U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

24–388 PDF 2017

S. HRG. 114–604 

THE IMPACTS OF FEDERAL FISHERIES 

MANAGEMENT ON SMALL BUSINESSES 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS 

AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

MARCH 3, 2016 

Printed for the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship 

( 

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.fdsys.gov 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

(II) 

COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP 

ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS 

DAVID VITTER, Louisiana, Chairman 

JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire, Ranking Member 

JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho 

MARCO RUBIO, Florida 

RAND PAUL, Kentucky 

TIM SCOTT, South Carolina 

DEB FISCHER, Nebraska 

CORY GARDNER, Colorado 

JONI ERNST, Iowa 

KELLY AYOTTE, New Hampshire 

MICHAEL B. ENZI, Wyoming 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington 

BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland 

HEIDI HEITKAMP, North Dakota 

EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts 

CORY A. BOOKER, New Jersey 

CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware 

MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii 

GARY C. PETERS, Michigan 

ZAK BAIG, Republican Staff Director 

ROBERT DIZNOFF, Democratic Staff Director 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

OPENING STATEMENTS

Page 

Shaheen, Hon. Jeanne, a U.S. Senator from New Hampshire ............................ 1 

Vitter, Hon. David, Chairman, and a U.S. Senator from Louisiana ................... 2 

Ayotte, Hon. Kelly, a U.S. Senator from New Hampshire ................................... 49 

Graves, Hon. Garret, a U.S. Representative from the State of Louisiana .......... 51 

WITNESSES

Anderson, Pam, Operations Manager, Capt. Anderson’s Marina, Panama City 

Beach, FL .............................................................................................................. 63 

Andry, Hughes, Regional Manager, Sportco Marketing, Richmond, TX ............. 72 

Gentner, Brad, President, Gentner Group Consulting, LLC., Tucson, AZ ......... 76 

Hayward, James, President, XI Northeast Fisheries Sector, Inc., Portsmouth, 

NH ......................................................................................................................... 81 

Wiersma, Joshua, Manager, Northeast Fisheries, Environmental Defense 

Fund, Boston, MA ................................................................................................ 88 

ALPHABETICAL LISTING AND APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED

Anderson, Pam 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 63 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 65 

Addendum 1 ...................................................................................................... 120 

Addendum 2 ...................................................................................................... 122 

Andry, Hughes 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 72 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 74 

Ayotte, Hon. Kelly 

Opening statement ........................................................................................... 49 

Gentner, Brad 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 76 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 78 

Graves, Hon. Garret 

Opening statement ........................................................................................... 51 

Article titled ‘‘Kingpins of the Gulf make millions off red snapper harvest 

without ever going fishing’’ .......................................................................... 54 

Blog Post titled ‘‘All Men Are Equal Before Fish’’ ......................................... 109 

Green, Jim 

Article titled ‘‘Red Snapper Management: The Irony of Protection and 

Threats from Washington D.C.’’ .................................................................. 119 

Gulf Small Businesses 

Letter to Chairman Vitter and Ranking Member Shaheen Dated March 

2, 2016 ............................................................................................................ 114 

Hayward, James 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 81 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 83 

Kenyon, Brad 

Article titled ‘‘Don’t Mess with Success in Fisheries Management’’ ............ 112 

Markey, Hon. Edward J. .........................................................................................

Statement for the Record ................................................................................. 108 

Shaheen, Hon. Jeanne 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 1 

Vitter, Hon. David 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

Page

IV 

—Continued 

Opening statement ........................................................................................... 2 

Report titled ‘‘Recreational Fisheries Management’’ ..................................... 4 

Wiersma, Joshua 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 88 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 90 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

(1) 

THE IMPACTS OF FEDERAL FISHERIES 

MANAGEMENT ON SMALL BUSINESSES 

THURSDAY, MARCH 3, 2016 

UNITED STATES SENATE, COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS

AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP, Washington, DC. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:01 a.m., in Room 

428A, Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. David Vitter, Chairman 

of the Committee, presiding. 

Present: Senators Vitter, Fischer, Ayotte, and Shaheen. 

Chairman VITTER. Good morning, everybody. Welcome to this 

very important hearing. 

Because of multiple demands on the Ranking Member’s schedule 

in terms of hearings, I am going to turn to her first and then I will 

have my opening statement and we will proceed with our witnesses. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JEANNE SHAHEEN, RANKING 

MEMBER, AND A U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW HAMPSHIRE 

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I really 

appreciate your willingness to let me go first this morning, as I try 

and be in five places at the same time. 

And, I want to apologize to Congressman Graves for missing his 

testimony. I am going to speak, try and get to another hearing, and 

then come back for the second panel. 

I know that there are a number of issues that are facing the constituents of Senator Vitter in Louisiana and I look forward to hearing more about those concerns. But, I want to take just a minute 

as I start to address some of the issues that are facing the fishing 

industry in New Hampshire and New England, and I am pleased 

that my colleague, Senator Ayotte, is here, who also knows very 

well those issues. 

We are in the midst of a real crisis that has decimated the fishing industry in New England, particularly the small fisherman. 

Over the past few years, the federal government has required drastic cuts to fishing quotas for the Gulf of Maine cod, and current 

quotas are now a tiny fraction—about five percent—of what they 

were just a few years ago. 

Cod is an absolutely critical resource in New Hampshire for fishermen and really across New England. In my State of New Hampshire, our fishermen typically have smaller boats. They fish closer 

to the shores. And their prime resource is cod. Now, because New 

England is managed as a multi-species fishery, the tight limit on 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

2 

cod really affects our fishing ability to fish for other species, as 

well. 

So, these cuts have been disastrous. Revenues have plummeted 

and many fishermen have been forced out of business. The New 

Hampshire fishing fleet has shrunk from 26 vessels in 2010 to just 

about seven right now. This has ramifications throughout our 

coastal economies, from onshore infrastructure, to crew employment, to local restaurants, and to the tourism industry. 

The federal government declared a fishing resource disaster for 

the region several years ago and we were able to get some much 

needed disaster funds to the region. But, the need is still very 

great. 

And to make matters worse, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, NOAA, has decided to enforce a new fee for 

at sea monitoring on New England fishermen, as much as $700 per 

observed trip. Now, I know my colleagues in New England and I 

have long fought the imposition of this fee and we will continue to 

do so, because this is not a payment that the New England fishing 

industry can make right now, given the severe hits their incomes 

have taken over the past several years, and worse, this is yet another issue that affects small businesses much more severely. The 

per trip fee is the same regardless of the size of a fisherman’s vessel. But smaller boats, as we all understand, bringing in a much 

less amount of fish and revenue per trip than larger ones. 

Now, I have heard from New Hampshire fishermen that this fee 

is entirely unaffordable and will be the final straw to force many 

out of the industry. In fact, one of the reasons I am leaving here 

is to go to the Appropriations Subcommittee where Secretary 

Pritzker, Commerce Secretary Pritzker, will be testifying so that I 

can ask her about what the Department is doing to try and address 

this concern that we have. 

I think we have got to do everything we can to protect the remaining small fishing businesses, and I am grateful that two of our 

witnesses who are going to be on the second panel are here today 

from New Hampshire and Maine. Both are deeply involved in the 

fishing community in New England and both have substantial experience and expertise in fisheries management. 

So, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I look forward to coming back to 

hear the second panel and very much appreciate your letting me 

go first. 

Chairman VITTER. Absolutely. Thank you, Ranking Member Shaheen. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. DAVID VITTER, CHAIRMAN, 

AND A U.S. SENATOR FROM LOUISIANA 

Chairman VITTER. Good morning, everybody, and welcome again 

to an important committee hearing entitled, ‘‘The impacts of Federal Fisheries Management on Small Businesses.’’ Thanks to all of 

our witnesses and everyone here today. 

For those of us born and raised in Louisiana, we share an inherent appreciation of our state’s abundant natural resources, certainly including fisheries. And we also share an obligation to encourage conservation efforts while protecting public access to those 

resources. 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

3 

When it comes to fishing in the Gulf, there needs to be a mutual 

respect between recreational anglers and commercial fishermen, in 

particular. Both anglers are an economic powerhouse for both Louisiana and the entire Gulf region, which makes protecting the 

public’s access to these resources even more important. 

Responsible for creating and implementing the rules that govern 

our fisheries and the Gulf’s federal waters is the National Marine 

Fisheries Service and the Gulf of Mexico Regional Fishery Management Council, known as NMFS and the Gulf Council. 

It is troubling to me that these two organizations, which are supposed to be dedicated to proper management of our Gulf fisheries, 

continue to chip away at the rights of recreational anglers, particularly with access to certain fisheries, including red snapper. The 

Gulf Council and NMFS are in place to protect the interests of the 

public, and yet continued attacks on the recreational sector and a 

failure to utilize proper data have led to decisions that really do exactly the opposite. While every region has its resources, our Gulf 

fisheries are considered some of the worst managed in the Nation, 

especially when compared to fisheries in the Northwest and Alaska. 

Using proper data collection techniques is paramount for the 

proper management of our Gulf fisheries, and the problems over at 

NMFS in accomplishing this were recently detailed in a GAO report entitled, ‘‘Recreational Fisheries Management: The National 

Marine Fisheries Service Should Develop a Comprehensive Strategy to Guide its Data Collection Efforts.’’ In this report, which I 

will be entering into the record, GAO detailed how NMFS’s current 

data collection methods do not result in quality recreational fishing 

data, which poses challenges for timely managing marine recreational fisheries. This failure to use quality data collection methods has resulted in states like Louisiana and Texas creating their 

own data collection programs. 

[The GAO report follows:] 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

4 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 1 here 24388.001

December 2015 

GA0-16-131 

United States Government Accountability Office 

Report to Congressional Requesters 

RECREATIONAL 

FISHERIES 

MANAGEMENT 

The National Marine 

Fisheries Service 

Should Develop a 

Comprehensive 

Strategy to Guide Its 

Data Collection Efforts 
5 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 2 here 24388.002

',,, ', ',,,, 

Highlights ofGI'i0,1's-131; ~ rep9rt tii congreSslonaf requesters, ' 

Why GAO Die( This Study 

Almost.11 milliol\ ang\ets'made ~~arly 71 milliqn ma~ne,rebleationatl\shlng 

trips in the continental JJr\lled States irt 

2013, Press~re.on'!11a.n~nsh.stocks 

from fishing na,s Jncrea~ed demand for 

quality and tlm<!IY data1hat can be 

used to .assess the status. of various 

fish stocks as,part <Jfjl1anaging marine 

recreatipnalfisheries: The many 

modes of marine rl'<'reatronal fishing,-

in which anglers fistr{rom I:>Jivale boats 

orboat$ w!th gutdl,s, .lhe shoteline, 

pdv~te p<()pefi¥; a~Ji pu~li~ t:!Qcksm!lke collect)~ !hjl.pata ne~ded \0 effectively mpnage rllcreationat 

fisheries both complex and 

challenging. 

