was overfishing fluke. By all other counts this appears to be impossible… In a last ditch effort to save the head boat industry, NY almost went out of compliance with the Atlantic States Fishery Management Commission, deciding not to do so only at the last minute. Thank God, as it would have wreaked havoc on the whole Atlantic States management system.
Anyway, the bottom line is that the MRFSS program was designed to provide an estimate of the coast-wide recreational fishery catch over a year, not for state by state quota monitoring. MRFSS is very good at what it was designed to do, but gets more and more variable the more you break down the estimates by state.
Now, I’m going to harp on something that I seem to be touching on a lot of lately (I’ve been doing so for a reason). With a recreational fishing license we don’t have to rely so much on estimates. A “Shot in the dark” is a good way to describe the current system. With a saltwater license in place, there will be a documented number of anglers, thereby a reliable way to determine effort and catch. With out a license, managers don’t have complete data. As we’ve seen with fluke it can result in overly restrictive measures, or much worse, it can result in continued overfishing. In either case, anglers are the big losers.
Something to think about… Now let’s get on to the reports.
The summer doldrums are beginning to break as reports of increased activity were abundant this week. Off the coast of New Jersey, the mid-shore lumps have been holding lots of school bluefin. In fact, many are describing it as the best bluewater year they’ve seen in recent memory. Bunker and large bluefish have come into the New York Bight with a vengeance. Find the bunker in Jamaica Bay and it’s likely that you’ll find big hungry blues willing to take a fly. Over in Raritan Bay there have been plenty of cocktail blues both on the surface, and underneath there have been good numbers of weakfish. Outside there have been increasing numbers of bay anchovies and Spanish mackerel have been making sporadic showings. I’ve seen a few bonito jump here and there, but there have been no real numbers to target yet. In Western Long Island, bonito are just beginning to show and on the North Shore and fly anglers are scoring sporadically. Big bluefish have inundated the South Shore. In east Hampton there have been some bonito around as well. Lots of bait in this area and plenty of schoolie bass and bluefish. Expect it to get very interesting soon. On the South Side there have been scattered reports of football bluefin inshore, but nothing solid. Inshore some large bass are still being taken along the rocks.
Weekend weather looks to be more on the cool side and the wind looks good… The albie run is drawing near and I wouldn’t be surprised if the bonito show up in good numbers this weekend. So get out there and fish!