1
play

1 MRFSS/MRIP Overlap and TransitionNE Impacts The current angler - PDF document

Apr 05, 2023 •125 likes •202 views

3. GROUNDFISH (January 31-February 2, 2012) #10 Marine Recreational Information Program (MRIP) Impacts on New England Council Managed Species George Darcy Assistant Regional Administrator for Sustainable Fisheries Northeast Regional Office

  1. 3. GROUNDFISH (January 31-February 2, 2012) #10 Marine Recreational Information Program (MRIP) Impacts on New England Council Managed Species George Darcy Assistant Regional Administrator for Sustainable Fisheries Northeast Regional Office January 30, 2012 New England Council Managed Recreational Stocks Stocks with MRIP-estimated catch and effort data: • Gulf of Maine (GOM) and Georges Bank (GB) cod • GOM haddock • Southern New England (SNE) and GOM winter flounder • Pollock Stocks with Recreational Annual Catch Limits (ACLs) • GOM Atlantic cod • GOM haddock 2 1

  2. MRFSS/MRIP Overlap and Transition—NE Impacts • The current angler intercept survey design will continue through December 2012 • MRIP estimation methods began January 2012; both MRFSS and MRIP estimates will be available through calendar year 2012 • Fishing year 2011 (May 1, 2011- April 30, 2012) will be last full year of MRFSS estimates for groundfish • Fishing year 2012 will have MRFSS-generated estimates for May 1, 2012-December 31, 2012, only 3 MRIP GOM Cod Information • MRIP catch estimates (landings + discards) are lower in all years except 2006 • MRIP substantially revised the calendar year 2010/fishing year 2009 catch estimate • Range of percent change in landings: -58% (FY 2009); -9% (preliminary FY 2011) • Range of percent change in discards: +9% (FY2006); -56% (FY2009) 4 2

  3. GOM Cod—MRFSS/MRIP Comparison GOM Cod Landings Comparison by Fishing Year 2004- 2011 9,000 MRFSS 8,000 MRIP Lb X 1,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Year Note: FY 2011 data are preliminary through October 2011. 5 GOM Cod—MRFSS/MRIP Comparison GOM Cod Total Catch Comparison in Numbers of Fish by Fishing Year 2004-2011 3,500 Numbers of Fish X 1,000 MRFSS 3,000 MRIP 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 0 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Year Note: FY 2011 data are preliminary through October 2011. 6 3

  4. MRIP GOM Haddock Information • MRIP catch estimates (landings + discards) are lower in most years • MRIP substantially revised the calendar year 2010/fishing year 2009 catch estimate • Range of percent change in landings: -63% (FY 2004); +9% (FY 2005) • Range of percent change in discards: +41% (FY2008); -51% (FY2004) 7 Stock Information—MRFSS/MRIP Comparison GOM Haddock Landings Comparison in Pounds by Fishing Years 2004-2011 2,500 Numbers of Fish X 1,000 MRFSS 2,000 MRIP 1,500 1,000 500 0 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Year Note: FY 2011 data are preliminary through October 2011. 8 4

  5. Stock Information—MRFSS/MRIP Comparison GOM Haddock Total Catch Comparison in Numbers of Fish by Fishing Years 2004-2011 700 Numbers of Fish X 1,000 MRFSS 600 MRIP 500 400 300 200 100 0 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Year Note: FY 2011 data are preliminary through October 2011. 9 Additional Species/Stocks Percent Change from MRFSS to MRIP for Aggregate 2004 - Preliminary 2011 • GOM Winter Flounder: 5-percent increase • SNE Winter Flounder: 11-percent decrease • Pollock: 3-percent increase • GB cod: 30-percent increase 10 5

  6. Additional Species/Stocks • Year-to-year variability in re-estimated MRIP data direction and magnitude are different for different species/stocks • Large percent changes in both directions (increases and decreases) • Relative scale of landings example: GB cod, 157% increase in 2008 11 ACL Monitoring • To date, ACLs have been monitored using MRFSS data (all that was available) • Beginning in FY 2012, this will cease to be an option • Application of MRIP estimates for ACL monitoring while MRFSS remains available requires additional discussion 12 6

  7. Impacts to Stock Assessments • Incorporation of recreational data is major undertaking; could potentially influence many assessment components • Effects of incorporating MRIP are not entirely predictable • Incorporation of MRIP data may require a vetting process for assessment use • Use of MRIP data may require benchmark-type peer- review to incorporate into assessments 13 Impacts to Stock Assessments • Additional work is required to address pre-2004 recreational data series • Ongoing MRIP project to re-estimate 1998-2003 • Planned calibration workshop, spring 2012 14 7

Recommend

More recommend