GAO was asked to review NMFS' 

marine recreational fisheries data 

colleqion .. program;This;report 

examines (1) .challenges tHllthave 

been ld~~tified wtt~ the agency'~ (jata 

collection~ffo(ts for man~!ling.fm!~ne 

recreatioct~f ~shenes and (f)steps the 

agencyl)as take? to' improve ~!Ita 

collection and challenges, !nat remain.; 

GAO reviewed laws, policie,s, and 

guidance reJa<ed to federal 'and state recreat~n?,! :Q$he:rle~~ dala ~Uection 

methpds;. re\lieW<!d NMfS and other 

documents O!J re~reationalfisheries 

data calillC!iP,;and tnte.rvlewed a nonseneralizab.lesamj;le.of·federal 

and state recri!~tioilallisl)eries officials and other stakeho)ders, selected to 

proVide geographic representation, 

among otl1er jhings, to obtain their 

views on NMI'S' data rolleiltion efforts. 

What GAO Recomm~nds 

GAO recotbrne~ds that NMFS develop 

a compreliensive.strategy til guide lis d~ta <;olleqtiooe(forts: The agepcy 

agreed with GAO's recommendation. 

View GA0-16-1'31. foi"more Jnfonhation1 

contacrAnne·Marie Fennelf at (202) 512-3841 or fennella@gao.gov, 

RECREATIONAL FISHERIES MANAGEMENT 

The National Marine Fisheries Service Should 

Develop a Comprehensive Strategy to Guide Its Data 

Collection Efforts 

What GAO Found 

The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) within the Department of 

Commerce faces several challenges related to fisheries data collection, 

according to reports GAO reviewed and NMFS officials and stakeholders GAO 

interviewed. These challenges include collecting quality recreational fishing data 

that are timely for managing marine recreational fisheries and communicating 

with stakeholders. Regarding the collection of quality data, for example, NMFS 

faces a challenge identifying the universe of anglers from which to collect 

information about their marine recreational fishing activity. NMFS relies in part on 

state registries to identify anglers, but some states exempt certain anglers from 

registering, and therefore NMFS does not have a complete list of recreational 

anglers. NMFS officials and other stakeholders have also identified challenges in 

communicating with stakeholders in collecting recreational fisheries data. For 

example, several stakeholders told GAO that NMFS has not always 

communicated with the public about its activities, creating concerns about a Jack 

of transparency regarding NMFS' fisheries management decisions. Reflecting 

this challenge, in 2014, Louisiana withdrew from the federal fisheries data 

collection program and implemented its own program because of concerns about 

federal recreational fisheries data, according to a Louisiana fisheries official. 

NMFS has taken several steps aimed at improving data collection to manage 

marine recreational fisheries and addressing challenges related to 

communicating with stakeholders. For example, to help improve the quality of the 

state data it relies on to identify the universe of anglers, NMFS made 

recommendations to states on improving their recreational angler databases and 

provided funds to the states to support data quality improvement projects, 

according to NMFS documents. NMFS has also taken steps to improve 

communication, including working with Louisiana to perform a side-by-side 

comparison of federal data with Louisiana's data to determine whether 

Louisiana's data can be used as an alternative to federal data. However, some 

challenges persist, including challenges in validating data the NMFS collects and 

communicating about upcoming NMFS initiatives. More broadly, the agency does 

not have a comprehensive strategy to guide Its efforts to improve recreational 

fisheries data collection. Such a strategy is consistent with the framework of 

leading practices in federal strategic planning, as described in the Government 

Performance and Results Act Modernization Act of 2010, Office of Management 

and Budget guidance, and practices GAO has identified. Based on GAO's 

discussions with NMFS officials and review of NMFS documents, the agency has 

not developed a comprehensive strategy because it has been focused on other 

priorities such as improving its data collection methods. NMFS officials told GAO 

that NMFS recognizes the need to enhance its strategic planning but did not 

provide information about how, or whether, they plan to develop a 

comprehensive strategy. Without a comprehensive strategy that articulates 

NMFS' goals to improve data collection and methods for measuring progress 

toward the goals, NMFS may have difficulty ensuring that the various steps it is 

taking to improve data collection are prioritized so that the most important steps 

are undertaken first, and it may find it difficult to determine the extent to which 

these steps will help it address the challenges it faces. 

-------------United States Government Accountability Office 
6 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 3 here 24388.003

Contents 

Letter 

Appendix I 

Appendix II 

Appendix Ill 

Figures 

Background 4 

Several Challenges with NMFS' Fisheries Data Collection Efforts 

Have Been Identified 12 

NMFS Has Taken Steps Aimed at Improving Data Collection, but 

Some Challenges Persist and NMFS Does Not Have a 

Comprehensive Strategy to Guide Improvement Efforts 18 

Conclusions 29 

Recommendation for Executive Action 30 

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation 30 

Objectives, Scope, and Methodology 33 

Comments from the Department of Commerce 36 

GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments 40 

Figure 1: Marine Recreational Fishing Statistics and Locations of 

Highest Fishing Activity 5 

Figure 2: Key Stakeholders in Marine Recreational Fisheries Data 

Collection and Management 8 

Figure 3: Estimating Total Marine Recreational Fisheries Catch 9 

Figure 4: Timeline of Key Events in Marine Recreational Fisheries 

Data Collection and Management 12 

Figure 5: Timeline of the National Marine Fisheries Service's 

Planned Transition to Fishing Effort Survey 20 

Figure 6: Examples of Recreational Fisheries Electronic 

Monitoring and Reporting Technologies 21 

Figure 7: Timeline of the National Marine Fisheries Service's 

Implementation of Red Snapper Specialized Survey 

Methods 23 

Pagel GA0-16-131 Fisheries Data Collection 
7 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 4 here 24388.004

Abbreviations 

MRIP 

NMFS 

NOAA 

Marine Recreational Information Program 

National Marine Fisheries Service 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. The published product may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety 

without further permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain 

copyrighted images or other material, permission from the copyright holder may be 

necessary if you wish to reproduce this material separately. 

Page ii GA0-16-131 Fisheries Data Collection 
8 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 5 here 24388.005

GAO u.s. GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE 

441 GSt.N.W. 

Washington, DC 20548 

December 8, 2015 

Congressional Requesters 

Saltwater recreational fishing in the United States makes significant 

contributions to local and regional economies and is an important social 

activity for individuals, families, and communities. Almost 11 million 

anglers made nearly 71 million marine recreational fishing trips in the 

continental United States in 2013, according to National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS) statistics. NMFS, within the Department of Commerce's 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), acts as a 

steward of living marine resources through science-based conservation 

and management. Much of this work occurs under the MagnusonStevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, which sets forth 

standards for the conservation and management of fisheries resources.' 

NMFS collaborates with stakeholders, such as states and interstate 

marine fisheries commissions, primarily through its Marine Recreational 

Information Program (MRIP) to collect and analyze marine recreational 

fisheries data. Several states, such as Louisiana and Texas, also manage 

their own marine recreational fisheries data collection programs. In 

addition, NMFS and its partners collect other types of data, such as 

information on commercial fishing activity and data on the total size of fish 

stock populations 2 The various data that are collected and analyzed are 

used to estimate fishing activity, understand fish biology, and determine 

fish stock abundance. This information is used to support the 

development of annual catch limits and other accountability measures to 

prevent overfishing and support rebuilding plans for overfished stocks in 

federal waters. 

Pressure on many fish stocks from fishing has increased the demand for 

high-quality and timely data that can be used to assess the status of 

various fish stocks as part of managing marine recreational fisheries. 

1Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, 16 U.S.C. §§ 

1851(a)(1)-(10). 

2A ~fish stock" refers to either one species or a complex of comparable species managed 

as an entity in a geographic area. Throughout this report, the term fish stock is used to 

mean one fish species or a fish stock complex. 

Page 1 GA0-16·131 Fisheries Data Collection 
9 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 6 here 24388.006

However, in contrast to commercial fisheries, which have standard 

mechanisms for data collection, the many modes of marine recreational 

fishing-in which anglers fish from private boats or boats with guides, 

from the shoreline, from private property, and from public docks-make 

collecting the data needed to effectively manage recreational fisheries 

complex and challenging. Designing marine recreational fishing surveys 

that provide high-quality and timely data at an acceptable cost was 

identified as one of several challenges facing NMFS by a 2006 National 

Research Council report on NMFS' marine recreational fisheries data 

collection methods. 3 

You asked us to examine NMFS' marine recreational fisheries data 

collection program. This report examines (1) the challenges that have 

been identified with NMFS' data collection efforts for managing marine 

recreational fisheries and (2) the steps NMFS has taken to improve data 

collection and challenges that remain. 

To conduct our work, we reviewed and analyzed relevant laws, agency 

policies, guidance, and other documentation related to fisheries data 

collection, including specific federal and state marine recreational 

fisheries data collection projects. To determine the challenges that have 

been identified with NMFS' data collection efforts, we first reviewed 

reports and evaluations of NMFS' data collection programs since 2006, 

including reports from the National Research Council and NMFS, among 

others. We also interviewed officials from NMFS headquarters and 

NMFS' Northeast, Northwest, and Southeast regional Fisheries Science 

Centers; representatives of the Gulf of Mexico, Pacific, and South Atlantic 

Fishery Management Councils; officials from the Atlantic, Gulf, and 

Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commissions; and officials from state 

fisheries agencies in Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, North 

Carolina, Rhode Island, Texas, and Washington. We selected federal and 

state agencies and regional organizations to interview based on such 

factors as geographic representation, locations of large volumes of 

recreational fishing, and representation from key data collection and 

management stakeholders. In addition, we interviewed selected marine 

recreational fisheries stakeholders, such as recreational anglers, to 

gather information on recreational fisheries data collection methods, 

3

National Research Council, Ocean Studies Board, Committee on the Review of 

Recreational Fisheries Survey Methods, Review of Recreational Fisheries Survey 

Methods (Washington, D.C.: 2006) 

Page 2 GAOw16-131 Fisheries Data Collection 
10 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 7 here 24388.007

associated challenges, and steps taken to address those challenges. 

These stakeholders represented various geographic locations and 

different recreational fishing sectors. We determined that the selection of 

these entities and individuals was appropriate for our design and 

objectives, and that the selection would generate valid and reliable 

evidence to support our work. The results of our interviews cannot be 

generalized to all stakeholders or data collection activities, but they 

provide examples of different recreational fisheries data collection efforts 

and challenges. Because the NMFS statistical surveys cover a wide 

range of methods, apply to a wide diversity of locations, and often entail 

in-depth technical knowledge about fisheries data collection, we did not 

conduct a technical evaluation of these challenges or assess their 

technical validity. 

