Best views, weather, etc. How to test them 👓 SC, Ala. sites look back Betty Ford honored
WASHINGTON
Fisheries

NOAA scientist says federal fish counts suffer from 'perception issue'

Ledyard King
USA TODAY

WASHINGTON — It’s not easy counting fish. Just ask the people who have to do it.

Red snapper, one of the main stocks at the center of a controversy over the accuracy of federal fish counts.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's fisheries division is responsible for estimating the health and size of dozens of fish stocks in U.S. waters, measurements that help eight regional councils determine which fish commercial and recreational anglers are allowed to catch.

The accuracy of NOAA's counts is at the heart of a national debate over whether to loosen current catch limits.

NOAA defends the data, obtained through a combination of sampling methods and statistical models. But recreational fishermen and their backers on Capitol Hill, who want to loosen the catch limits, claim they're based on “flawed science.”

Officials calling for more accurate fish counts

Prep for the polls: See who is running for president and compare where they stand on key issues in our Voter Guide

House passes overhaul of fishing laws

The debate comes as Congress considers reauthorization of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, the law that governs management of federal fisheries.

Richard Merrick, NOAA's chief fisheries scientist, believes the fish counts are “statistically robust” but acknowledges NOAA could do a better job explaining how it conducts the counts and building trust among stakeholders.

Merrick recently talked with USA TODAY about why NOAA's counts are under attack and options for improving them.

Question: Some stakeholders, particularly the recreational fishing industry, don’t think you’re counting correctly.

Answer: “There’s a perception issue. From the science side, we’re sort of naive. We think, yeah, (the science) should establish that (the counts are) really good. But clearly if you listen to what’s happening in the Gulf, and listen to recreational fishermen, it sounds like there’s a problem. And if you listen to our congressional delegations, there’s a problem.

Q: Some members in Congress want to give control of fisheries management to the Gulf states because they believe federal authorities are too cautious when it comes to catch limits on red snapper. Would that work?

A: “It’s not clear to me how they satisfy the science part. I get the suspicion that (states are) going to come right back to us and ask us to do the stock assessments, that what they’re really talking about is the management part and extending the state waters out or taking control

Q: What's your reaction to people who say they're literally tripping over fish, in particular red snapper in the Gulf, and don’t understand how NOAA doesn’t see what they see?

A: “Six, seven years ago, there were hardly any fish off Florida. And they’re finding fish all over Florida now. So the (red snapper) stock is and the (catch limit) is increasing every time we do a new stock assessment. What’s difficult is what people’s perceptions are, of what they think they should be able to do. And what we frequently hear, whether it’s from the media in the Gulf or individual fishermen we talk to or from congressional (offices) is they would like to have a 365-a-day season, And I don’t know how we do that. They used to be able to do that because they didn’t catch anything. They’re catching a lot more now than they did 10 years ago.

U.S. fisheries bouncing back since limits imposed

Q: The states have their own seasons in the coastal waters they manage. How has that affected federal management?

A: Most of these states have really long seasons. They’re pre-empting the federal fishery by the catch that’s occurring. That’s why I’d be concerned about having the five individual states try to manage.

Q: What about deploying more boats in the water and people at the dock monitoring catchings and landings. Do you have enough boots on the ground, so to speak?

A: We have enough statistically to develop a robust estimate of the catch. You can always put out more, and that would make your estimates somewhat more precise. But it’s such an enormous fishery, trying to monitor all those for 365 days a year is a big deal. So it has to be done with some sort of sampling methodology.

Q: Would the anger directed at NOAA be better directed at the regional councils who use your data to set the catch limits?

Fish counts vary in number and frequency, U.S. study reveals

A: It would be more effective working through (each) council. A lot of people don’t recognize that the council’s actually the group that makes the decision. We can always overrule but we tend to defer to the council because that’s what the structure (under Magnuson-Stevens) is based on. To me, we need to work with the councils and get them to work right.

Q: What are you doing about working with the Gulf states on the red snapper issue?

A: There are surveys in Louisiana, Alabama and Mississippi that we are funding. If the states want to develop their own data collection program, we don't have a real issue with that. We just want to make sure it's scientifically valid. It has to plug into this larger estimation process when it comes to stock assessments. There’s a perception that people think there’s always one right answer. In truth, there are multiple ways to estimate. We don't really care, so long as they’re statistically reliable.

Q: Recreational fishermen say NOAA doesn't do a good job surveying artificial structures, like oil rigs, where they say red snapper are particularly abundant. Do you agree?

A: The scale of these fish isn't enough to fundamentally change the assessment. But we’ll work on it and make sure. My biggest concern isn't not doing it, it's not doing it right. If we can bring more citizen science or folks from the recreation fleet to become involved in that, they may help the perception issue.

Q: NOAA is asking the National Academies of Sciences to review its data collection system in order to build more trust in its fish-counting methods. What do you think will come of that?

A: “I want an independent review. If they find some warts, great. We can fix them.

Featured Weekly Ad