Draft Ad Hoc Data Collection Committee Summary

August 10, 2010

Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council

Tampa, Florida

Members present:Absent:

Vicki Cornish, ChairMichael MigliniMatt Hill

Glen Brooks Tracy ReddingTroy Frady, V. Chair

Suzanne DelauneBobby TerrebonneBob Zales II

Camp Matens

Gulf Council Staff:Council Members:

John FroeschkeRobin Riechers

Karen HoakBob Gill

Emily Muehlstein

Other:Other:

Beverly SaulsEric Schindler

Jeff BargerMichelle Owen Dennis O’Hern Chris Robbins

Jeff WilkinsCynthia Jones

Jeffrey WielgusTJ Marshall

Dave DonaldsonKelly Fitzpatrick

The Ad Hoc Data Collection committee met August 10, 2010 at the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council office, Tampa, Florida to discuss methods for incorporating electronic reporting systems for data collection, as appropriate and where feasible, to improve the timeliness and accuracy of catch and effort data for the recreational fishery sector in the Gulf of Mexico. The meeting agenda was accepted as written, except for scheduled presentations by National Marine Fisheries staff, who were unable to attend the meeting. Seven members of the advisory panel were present; Matt Hill, Troy Frady, and Bob Zales II were unable to attend. This meeting began with a review of the charge to this AP by chair Vicki Cornish and update of previous actions taken by this Panel focused on the commercial, dealer, and for-hire sectors in the Gulf of Mexico.

The meeting began with several presentations from invited speakers on existing recreational fisheries data collection programs in California, Oregon, Texas, and North Carolina. The afternoon session focused discussion on various aspects of data collection programs for private anglers including strengths, weaknesses, and potential applicability in Gulf of Mexico fisheries. The Panel passed several motions designed to enhance existing or guide development of new data collection systems in support of improving effort and catch monitoring data of Gulf of Mexico recreational fisheries, and to meet the longer term goal of in-season management, with an emphasis on electronic reporting systems, where appropriate.

Motion: As a complement to the MRFSS phone survey process and for the purpose of comparing the reliability of the phone versus web-based system, the AP recommends the formation of 2 groups of anglers from existing state records that are presumed to be fishermen fishing in federal waters; one of which will submit timely catch data by electronic means to a web-based system; the other of which shall submit timely effort data by the same means. A larger group will submit effort data and a subset will submit both catch and effort data. Motion carried.

For the purpose of enhancing the timeliness and accuracy of estimates from recreational angler catch and effort data, electronic (i.e., web, text) reporting systems are being proposed and used in other regions. These programs may be advantageous as they could provide more reliable effort estimates, minimize recall biases, make data available to managers in a more timely manner, and could be implemented in a relatively short time period. However, electronic self-reporting may have some of the same limitations as phone surveys, logbooks, and other self-reported data collection systems (such as inadequate response rates, recall and other biases, and difficulty of validation). They may also present a challenge to users that are not familiar with electronic media (internet, email, text messaging). The question then must be asked which tradeoffs (bias/accuracy, precision, timeliness, cost) are most critical for a given management need. This motion was passed to provide a means of calibrating new data collection systems and intended to complement existing data collection systems.

Motion: In order to improve the precision of catch and effort estimates for the recreational fishery, (for example in FL and LA) recommend that the NMFS consider stratifying the Gulf States into finer geographic regions under MRFSS. Motion carried.

This motion was passed to promote improved catch and effort estimates of recreational anglers by geographic area and species (as was done for the California Recreational Fisheries Survey and the Texas creel survey), with the benefits that it could be implemented in the near-term. This would help target management measures more effectively to specific areas and species of concern. However, to do this effectively, sample sizes may need to be increased within each stratum.

Motion: In order to improve the precision of catch and effort estimates for particular species, (for example red snapper and Amberjack) recommend that the NMFS develop protocols for a timely response for emerging issues and specific species. Motion carried.

This motion was passed to encourage flexibility in sampling needs in response to sudden or specific management needs that may arise periodically due to disturbances (e.g., Deepwater Horizon spill), changes in stock status, concerns about overfishing, or other shorter-term management needs or developments within a fishery.

Motion: In order to provide for timely data collection, and to improve precision and accuracy of recreational data, the Panel requests that necessary regulations be developed which require reporting in a timely manner when selected. Motion carried 4 to 2.

This was passed to require participation of selected anglers in data collection programs that could be used to evaluate the efficacy of both new and existing recreational data collection programs. The concept of voluntary versus mandatory participation was discussed at length due to concerns that voluntary systems would result in incomplete or lower quality catch or effort estimates. However, there was concern that mandatory programs would be met with resistance from stakeholders that could undermine the effectiveness of this program. In the end, the majority of the AP believed that a mandatory data collection system for select anglers was necessary to meet management needs for high quality data.

Motion: As self reported data are increasingly relied upon for in season management, that emphasis be placed on developing protocols for assessing the reliability of self-reported data (for example, intercepts and at sea monitoring).Motion carried.

Self-reported data have some inherent limitations that should be considered when used for management purposes. However, in the absence of appropriate alternative data collection methods, self-reported data are a necessary tool to estimate catch and effort in recreational fisheries. Thus, the development of methods to assess the reliability of self-reported data should be developed to promote more effective use of these data.

The Ad Hoc Data Collection advisory panel adjourned at 4:30 p.m. Eastern Time.

1