To determine the steps NMFS has taken to improve data collection and 

challenges that remain, we conducted interviews as described above and 

reviewed NMFS reports and other documents. Specifically, we reviewed 

NMFS' strategic plans, recreational fisheries planning documents, and 

recreational fisheries data collection program documents. We compared 

this information with the framework of leading practices in federal 

strategic planning contained in the Government Performance and Results 

Act of 1993, the Government Performance and Results Act Modernization 

Act of 2010, and Office of Management and Budget guidance. We also 

compared this information to key practices related to communication we 

identified in previous reports. 4 Consistent with our approach to the 

previous objective, we did not conduct a technical evaluation of NMFS' 

steps to improve data collection or assess the appropriateness of those 

steps in light of the challenges NMFS faces. Appendix I contains a more 

detailed description of our objectives, scope, and methodology. 

We conducted this performance audit from July 2014 to December 2015 

in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. 

Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain 

sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our 

findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that 

4

See GAO, Foreign Aid Reform: Comprehensive Strategy, Interagency Coordination, and 

Operational Improvements Would Bolster Current Efforts, GA0-09-192 (Washington, D.C.: Apr. 17, 2009) and Results-Oriented Cultures: Jmp/ementanon Steps to Assist 

Mergers and Organizational Transformations, GA0-03-669 (Washington, D.C. July 2, 

2003). 

Page 3 GA0-16-131 Fisheries Data Collection 
11 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 8 here 24388.008

Background 

the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and 

conclusions based on our audit objectives. 

NMFS' mission is to act as a steward of the nation's ocean resources and 

their habitats. This includes responsibility for managing recreational 

fisheries in federal waters. These waters generally include the United 

States Exclusive Economic Zone, which typically begins approximately 3 

geographical miles from land and extends 200 nautical miles from land. 

Coastal states generally maintain responsibility for managing fisheries in 

waters that extend approximately 3 geographical miles from their 

coastlines. The extent of recreational fishing varies by region, with the 

greatest amount of marine recreational fishing taking place in the Gulf of 

Mexico, followed by the South Atlantic and Mid-Atlantic, according to 

NMFS statistics. Figure 1 shows NMFS statistics about the extent of 

marine recreational fishing activity overall and the locations of the highest 

levels of marine recreational fishing activity. 

Page4 GA0~16·131 Fisheries Oata Collection 
12 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 9 here 24388.009

Page 
13 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 10 here 24388.010

overfished fisheries, protect essential fish habitat, and reduce bycatch, 5 

among other things. The 1996 act included for NMFS and 

the councils to fisheries me>n~nPimAnl 

establish required for 

overfished. A reauthorization of the act was 

established further 

and 

The marine recreational fishing sector is divided between private anglers 

and the for-hire sector. Private anglers 

recreational fisheries by 

shore. The for-hire sector 

Charter boats are chartered or contracted by anglers for a 

flat fee regardless of the number of anglers on the boa!. 6 

are usually large that charge each 

angler a per person 

Page 6 GA0-16-131 Fisheries Data Collection 
14 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 11 here 24388.011
15 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 12 here 24388.012
16 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 13 here 24388.013

to NMFS documentation, 

for scientific analysis 

biology of fish stocks. 

the lengths, weights, of fish 
17 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 14 here 24388.014

collected during NMFS' shoreside interviews of recreational anglers or by 

tagging fish to track after they are caught and released. Academic 

programs and cooperative research with the fishing industry are other 

sources of biological sampling data. 

In addition to collecting data on marine recreational fisheries, NMFS and 

its stakeholders, such as states, collect other types of data including data 

on commercial fisheries. Unlike recreational fisheries data, however, 

commercial fisheries data are collected through a census of the weight 

and value of all fish species sold to seafood dealers using a network of 

cooperative agreements with states. According to NMFS documentation, 

in some regions, state fishery agencies are the primary collectors of 

commercial fisheries data that they receive from seafood dealers who 

submit periodic reports on the amount and value of the various fish 

species they purchase. In addition, independently from recreational or 

commercial fishing data collection efforts, NMFS and its stakeholders also 

collect information on the abundance of fish stocks and environmental 

conditions in fish habitats, such as seafloors, open ocean water, and 

natural and artificial reefs. These data are used to determine the size, age 

composition, and distribution of fish stocks, and allow NMFS to track the 

total abundance of fish stocks over time. NMFS officials told us NMFS 

relies on its own research vessels or contracted commercial fishing 

vessels to collect abundance data. 

NMFS uses these various types of data to conduct fish stock 

assessments that estimate, among other things, the population of fish 

stocks, fish stock productivity, and biological reference points for 

sustainable fisheries. NMFS and the Regional Fishery Management 

Councils in turn use the fish stock assessments to examine the effects of 

fishing activities on the fish stocks and make determinations such as 

whether stocks are overfished and whether overfishing is occurring. 10 

According to NMFS documentation, the data are also used to support 

management decisions, such as setting limits on how many fish can be 

caught annually or determining the need to close a recreational fishery for 

a particular fish stock during an open fishing season, called an in-season 

closure, when annual catch limits are anticipated to be exceeded. 

10We previously reported on NMFS' fish stock assessments; see, for example, GAO, Fish 

Stock Assessments: Prioritization and Funding, GA0~14-794R (Washington, D.C" Sept 

19. 2014). 

Page 10 GA0-16-131 Fisheries Data Collection 
18 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 15 here 24388.015

National Research Council 

Findings and NMFS' 

Implementation of MRIP 

In 2006, the National Research Council issued a report that reviewed 

NMFS' marine recreational fisheries data collection programs and made 

numerous general and specific recommendations to address 

weaknesses. Among other things, the council recommended the redesign 

of all marine recreational fishing surveys funded by NMFS. 11 In addition, 

the council recommended that NMFS improve its survey coverage by 

either developing a national registration of all saltwater anglers or by 

using new or existing state saltwater license programs that would provide 

appropriate contact information for all anglers fishing in all marine waters, 

both state and federaL The 2007 reauthorization of the MagnusonStevens Act included requirements for NMFS to take into consideration 

and, to the extent feasible, implement the recommendations in the 

National Research Council report. 

Subsequently, in October 2008, NMFS began implementing MRIP, 

managed in NMFS' Office of Science and Technology, to collect 

recreational fisheries effort and catch data and develop estimates for use 

in fisheries management MRI P was intended to coordinate collaborative 

efforts among NMFS and its various stakeholders to develop and 

implement an improved recreational fisheries statistics program. MRIP 

consists of a system of regional surveys that provide effort and catch 

statistics for use in the assessment and management of federal 

recreational fisheries. According to NMFS officials, because counting 

every recreational angler or observing every fishing trip is not possible, 

NMFS relies upon statistical sampling to estimate the number of fishing 

trips recreational anglers take and what they catch. The data gathered 

from the regional surveys are compiled to provide regional and national 

estimates. Under MRIP, certain states, including California, Oregon, and 

Washington, have implemented recreational fisheries data collection 

programs funded, in part, by NMFS; these data are also used to inform 

fisheries management. Also, some states have developed and 

implemented other recreational fisheries data collection programs funded, 

in part, through mechanisms such as fee-based fishery programs in those 

states. Figure 4 provides a timeline of key legislative and other events 

related to marine recreational fisheries data collection and management 

11This included surveys under NMFS' Marine Recreational Fisheries Statistics Survey, 

which was established in 1979 to provide data for estimating the Impact of recreational 

fishing. 

Page 11 GA0-16-131 Fisheries Data Collection 
19 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 16 here 24388.016

staker1olders such as private rec:re<ltional 

regarding how NMFS communicates with stakel·lolders 

data collection efforts. 
20 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 17 here 24388.017

Identifying the universe of recreational anglers. NMFS faces a 

challenge in obtaining complete information on the universe of 

recreational anglers. According to NMFS officials, MRIP created a 

national saltwater angler registry to obtain more complete information 

about recreational anglers. However, this registry does not include 

anglers if they are registered in states bordering the Atlantic Ocean 

and Gu~ of Mexico because NMFS granted those states exemptions 

from the national registry." According to NMFS officials, NMFS relies 

on state angler registries to identify the universe of recreational 

anglers in those exempted states. However, some state angler 

registries offer exemptions from fishing permit requirements, such as 

for individuals under or over certain ages, and NMFS officials noted 

that not all anglers comply with state licensing and registration 

requirements. Therefore, these anglers do not appear on state angler 

registries. As a result, NMFS does not have a complete list of 

recreational anglers. 

Obtaining sufficient coverage in effort surveys. According to some 

state officials, NMFS faces challenges in ensuring that it covers the 

full range of anglers among the participants it selects to participate in 

fishing effort surveys so that they are representative of the overall 

angler population. For example, NMFS has relied on its Coastal 

Household Telephone Survey, which randomly selects participants 

from all potential household telephone numbers in coastal counties, to 

obtain information about shoreside and private boat fishing effort in 

the Gulf of Mexico and the Atlantic coast. As a result, the survey does 

not capture recreational anglers from noncoastal states that travel to 

fish in the Gulf of Mexico or Atlantic coast, or coastal resident anglers 

in households that do not have a landline phone. NMFS officials 

acknowledged this limitation with the Coastal Household Telephone 

Survey. 

Targeting a representative sample in shoreside surveys. 

According to NMFS officials, NMFS faces challenges in collecting 

data on a portion of the recreational fishing sector since it generally 

does not collect data on private property or at private-access fishing 

sites. According to NMFS officials and other governmental 

12Section 401{g) of the Magnuson~Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act 

requires NMFS to establish a registry program for recreational fishermen. The law 

exempts licensed anglers in states that provide data suitable for NMFS' use. Under 

Memoranda of Understanding with NMFS. each of the Atlantic and Gulf Coast states are 

providing lists of anglers to NMFS from their saltwater fishing license databases, while 

Pacific Coast states and island territories are providing survey data to NMFS. 

Page 13 GA0~16~131 Fisheries Data Collection 
21 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 18 here 24388.018

stakeholders, this is an issue in states that have many private-access 

sites, such as California and Florida, because there may be a 

significant portion of the recreational fishing sector that is not being 

surveyed. As a result of this limitation, according to NMFS officials 

and some state officials, NMFS relies on untested assumptions about, 

for example, catch and discard rates for anglers that use privateaccess fishing sites to develop recreational catch estimates. However, 

NMFS officials noted that survey data on fishing effort are collected 

from anglers regardless of whether they fish from public or privateaccess fishing sites. In addition. according to one state official, NMFS' 

standard protocols for determining when and where to assign 

shoreside observers to conduct interviews may not take into account 

local fishing patterns and, therefore, observers may not be located in 

the right places at the right times to collect the most representative 

data. For example, according to this official, NMFS' protocols for 

assigning shoreside observers do not account for the length of time 

anglers would typically take to reach federal waters and return from 

their trip. As a result, observers may not be at the shoreside when 

anglers return. 

Obtaining a sufficient number of survey responses and 

biological samples. According to NMFS and some state officials, 

NMFS faces the challenge of collecting a sufficient number of survey 

responses and samples in its effort and catch surveys. For example, 

some NMFS and state officials told us Coastal Household Telephone 

Survey response rates have been declining, and a 2014 report 

prepared for NMFS noted that response rates to the survey had 

"declined considerably" in the previous decade, which could increase 

the potential for bias in the data collected on recreational angler 

fishing effort. 13 Also, one state official told us he does not believe 

NMFS assigns enough shoreside observers to collect the recreational 

angler catch and discard data needed to develop precise recreational 

catch estimates. In addition, another state official told us that the lack 

of shoreside observers has contributed to an insufficient amount of 

biological samples collected to adequately address scientific needs. 

Consistent with these views, in 2013 NMFS' Southeast Fisheries 

Science Center identified a need for more fish tissue samples in its 

reg ion to aid in assessing fish stock reproduction. 

13Nationa! Marine Fisheries Setvice, Development and Testing of Recreational Fishing 

Effort Surveys: Testing a Mail Survey Design, Final Report, July 31, 2014. The report did 

not cite specific response rates. 

Page 14 GA0~16·131 Fisheries Data Collection 
22 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 19 here 24388.019

Obtaining valid survey responses. According to some state and 

NMFS officials, obtaining valid survey responses can be challenging 

because they depend on anglers' recollections of prior fishing events. 

NMFS officials told us that the accuracy of self-reported data (i.e., 

data that rely on participants providing responses based on personal 

observations) depends on the angler's ability to recall events or to 

distinguish between different fish species. However, anglers may not 

be able to accurately recall details about fish they caught and then 

discarded, especially as time elapses or because of limited knowledge 

about fish species, and without independent validation or verification, 

that data may be inaccurate. According to NMFS officials, these 

challenges affect the Coastal Household Telephone Survey because 

the survey asks anglers how many saltwater fishing trips were taken 

in the previous 2 months, but it does not use observers or other 

mechanisms to independently validate and verify this self-reported 

data. 

Obtaining key recreational fisheries data. According to NMFS and 

some state officials, NMFS faces a challenge in collecting complete 

data on discards-that is, fish that are caught but then releasedbecause of the difficulty of validating and verifying self-reported data 

as previously discussed. In light of this difficulty, Louisiana does not 

collect recreational angler discard data as part of its own recreational 

fisheries data collection program because of concerns about the 

quality of angler self-reported data, according to a state official. Even 

given the uncertainty in identifying the exact amount of discards, the 

number of discards can be substantial-for example, according to 

NMFS statistics, the majority of fish caught by marine recreational 

fishermen in 2013 were discarded. NMFS officials told us that 

discarded fish that have to return to great depths often experience 

high mortality rates due to barotrauma. 14 As a result of limited 

information about the number of discarded fish and their mortality 

rates, according to NMFS officials, NMFS relies on assumptions about 

the mortality rates of discarded fish to produce or adjust recreational 

catch estimates. 

NMFS also faces challenges in collecting timely marine recreational 

fishing data to support certain fisheries management decisions, according 

14According to NMFS documentation, barotrauma is a condition experienced by some 

deepwater fish that are brought quickly to the surface. Fish experiencing barotrauma often 

sustain serious injuries and, upon release, are unable to swim or dive back to deep water. 

Therefore, the survival rates of caught and released deepwater fish are generally !ow 

Page 15 GA0·16-131 Fisheries Data Collection 
23 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 20 here 24388.020

to NMFS and some state officials we interviewed. According to NMFS 

officials, the Magnuson-Stevens Reauthorization Act of 2006 

implemented new requirements that have greatly expanded the pressures 

on fisheries managers to rely on timely data to make decisions." 

However, according to NMFS and some state officials, NMFS' data 

collection systems have not evolved quickly enough to support 

management decision making. For example, it takes 2 months to conduct 

the Coastal Household Telephone Survey, which collects data on 

recreational fishing effort in the Gulf of Mexico and the Atlantic coast, and 

about 45 days to analyze the data and produce recreational fishing 

estimates. According to NMFS and some state officials, as a result of 

these timing issues, NMFS managers do not have enough information to 

make informed decisions about whether to initiate in-season closures for 

certain fish stocks with annual catch limits in order to prevent anglers 

from exceeding those limits. State officials frequently highlighted this as a 

concern in managing the Gulf of Mexico red snapper, which is susceptible 

to in-season closures because of concerns about overfishing. According 

to NMFS documentation, this fishery has been subject to shortened 

federal fishing seasons over the last few years-including seasons of 9 

days in 2014 and 10 days in 2015, compared with 75 days in 2009 and 42 

days in 2013. 

NMFS, some state officials, and some other stakeholders, such as private 

recreational anglers, have also identified challenges in how NMFS 

communicates with stakeholders about its fisheries data collection efforts. 

For example, a fisheries official from Texas said that, although Texas 

provides NMFS with marine recreational fisheries data, NMFS does not 

clearly communicate how or if it uses those data. Some private 

recreational anglers also told us that NMFS has not always sufficiently 

communicated with the public about its activities, creating concerns about 

a lack of transparency regarding NMFS' fisheries management decisions. 

For example, some private anglers told us they are confused because 

NMFS has not explained why it continues to shorten the Gulf of Mexico 

red snapper fishing season even though the red snapper population has 

increased. NMFS officials acknowledged that NMFS has not always 

clearly communicated with regional stakeholders to explain its decision15The act requires NMFS to report annually to Congress and the Regional Fishery 

Management Councils on the status of fisheries within each council's geographical area of 

authority and identify those fisheries that are overfished or are approaching a condition of 

being overfished. 

Page 16 GA0-16·131 Fisheries Data Collection 
24 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 21 here 24388.021

making processes, stating that this has contributed to the public's 

misperceptions. 

As a result of the challenges that have been identified with collecting 

fisheries data, NMFS officials told us they face a lack of public confidence 

and trust in their ability to provide the data needed for managing 

recreational fisheries. For example, according to a Texas fisheries official, 

Texas withdrew from NMFS' recreational data collection program and 

implemented its own data collection program in the late 1970s because it 

did not believe that NMFS' data collection methods suited Texas' needs 

for managing recreational fisheries. Similarly, in 2014, louisiana withdrew 

from MRIP and implemented its own recreational fisheries data collection 

program, called LA Creel, because of concerns about MRIP data being 

able to support Louisiana's needs for managing recreational fisheries, 

according to a Louisiana fisheries official. Similarly, according to state 

officials, Mississippi and Alabama have also independently initiated 

efforts to collect data on the abundance of certain fish, including red 

snapper, in artificial reefs off the coasts of these states because of 

concerns that NMFS' current data collection methods underestimate the 

abundance of these fish stocks. Citing dissatisfaction with NMFS' 

management of the Gulf of Mexico red snapper fishery, the states 

bordering the Gulf of Mexico released a proposal in March 2015 to 

transfer the responsibility for managing Gulf of Mexico red snapper from 

NMFS to these states. 16 

16The proposal was signed by officials from Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, and 

Texas. Two bills (S. 105 and H. R 3094) pending in Congress would amend the 

MagnusonRStevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act to transfer to the Gulf 

Coast states, under certain conditions, the authority to manage red snapper fisheries in 

the Gulf of Mexico. 

Page 17 GA0-16-131 Fisheries Data Collection 
25 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 22 here 24388.022

NMFS Has Taken 

Steps Aimed at 

Improving Data 

Collection, but Some 

Challenges Persist 

and NMFS Does Not 

Have a 

Comprehensive 

Strategy to Guide 

Improvement Efforts 

NMFS Has Taken Steps 

Aimed at Improving 

Recreational Fisheries 

Data Collection, but Some 

Challenges Persist 

Addressing Challenges in 

Collecting Quality Data 

NMFS has taken several steps aimed at improving data collection to 

manage marine recreational fisheries and addressing challenges related 

to communicating with stakeholders. However, some data collection 

challenges persist, and NMFS does not have a comprehensive strategy 

to guide its efforts to improve recreational fisheries data collection. 

NMFS has taken steps to address some of the challenges it faces in 

collecting data for managing marine recreational fisheries, including steps 

aimed at collecting quality data to support scientific analyses and 

producing credible effort and catch estimates, improving the timeliness of 

data collection, and improving communication with stakeholders. 

However, even with the various steps NMFS has taken, agency officials 

said that some challenges persist. In Apri12015, NMFS requested that the 

National Research Council review MRIP to determine the extent to which 

NMFS has addressed the recommendations in the 2006 National 

Research Council report. A NMFS official told us the National Research 

Council has initiated the review process, and NMFS expects the review to 

be completed in 2017. 

NMFS has taken several steps to address the challenges it faces in 

collecting quality data. To address the challenge of identifying the 

universe of recreational anglers, NMFS documents indicate that by 

October 2011 NMFS had entered into memoranda of agreement with 

states and United States territories that were exempt from the national 

registry requirements, whereby these states and territories agreed to 

submit their data on marine recreational fishing participants to NMFS for 

inclusion into the national registry." In 2011 and 2012, NMFS provided 

17Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the United States Virgin Islands have not entered into 

memoranda of agreement 

Page 18 GA0-16·131 Fisheries Data Collection 
26 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 23 here 24388.023

approximately 20 grants to states through the interstate marine fisheries 

commissions to support initial data quality improvement projects. 

Subsequently, in 2012 and 2013, NMFS received state angler registry 

data from each of the exempted Atlantic and Gulf Coast states and 

entered the data into the national registry database. During this same 

period, NMFS made recommendations to the states on improving their 

recreational angler databases. NMFS also continued to provide funds to 

the states through the commissions to support the initial data quality 

improvement projects, according to NMFS documents. 

To address both regional and national needs for effort and catch data, 

NMFS has supported the redesign of state and federally managed 

surveys in all regions. For example, in 2009, NMFS initiated a series of 

pilot studies to address declining participation rates in telephone 

recreational fishing effort surveys and potential gaps in the data that could 

skew survey results due to limitations in reaching coastal residences. 

NMFS conducted these pilot studies to determine whether mail survey 

methods for collecting recreational fishing effort data would improve 

estimates. In a July 2014 report, NMFS stated that the findings from the 

study indicated that mail survey response rates were nearly three times 

higher than the telephone survey response rates. 18 Given these results, in 

May 2015, NMFS issued a plan for transitioning from the current Coastal 

Household Telephone Survey to a newly designed mail-based survey, 

referred to as the Fishing Effort Survey. According to NMFS 

documentation, NMFS expects the Fishing Effort Survey to be fully 

implemented by January 2018, as shown in figure 5. 

18Nationa! Marine Fisheries Service, Development and Testing of Recreational Fishing 

Effort Surveys: Testing a Mail Survey Design, Final Report, July 31, 2014. 

Page 19 GA0~16~131 Fisheries Data Collection 
27 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 24 here 24388.024
28 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 25 here 24388.025
29 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 26 here 24388.026

Addressing 
30 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 27 here 24388.027
31 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 28 here 24388.028

Addressing Challenges in 

Communication 

season. However, according to NMFS officials and a state official, to 

implement a separate survey that specifically targets Gulf of Mexico red 

snapper would likely entail adding additional resources to this effort that 

would need to be taken from other surveys, such as the Fishing Effort 

Survey. According to NMFS officials, trade-offs also are often necessary 

to balance the competing needs of state and federal fisheries 

management and, as a result, NMFS prioritizes among competing 

demands for data. NMFS has attempted to address the need to 

understand the trade-offs involved in data collection; according to NMFS 

documentation, tools intended to help evaluate possible resource 

allocation trade-offs were expected to be available for use in 2014. 

However, according to NMFS officials, the tools were not in place as of 

October 2015, and NMFS has not determined when the tools will be 

available. The officials said that the tools were being developed in 

collaboration with academia, but the project stalled because the project 

leader left the academic institution, and the institution has not yet found a 

replacement. 

NMFS has also taken steps to improve communication with recreational 

fisheries stakeholders about recreational data collection. NMFS has 

worked with its MRIP Executive Steering Committee to address priority 

communication initiatives through various MRIP teams. For example, the 

MRIP communications and education team plans to implement a 

communications strategy-entailing various communication activities 

such as webinars-to support the transition from the Coastal Household 

Telephone Survey to MRIP's new mail-based Fishing Effort Survey. 

According to NMFS officials, the agency is developing an MRIP strategic 

communications plan to guide its transition to the Fishing Effort Survey 

that was expected to be finalized by the end of October 2015. To further 

enhance MRIP communications, in 2014, the MRIP communications and 

education team began restructuring its communications network by 

developing MRIP communication teams at the regional leveL 

Some of NMFS' steps to improve communication have resulted in 

increased collaboration with recreational fisheries stakeholders, according 

to NMFS and state officials. For example, according to a state fisheries 

official, NMFS coordinated with the state to provide state officials greater 

input in determining observer assignment schedules and locations as part 

of the new protocols for the Access Point Angler Intercept Survey. NMFS 

officials told us that they are also working collaboratively with Louisiana to 

perform a side-by-side comparison of MRIP data with data collected 

under Louisiana's LA Creel data collection program, to determine whether 

LA Creel can be used as an alternative to MRIP surveys. According to 

Page 24 GA0-16-131 Fisheries Data Collection 
32 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 29 here 24388.029

NMFS officials, in early 2016, NMFS and Louisiana plan to evaluate the 

results of the side-by-side comparison to determine next steps. Regarding 

stakeholder concerns about NMFS' lack of data on fish stock abundance 

in reef habitats, NMFS officials told us that NMFS plans to use data 

collected by academic partners on red snapper abundance on artificial 

reefs in its Gulf of Mexico red snapper fish stock assessment NMFS also 

has worked with the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission and the 

Atlantic Coastal Cooperative Statistics Program to transition from a 

NMFS-Ied data collection system to a state-led data collection approach. 

In 2016, according to a NMFS official, the Atlantic Coast states will 

assume responsibility for conducting the Access Point Angler Intercept 

Survey shoreside interviews to collect marine recreational fishing data 

from anglers, and NMFS' role will be to review, certify, and provide funds 

to support these data collection efforts. 

NMFS is also placing renewed emphasis on collaborating with its regional 

partners to determine future data collection needs and priorities for 

improving recreational fisheries effort and catch surveys, according to 

NMFS documents. For example, NMFS' 2013-2014 MRIP implementation 

plan recommended establishing a hybrid approach to MRIP data 

collection. 19 Under this approach, NMFS is to maintain a central role in 

developing and certifying survey methods and establishing national 

standards and best practices for data collection, while regions-through 

the regional fishery information networks or their equivalent-are to be 

responsible for selecting survey methods and managing data collection. 

According to NMFS officials and NMFS documentation, NMFS staff 

participated in a workshop in July 2013to discuss the initial planning 

stages for developing this new regional approach to recreational fisheries 

data collection. According to NMFS officials, NMFS is developing MRIP 

Regional Implementation Plans to address regional data collection needs 

19An initial MRIP implementation plan was issued in October 2008. Since then, NMFS has 

issued several MRIP implementation plan status updates that describe various MR!P 

initiatives and contain information on program accomplishments and priorities. 

Page 25 GA0-16·131 Fisheries Data Collection 
33 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 30 here 24388.030

and priorities. 20 The NMFS officials said that the West Coast region is 

scheduled to have a Regional Implementation Plan in early 2016. The 

officials said the Atlantic and Gulf Coast regions support the new 

approach to data collection and plan to complete their respective MRIP 

Regional Implementation Plans in 2016. As part of the new hybrid MRIP 

data collection approach, NMFS is in the process of identifying regional 

recreational fisheries data collection funding priorities. 

Challenges related to how NMFS communicates with stakeholders, 

however, persist. For example, some Gulf Coast state fisheries officials 

expressed concerns that NMFS has not provided sufficient information to 

improve communication regarding its recreational fisheries data collection 

activities. One state fisheries official said that NMFS has made some 

progress working with stakeholders to identify MRIP initiatives to improve 

recreational fisheries data collection, but it has not adequately 

communicated how it intends to coordinate and collaborate with its 

stakeholders to implement MRIP initiatives. Some stakeholders continue 

to express concerns that NMFS is not adequately communicating its 

process for developing Gulf of Mexico red snapper catch and effort 

estimates. For example, some stakeholders cited the presence of larger 

and more numerous red snapper in the Gulf of Mexico and do not 

understand the need for continued catch limits and fishing restrictions. 

NMFS officials told us that, although the Gulf red snapper population is 

rebounding, and the average weight of red snapper that are caught by 

anglers has increased, NMFS' most recent stock assessment confirms 

that Gulf red snapper continue to be overfished. Therefore, as required by 

the Magnuson-Stevens Act, red snapper continue to be managed under a 

stock rebuilding plan. According to these officials, annual catch limits for 

red snapper are being reached more quickly due to several factors, 

including higher catch rates and more fishing effort being directed at the 

more abundant rebuilding stock. This has required even shorter fishing 

seasons despite increasing stock abundance, as well as corresponding 

increases to annual catch limits. NMFS officials stated that, in response to 

20According to NMFS documentation, MR!P Regional Implementation Plans are to include 

descriptions of regional needs for recreational fishing statistics, including needs for 

coverage, precision, and timeliness of survey estimates; a baseline assessment of current 

data collection programs, including assessing the extent to which current programs satisfy 

needs and identifying data collection gaps; recommendations and justification for a 

sequential, prioritized approach for implementing improved methods that address national 

and regional needs that are currently unmet; and estimated costs overall and for individual 

survey components. 

Page 26 GA0w16·131 Fisheries Data Collection 
34 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 31 here 24388.031

NMFS Does Not Have a 

Comprehensive Strategy 

to Guide Its Data 

Collection Improvement 

Efforts 

a history of exceedance of annual red snapper catch limits and litigation, 

NMFS is now setting the length of the red snapper fishing season based 

on a recommendation by the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council 

to use a buffer of 20 percent of the annual catch limit. 21 This buffer is 

intended to account for uncertainty resulting from the difficulty of obtaining 

timely and precise catch estimates, as well as uncertainty stemming from 

state regulations that provide for longer seasons in state waters. NMFS 

officials acknowledged that achieving stakeholder understanding of this 

complex process is an ongoing concern, but they told us they plan to 

continue communicating with stakeholders to help convey the rationale 

behind NMFS' fisheries management decisions. 

NMFS has taken steps aimed at addressing several data collection 

challenges, but it does not have a comprehensive strategy to guide its 

efforts to improve recreational fisheries data collection. The Government 

Performance and Results Act Modernization Act of 2010 requires, among 

other things, that federal agencies develop long-term strategic plans that 

include agency-wide goals and strategies for achieving those goals. 22 Our 

body of work has shown that these requirements also can serve as 

leading practices at lower levels within federal agencies, such as at 

NMFS, to assist with planning for individual programs or initiatives that 

are particularly challenging." Taken together, the strategic planning 

elements established under the act and associated Office of Management 

and Budget guidance, and practices we have identified, provide a 

framework of leading practices in federal strategic planning and 

21 The council requested that NMFS set the length of the fishing season based on an 

"annual catch target" that is 80 percent of the overall recreational quota for red snapper. 

The remaining 20 percent constitutes a buffer to reduce the likelihood of the quota being 

exceeded. 

22Government Performance and Results Act Modernization Act of 2010, Pub. L No. 111· 

352, § 2, 124 Stat. 3866, 3866-67 (2011) 

23Forexample, see GA0-09-192 and GAO, Pipeline Safety: Management of/he Office of 

Pipeline Safety's Enforcement Program Needs Furlher Strengthening, GA0-04-80 1 

(Washington, D.C .. July 23, 2004). 

Page 27 GA0-16-131 Fisheries Data Collection 
35 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 32 here 24388.032

characteristics of good performance measures. 24 These practices include 

defining a program's or initiative's goals, defining strategies and 

identifying the resources needed to achieve the goals, and developing 

time frames and using performance measures to track progress in 

achieving them and inform management decision making. Furthermore, 

key practices related to communication call for communicating 

information early and often and developing a clear and consistent 

communications strategy to help develop an understanding about the 

purpose of planned changes, build trust among stakeholders and the 

public, cultivate strong relationships, and enhance ownership for 

transition or transformation. 25 

According to a NMFS official, the initial 2008 MRIP implementation plan 

and the subsequent updates are the key documents used to guide NMFS' 

recreational fisheries data collection efforts. However, based on our 

review, NMFS' MRIP implementation plans do not constitute a 

comprehensive strategy for improving recreational fisheries data 

collection consistent with the framework previously discussed. For 

example, the implementation plans do not consistently and clearly define 

NMFS' goals, identify the resources needed to achieve the goals, or 

develop time frames or performance measures to track progress in 

achieving them. 

Based on our analysis, NMFS does not have a comprehensive strategy 

because it has been focused primarily on implementing the 

recommendations of the 2006 National Research Council report. A NMFS 

official confirmed that MRIP initially focused on implementing the 

recommendations in the 2006 National Research Council report and 

meeting the requirements to improve recreational fisheries data collection 

as described in the Magnuson-Stevens Reauthorization Act that was 

passed in 2006. According to NMFS officials, the agency's first priority 

was to address the recreational fisheries survey design issues identified 

see GAO, Executive Guide: Effectively Implementing the Government 

Performance and Results Act, GAO/GGD-96-118 (Washington, D.C .. June 1, 1996): Tax 

Administration: IRS Needs to Further Refine Its Tax Filing Season Performance 

Measures, GA0-03-143 (Washington, D.C .. Nov. 22, 2002); Managing for Results· 

Enhancing Agency Use of Performance Information for Management Decision Making, 

GA0-05-927 (Washington D.C.: Sept 9, 2005): and Office of Management and Budget. 

Circular No. A·11, Preparation, Submission, and Execution of the Budget (2015) 

25See GA0-09-192 and GA0-03-669. 

Page 28 GA0·16·131 Fisheries Data Collection 
36 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 33 here 24388.033

Conclusions 

in the 2006 National Research Council report. Specifically, NMFS 

determined that it would first design, test, review, certify, and implement 

new survey designs, such as the new mail-based Fishing Effort Survey. 

As previously discussed, NMFS intends to transition to a regional data 

collection approach whereby the agency will collaborate with regional 

stakeholders, such as states, to identify regional data collection needs. 

NMFS officials told us that, in hindsight, NMFS could have benefited from 

a more robust strategic planning approach to MRIP implementation and 

stated that NMFS recognizes the need to enhance its strategic planning 

as it begins to transition to a regional data collection approach. NMFS 

officials told us that NMFS intends to develop strategic planning 

documents to guide future individual initiatives, using NMFS' experiences 

with the transition to the new mail-based Fishing Effort Survey as a 

template, but they did not provide information about how, or whether, they 

planned to integrate these documents into a comprehensive strategy or 

how they would communicate such a strategy to NMFS' stakeholders. 

Without a comprehensive strategy, NMFS may have difficulty ensuring 

that the variety of steps it is taking to improve data collection are 

prioritized so that the most important steps are undertaken first and may 

find it difficult to determine the extent to which these steps will help 

address challenges. Further, without communicating the strategy and 

NMFS' progress in implementing it, NMFS may have difficulty building 

trust among its stakeholders, and these stakeholders may have difficulty 

tracking the agency's efforts. 

Recognizing the importance of collecting quality and timely data at an 

acceptable cost to guide recreational fisheries management and conduct 

fish stock assessments, NMFS has taken many steps to improve its data 

collection, such as funding several pilot programs to test alternative data 

collection methods. NMFS has also initiated a fundamental shift in its data 

collection approach, envisioning a standard-setting and oversight role for 

NMFS rather than actual data collection, which is to be carried out by 

partners. However, NMFS does not have a comprehensive strategy to 

guide the implementation of its various efforts. Without a comprehensive 

strategy and associated performance measures to assess progress, 

NMFS may have difficulty ensuring that the variety of steps it is taking to 

help address the challenges it faces are prioritized so that the most 

important steps are undertaken first. Likewise, NMFS may have difficulty 

determining the extent to which these steps will help address challenges 

or if a different approach may be needed. Moreover, without clearly 

communicating the strategy to its stakeholders, NMFS may find it difficult 

Page 29 GA0·16~131 Fisheries Data Collection 
37 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 34 here 24388.034

Recommendation for 

Executive Action 

Agency Comments 

and Our Evaluation 

to build trust, potentially limiting its ability to effectively implement MRIP 

improvement initiatives that rely on data collection partners. 

To improve NMFS' ability to capitalize on its efforts to improve fisheries 

data collection for managing marine recreational fisheries, we 

recommend that the Secretary of Commerce direct NOAA's Assistant 

Administrator for Fisheries to develop a comprehensive strategy to guide 

NMFS' implementation of its marine recreational fisheries data collection 

program efforts, including a means to measure progress in implementing 

this strategy and to communicate information to stakeholders. As part of 

this strategy, NMFS should clearly identify and communicate 

programmatic goals, determine the program activities and resources 

needed to accomplish the goals, and establish time frames and 

performance measures to track progress in implementing the strategy 

and accomplishing goals. 

We provided a draft of this report to the Department of Commerce for 

comment. In its written comments (reproduced in app. II), NOAA, 

providing comments on behalf of Commerce, agreed with our 

recommendation that NMFS develop a comprehensive strategy to guide 

the implementation of its marine recreational fisheries data collection 

program efforts. NOAA stated that it agrees that transitioning from a 

primarily research and development focused program to one that is more 

focused on implementing improvements to recreational fisheries data 

collection presents an opportunity to engage in strategic planning. 

Specifically, NOAA stated it will work with its regional stakeholders over 

the next year to develop MRIP implementation plans that include 

milestones, timelines, performance metrics, and resource needs. In 

addition, NOAA stated that a new National Research Council review of its 

recreational fisheries data collection program will help to inform its 

strategic planning effort. 

NOAA also provided three general comments. First. NOAA stated that our 

report disproportionally included interviewees from the Gulf Coast, which 

may weigh the report's conclusions differently than if other regions were 

more fully represented. As noted in our scope and methodology appendix 

(app. 1), we selected federal and state agencies and regional 

organizations to interview based on such factors as geographic 

representation and locations of large volumes of recreational fishing. 

According to NMFS statistics, the largest volumes of recreational fishing 

are in the Gulf of Mexico. As a result, we believe that our selection of 

Page 30 GA0~16·131 Fisheries Data Collection 
38 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 35 here 24388.035

agencies and organizations, while not nationally representative, 

nevertheless provides an appropriate set of perspectives on recreational 

fisheries management. Second, NOAA stated that it interpreted our 

statement that we did not conduct a technical evaluation to mean that we 

are suggesting that a technical evaluation is needed to determine whether 

NMFS has appropriately prioritized its recreational fisheries data 

collection challenges. We did not conduct a technical evaluation because 

it was not within the scope of our review, and it was not our intent to 

suggest that a technical evaluation is needed. Third, NOAA stated that, 

while the report identifies several unaddressed recreational fisheries data 

collection challenges, it does not mention that the challenges require 

funding levels above the current MRIP budget. Addressing whether 

NMFS funding levels are sufficient to address the data collection 

challenges it faces was not within the scope of our review. We do, 

however, note in our report the importance of making trade-offs in 

addressing challenges and allocating resources. NOAA also provided 

technical comments, which we incorporated as appropriate. 

As agreed with your offices, unless you publicly announce the contents of 

this report earlier, we plan no further distribution until 30 days from the 

report date. At that time, we will send copies to the appropriate 

congressional committees, the Secretary of Commerce, the NOAA 

Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, and other interested parties. In 

addition, the report will be available at no charge on the GAO website at 

http://www.gao.gov. 

If you or your staff members have any questions about this report, please 

contact me at (202) 512-3841 or fennella@gao.gov. Contact points for 

our Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found 

on the last page of this report. Key contributors to this report are listed in 

appendix Ill. 

Anne-Marie Fennell 

Director, Natural Resources and Environment 

Page 31 GA0-16~131 Fisheries Data Collection 
39 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 36 here 24388.036

List of Requesters 

The Honorable Marco Rubio 

Chairman 

Subcommittee on Oceans, Atmosphere, Fisheries, and Coast Guard 

Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation 

United States Senate 

The Honorable Thad Cochran 

United States Senate 

The Honorable Jeff Sessions 

United States Senate 

The Honorable Richard Shelby 

United States Senate 

The Honorable David Vitter 

United States Senate 

The Honorable Roger F. Wicker 

United States Senate 

Page 32 GA0·1G-131 Fisheries Data Collection 
40 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 37 here 24388.037

Appendix 1: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology 

Our objectives were to examine (1) the challenges that have been 

identified with the National Marine Fisheries Service's (NMFS) data 

collection efforts for managing marine recreational fisheries and (2) the 

steps NMFS has taken to improve data collection and challenges that 

remain. 

To conduct our work, we reviewed and analyzed relevant laws, agency 

policies, guidance, and other documentation related to fisheries data 

collection, including documentation related to specific federal and state 

marine recreational fisheries data collection projects. 1 We also reviewed 

previous GAO work related to fisheries management> To determine the 

challenges that have been identified with NMFS' data collection efforts, 

we first reviewed reports and evaluations of NMFS' data collection 

programs issued since 2006 from the National Research Council, the 

Department of Commerce Inspector General, NMFS, states, and 

independent consultants and assessed the extent to which they 

discussed data collection challenges. 3 Of these reports, we relied 

primarily on the findings of the National Research Council and NMFS to 

identify data collection challenges. To obtain insights into the challenges 

identified in these documents, as well as to obtain information on any 

additional challenges, we interviewed officials from NMFS headquarters 

and three of NMFS' six regional Fisheries Science Centers (Northeast, 

Northwest, and Southeast); representatives of three of the eight Regional 

Fishery Management Councils (Gulf of Mexico, Pacific, and South 

Atlantic) and all three interstate Marine Fisheries Commissions (Atlantic, 

Gulf, and Pacific States); and officials from state fisheries agencies in 

Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, Rhode Island, 

Texas, and Washington. We selected federal and state agencies and 

regional organizations to interview based on such factors as geographic 

representation, locations of large volumes of recreational fishing, and 

representation from key data collection and management stakeholders. 4 

The views of representatives from the agencies and organizations we 

1 See, for example, Magnuson~Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act 

2See, for example, GA0-14-794R. 

3See, for example, National Research Council, Ocean Studies Board, Committee on the 

Review of Recreational Fisheries Survey Methods, Review of Recreational Fisheries 

Swvey Methods (Washington, D.C.: 2006). 

4According to NMFS statistics, the largest volumes of recreational fishing are in the Gulf of 

Mexico, followed by the South Atlantic, and then the mid~Atlantic regions. 

Page 33 GA0-16-131 Fisheries Data Collection 
41 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 38 here 24388.038

Appendix 1: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology 

contacted are not generalizable to other agencies and organizations, but 

they provided various perspectives on recreational fisheries management. 

In addition, to obtain additional information about data collected by the 

recreational fishing sector and challenges associated with data collection, 

as well as to obtain views on recreational fisheries data collection 

generally, we interviewed 22 nongovernmental marine recreational 

fisheries stakeholders. Of these stakeholders, 17 had expressed interest 

in, or concerns about, NMFS' recreational fisheries data collection to 

congressional staff. These stakeholders added to the geographic 

variation and the recreational fishing sectors represented in our review, 

but their views do not represent the views of NMFS stakeholders 

generally. To supplement views on recreational fisheries data collection, 

we interviewed 5 additional stakeholders, including 4 stakeholders 

identified by NMFS and 1 stakeholder we identified through our previous 

work on fisheries management. 5 The 22 stakeholders we interviewed 

included charter boat owners, private recreational anglers, members of 

academia, and advocacy groups, among others, and represented various 

geographic locations and different recreational fishing sectors. The NMFS 

statistical surveys used to collect data for managing recreational fisheries 

cover a wide range of methods, apply to a wide diversity of locations and 

often entail in-depth technical knowledge about fisheries data collection. 

For these reasons, we did not conduct a technical evaluation of these 

challenges or assess their technical validity. 

To determine the steps NMFS has taken to improve data collection and 

challenges that remain, we conducted interviews as described above and 

reviewed NMFS' reports and other documents. Specifically, we reviewed 

NMFS' strategic plans, recreational fisheries planning documents, and 

recreational fisheries data collection program documents. 6 We compared 

this information with the framework of leading practices in federal 

strategic planning contained in the Government Performance and Results 

Act of 1993, the Government Performance and Results Act Modernization 

Act of 2010, and Office of Management and Budget guidance. We also 

compared this information to key practices related to communication we 

5GA0-14-794R. 

6

See, for example, National Marine Fisheries Service, Development and Testing of 

Recreational Fishing Effort Surveys: Testing a Mail Survey Design, Final Report, July 31, 

2014. 

Page 34 GA0-16~131 Fisheries Data Collection 
42 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 39 here 24388.039

Appe-ndix 1: Objectives, Scope, and 

Methodology 

identified in previous reports. 7 Consistent with our approach to the 

previous objective, we did not conduct a technical evaluation of NMFS' 

steps to improve data collection or assess the appropriateness of those 

steps in light of the challenges NMFS faces. 

We conducted this performance audit from July 2014 to December 2015 

in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. 

Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain 

sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our 

findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe that 

the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and 

conclusions based on our audit objectives. 

for example, GA0-09-192 and GA0-03-669. 

Page 35 GA0~16-131 Fisheries Data Collection 
43 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 40 here 24388.040

Appendix II: Comments from the Department 

of Commerce 

November 19,2015 

Ms. Anne-Marie Fennell 

Director, Natural Resources and Environment 

U.S. Government Accountability Office 

44! G Street, NW 

Washington, DC 20548 

Dear Ms. Ferme!l: 

I 

THE OEPUTY SECRETARY OF COMMERCE 

Washmgton. O.C 20230 

Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the Gtwemment Accountabillty 

Office's (GAO) draft report titled Recreational Fisheries Management: The National Marine 

Fisheries Service Should Develop a Comprehensive Strategy to Guide Its Data Collection FJ!orts 

{GAO· 16·13 J ). Enclosed are the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's 

programmatic comments to the chaft report. 

If you have any questions, please contact me or Jim Stowers, Acting Assistant Secretary 

for Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs, at (202) 482-3663. 

Bruce H. Andrews 

Deputy Secretary of Commerce 

Enclosure 

Page 36 GA0-16~131 Fisheries Data Collection 
44 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 41 here 24388.041

Appendix II: Comments from the Department 

of Commerce 

General Comments 

Department of Commt'rcc 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

Response to the GAO Ontft Report t:ntitled 

Recreatiorwl Fisheries ,t/anagemelll: The National Marine 

Fisheries ,\'ervice Should Del•elop a Comprehem·ive 

Strategy to Guide Its Data Colleaio11 Efforts 

(GA0-16-131, December 2015) 

The Department of Commerce'~ National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) 

appreciates the opportunity to review the Gowmmental Accotmtability Office's {GAO) draft 

report on recreational fisheries management. Please see our comments he low, specifica!ty 

prepared by 1\'0AA's National Marine Fisheries Service (:-.JMFS) 

L The GAO report examines challenges that have been identified with the agency's data 

collection effOrts for managing marine recreational fisheries, examines steps taken by the 

agency to improve data collection. and identifies challenges that remain. To support its 

analy'!!cS, the report relics on laws, agency policies, and guidance related to Federal and State 

rc ... -rcational fisheries data collection methods; N:VfFS" and external do.:umcnts on 

recreational fisheries data co!lcttion, and, inten.'iews to obtain views on :'\MFS" daUi 

collection et10rt<: from Federal and State recreational fisheries ofi1cials and other 

stnkeho!ders selected to provide g~ographic representation. 

Interviews were conducted with the following partner organizations: 

Stateofticials 

FL, AL, MS, LA, and TX- all five Gulf States 

NC and RI -two of 15 Atlantic States 

\VA -one of three Pa.::ific States 

councils 

Interstate Marine Fisherv Commis:sions/Fishen· Infonnation Networks fFINs2 

All three commi~sions, but only two of the three FI:'\i"s (GulfFil'\ and Pac1fh: FIN, but not th~ 

Atlantic Coastal Cooperative Statistics Program) 

On pages 2-3 Qflhe report, GAO states, "We determined that the selection ofth,.:se entities 

and individuals was appropriate for our design and objectives, and that the selection would 

generate valid and reliable evidence to support our worL" 

Comment: Tile disproportionate representation of Gulf Coast partners may weigh the 

report's conclusions differently than if other regions were better represented through lht.l 

interview process. No interviews 'Were Cl,"lllducted with key partners in the western Pacifi<.\ 

Caribbean, or Atlantic Highly :VIigratory Species partner commuuities. Both the Atlantk and 

Page 37 GA0-16-131 Fisheries Data Collection 
45 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 42 here 24388.042

Appendix II: Comments from the Department 

of Commerce 

Pacific Coasts appear underrepresented. Accordingly, the report states on pnge 3 that "11w 

results of our interviews cannot be generalized to a!l stakeholders or data co!lc(:tion activities, 

but they provide examples of different recreational fisheries data collection efforts and 

challenges." We agree with this slatement and suggest that a more representative group of 

partner interviews might have resulted in additional or differently weighted conclusions 

about our challenges and Marine Recreational Information Program's {MRIP) progress in 

addressing these challenges. 

2. On page 3, the report states" ... we did not conduct a technical evaluation of these challenges 

or assess their technical validity . ., On the same page, the report al!{O state!': ''Consistent with 

our approach to the previous objective, we did not conduct a technical evaluation of NMFS' 

steps to improve data co!lcctkm or asl>e~s the appropriatl!n<!ss of those s1cps in light of the 

challenges NMFS faces.'' These are important points because they suggest that an additional 

technical evaluation is needed to determine v.hether NMFS has appropriately prioritized 

MRIP's challenges. 

3. 11le reporlldentifies several unaddressed challenges. but fails to addres~ that such challenges 

require funding levels above the current MRIP budget. For example, on page 14 in the 

section "Obtaining a sufficient number of survey responses and biological samples," the 

report indtcates that State officials informed GAO that NMFS does not allocate sunicient 

levels of sampling for catch data and biological data on catch. Another example is on page 

16, where th<;) n.'Port notes that NMFS and State ofticials told GAO, ''N.\4FS' da!a co!kciion 

systems h1L\'e no! evolved quickly enough to support management decision making. It may 

help the reader's interpretation of examples sueh as these if the report acknowledged that a 

~>uhstantia! increa.<:e in funding would he needed to implement the increased sampling levels 

that would he necessary to provide more frequent in-season tracking of recreational catches 

with well-designed statistical surveys. 

NOAA's Response to GAO R«ommendation 

The draft GAO report state.<:, "To improve >JMFS' ahi!ity to capitalize on its efforts to improve 

fisheries data collection for managing marine recreational fisheries, we recommend that the 

Secretary of Commerce direct the t\OAA Assistant Administrator for Fisheries:" 

Recommendation 1: "To devd1)p a comprehensive stmtegy to guide NMFs· implementation of 

its marine re-.T.:ationu! fishcri~ data colk·ction progrrun efforts, including a means to measure 

progres~ in implementing this strategy and to communicate infnnnation to stakeholders. A~ part 

of this strategy, NMFS should clearly identify and communicate programmatic goals, dctenninc 

the program activities and resources needed to accomplish the goals, and establish timcffames 

and perfonnance measures to track progres.s in implementing the strategy and accomplishing 

goals." 

NOAA Response: NOAA COJ}<.;Uf'S with this recommendation. As articulated in the Octob~r 

2008 Implementation Plan, ~tRIP has. followed a strategy that sequenced its priorities as: 

First. addres..<; the fundamental design issues raised by the 2006 National Research 

Council (NRC) review (e.g., improperly weighted data tL~cd in estimation, potential bias 

i11 shoreside survey design, and potential bias mte!cphone survey). 

Page 38 GA0·16-131 Fisheries Data Collection 
46 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 43 here 24388.043

Appendix II: Comments from the Department 

of Commerce 

o f>esign. test, peer review, and certify new and improved survey designs 

<') lmplcmcnt improvements that address the fundamental d..:sign issues. 

"Inen. scale up data colle'-1ion to addresz. regional needs for improved precision. 

timeliness, covemge, ami special needs 

As of2015, substantial progress has been made in implementi11g improved survey designs that 

address the fundamental design issues raised by the NRC Panel. NMFS agrees that transitioning 

from a primarily research and development focused progmm to one that is more focused on 

implementing survey improvement~, as discussed at pages 25-26 of the report. presents an 

opportunity to engage m strategic planning. 1l1is V<ill hodp us develop an .:nhanc~d approach to 

managing th~ program 

The current initiatives to develop ;\1RIP Rcgionallmph:mentation Plans and initiate a new NRC 

review of the program's progress to date. repref'ent important milestones on the path to 

developing a comprehensive strategic plan. Over the next year, we will work with our regional 

partners to develop MRJP Regional Implementation Plans that include milestones, time lines, 

appropriate perfomlatwt! metric~, and resoum:: n<:eds. We will simultaneously work 10 develop 

national-level strategic pla1ming that will set overall prograrmnatic goals, strategi~s, and 

priorities; provide ongoing guidance to the regional planning eftOrts; and Jay out a schedule for 

addressing remai11ing overall necds for improving the designs of the surveys (e.g., developing 

methods for assessing private access catch, evaluating accur<K'Y of re\ea..::ed catch d.1.ta, etc.) 

Titis eftOrt will be further informed by the findings and rox:ommendations of the 1\:RC in its 

review ofMRIP. 

l\'MFS will initiate this strategic planning eflOrt 111 the second quru1er ofFY 2016. to be 

completed within 6 months ofreccipt of the new -:-JRC rcvtcw, so that the ~RC's fi11ding.<: and 

recommendations c~m be incorporated into the MRJP program 

Page 39 GAOM16M131 Fisheries Data Collection 
47 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 44 here 24388.044

Appendix Ill: GAO Contact and Staff 

Acknowledgments 

GAO Contact 

Staff 

Acknowledgments 

(361597) 

Anne-Marie Fennell, (202) 512-3841 orfennella@gao.gov 

In addition to the individual named above, Steve Gaty (Assistant 

Director), Steve Secrist (Assistant Director), Leo Acosta (Analyst-inCharge), Mark Braza, Joseph Capuano, Elizabeth Curda, John Delicath, 

Richard Johnson, Jerry Leverich, Jeanette Soares, and Sara Sullivan 

made contributions to this report 

Page 40 GA0-16-131 Fisheries Data Collection 
48 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 45 here 24388.045

GAO's Mission 

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony 

Order by Phone 

Connect with GAO 

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs 

Congressional 

Relations 

Public Affairs 

The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation, and 

investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its 

constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and 

accountability of the federal government for the American people. GAO 

examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and 

policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance 

to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. 

GAO's commitment to good government is reflected in its core values of 

accountability, integrity, and reliability. 

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no 

cost is through GAO's website (http://www.gao.gov). Each weekday 

afternoon, GAO posts on its website newly released reports, testimony, 

and correspondence. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted 

products, go to http://www.gao.gov and select "E-mail Updates." 

The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO's actual cost of 

production and distribution and depends on the number of pages in the 

publication and whether the publication is printed in color or black and 

white. Pricing and ordering information is posted on GAO's website, 

http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm. 

Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or 

TDD (202) 512-2537. 

Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card, 

MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional information. 

Connect with GAO on Facebook, Flickr, Twitter, and YouTube. 

Subscribe to our RSS Feeds or E-mail Updates. 

listen to our Podcasts and read The Watchblog. 

Visit GAO on the web at www.gao.gov. 

Contact: 

Website: http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm 

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov 

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470 

Katherine Siggerud, Managing Director, siggerudk@gao.gov, (202) 512-

4400, U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 

7125, Washington, DC 20548 

Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov, (202) 512-4800 

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, DC 20548 

•• ""·I 

Please Print on Recycled Paper. 
49 

Chairman VITTER. Right now, there are over three million saltwater recreational anglers, including charter boats, all the way 

from Florida to Texas, and nearly 400 commercial red snapper fishermen. However, federal management authorities weigh the priorities of the few over the public, which can be seen in the reduction 

of the recreational red snapper season from 40 days to 10 or fewer 

days. 

I certainly understand the need to find a balance in timing for 

recreational and commercial harvests, but it is clear that federal 

authorities are not taking into account the effects their decisions 

have not only on anglers, but on thousands and thousands of small 

businesses that surround the recreational community. 

For the livelihoods of Gulf Coast anglers and the small businesses that rely on the red snapper fishery, updating the outdated 

collection strategies and allocation levels is an urgent matter. In 

the Gulf alone, salt and freshwater anglers generate $13.5 billion 

for the region, as well as supporting almost 121,000 jobs. On a 

wider scale, the recreational angler industry contributes around 

$115 billion annually to the national economy, helping keep close 

to 563,000 people employed. 

The issues surrounding these Gulf fisheries have continued to 

spur national attention. While several logical solutions have presented themselves, including a historic agreement by the Gulf 

states to manage some of the worst managed federal fisheries 

themselves, progress on this issue has been thwarted by those who 

demand the status quo. 

This is clearly seen in the flurry of lawsuits in recent years that 

have been aimed at any attempt to adjust allocation levels. Many 

of these efforts to diminish the voices of millions of Gulf anglers 

and related small businesses are led by organizations from outside 

the Gulf region. It is time for the Gulf states to take a larger role 

in the management of these important assets. 

In a time of economic uncertainty, the U.S. effort should be focused on data-backed solutions that support our Nation’s small 

businesses and that spur job creation. 

Again, I want to thank everyone for being here today and I look 

forward to our discussion. 

Now, before I introduce our witnesses, I know Senator Ayotte 

also has some other engagements, so I am going to defer to Senator 

Ayotte. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. KELLY AYOTTE, A U.S. 

SENATOR FROM NEW HAMPSHIRE 

Senator AYOTTE. Oh, I want to thank the Chairman. 

I just wanted to mention, I know on the second panel today we 

are going to have—Senator Shaheen had said Dr. Wiersma and 

also James Hayward, both who are representative and are going to 

tell us about the plight, really, of our ground fishermen in New 

Hampshire, and they are going to be a great example of they are 

trying to do everything they can, really, to make sure that the fishermen can continue to thrive and grow. 

And I think that Mr. Hayward is a great example, as a second 

generation fishermen, that these are family small businesses. And, 

not only are these small businesses important, but they are also 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

50 

generational. I have said before, but having our small fishermen— 

it is iconic. It is so important not only to have, you know, the availability of fresh fish, the work that they do as small businesses, but 

also this is something that I think is a great tradition that is being 

devastated, basically eliminated. 

As Senator Shaheen said, this is not right, Mr. Chairman, because what has happened, essentially, is that the catch share rules 

and the dramatic increases—cod is a prime example of this—have 

put our fishermen in such a difficult position where they cannot 

make a living. 

And then on top of it, to add insult to injury, is now these monitoring fees, which are $710 a day, is the average, okay. And, if you 

put together what a ground fisherman actually makes on an average day, often, what they would have to pay at the monitoring fees 

and the few fishing days that they get actually exceed what they 

would make after they pay their crew. 

And, so, you know, I think about—we worry about too big to fail 

around here. Well, the way this is set up is that it is going to end 

up with the larger fishing boats are able to thrive and grow, but 

the small businesses, the fishermen, they are going out of business 

and they are going to extinction unless we do something about it. 

And, I am glad you raised the issue of research and data and 

making sure that we are making these decisions based on good information, because I know this is an issue I know that Dr. 

Wiersma is very well versed in, but also that I have heard from my 

fishermen about the concerns they have that the decisions that are 

being made of the dramatic reductions, for example, in cod, which 

are 95 percent reductions, essentially, over a very short period, 

they are concerned because when they are out on the waters, they 

are seeing things that are different. We need to make sure that we 

are making these decisions based on good information, as well. 

So, I appreciate the opportunity to comment on this today and 

I certainly will want to question—be back to ask about these 

issues. But, this is something in this committee that I hope we can 

address. 

I recently—I serve on the Commerce Committee, as well, and I 

recently asked the Deputy Assistant Administrator for NOAA 

about this issue on the monitoring, because here is the thing. The 

Appropriations Committee has said in the language in the appropriations bill that we intended to fund the at sea monitoring, but 

NOAA is not following through on it. So, the Congress said, we do 

not want to put this fee on our fishermen because we do not want 

them to go out of business, and yet NOAA is doing it anyway, I 

believe in contravention to what we have said in the appropriations 

process. And, I got a completely unacceptable answer when I asked 

the Deputy Administrator the other day. I said, you cannot find 

this money anywhere? 

That is something I hope we can work together and push, as 

well, because they are violating the intent of Congress to pay for 

the at sea monitoring, which is the straw that will break the camel’s back here. And, so, we have got to do something about this. We 

need good data, first of all. We need to stop putting the small fishermen out of business. And, certainly, these at sea monitoring fees 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

51 

should be paid for by NOAA, because that is what the Congress intended. 

And, I really appreciate your having this incredibly important 

hearing today. 

Chairman VITTER. Thank you, Senator Ayotte, and certainly 

count me in as we try to address all of these fisheries issues, certainly including that really devastating situation in the Northeast. 

Congressman Garret Graves and Congressman Austin Scott requested to be present as a first members panel, and we are happy 

to hear from them and eager to hear from them. I will introduce 

Congressman Graves, who is here. I hope Congressman Scott is on 

the way, and if he shows up, I will obviously introduce him in turn. 

And then after their presentations, I will introduce our second 

panel. 

But, Congressman Graves represents Louisiana’s Sixth Congressional District. He sits on the House Committee on Transportation 

and Infrastructure and the Committee on Natural Resources. The 

Congressman is a lifelong resident of Baton Rouge, where he lives 

with his wife, Carissa, and three children. He has been a champion 

of recreational fishing rights in the House and currently has legislation pending that would turn control over troubled fisheries to 

the Gulf States. 

Congressman Graves. 

STATEMENT OF HON. GARRET GRAVES, A U.S. 

REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE STATE OF LOUISIANA 

Representative GRAVES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Senator 

Ayotte. I appreciate the opportunity to be here today. 

The House actually just called a vote, so either Congressman 

Scott or I is making the wrong decision—— 

[Laughter.] 

But nonetheless, great to be here. 

Mr. Chairman, in 2010, the White House announced the Great 

Outdoors Initiative, and they went across the United States engaging different outdoor recreation opportunities and stakeholders, 

trying to figure out how to get people off their couches and enjoy 

our Nation’s bounty, our Nation’s natural resources, much more so 

than we have seen in regard to recent trends. I totally support the 

initiative. As a former wilderness instructor and outdoor guide, I 

appreciate the fact that they are engaging people and trying to get 

them up, get them in the outdoors. 

Senator Ayotte, Senator Shaheen, your home State, the 

Presidentials, that traverse is on my wife and I’s bucket list. We 

have not done it yet, but we will be there. I have seen pictures and 

friends and amazing things, an amazing place. But, if you think 

about what it takes to go there, people go to the stores, they go to 

the gas stations, they go to the gear shops, they go to the hotels, 

they go to the restaurants. There is so much involved in that. 

My wife’s family is from Washington State, where I know Senator Cantwell represents, and Washington State, we go every year 

we go, and we go enjoy, whether it is Mount Baker that we have 

climbed and named our daughter after. We go and enjoy the Olympic Peninsula, the Olympics, the Cascades. We enjoy getting in the 

outdoors. 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

52 

But, I want to flip back to Louisiana. We do not have those 

mountains, and I would love to have them. If you want to send 

some, we need them. But, we would love to have those opportunities, but we have a different type of outdoors in Louisiana. 

Our state is known as a sportsman’s paradise, and what that 

means to us is that we enjoy going out hunting and fishing and enjoying our outdoors, which are very different, very unique, and fantastic. It is a huge part of our culture, our economy, our way of life 

at home. 

And, what we have seen in recent years that so much contrasts 

what it was like when I was a child. When I was a child, we used 

to be able to go out and fish 365 days a year, and it was a family 

thing. We would all go out with family and friends and extended 

family. In fact, we would do it during holidays. That is what we 

do at home. And we have some of the best food in the Nation as 

a result of this incredibly productive ecosystem we have in Coastal 

Louisiana. 

But, what has happened in recent years, we went from being 

able to fish 365 days a year to, in 2014, just 9 days for red snapper 

and just two fish. In 2015, it was just 10 days. Amazing to go from 

365 days a year and reducing it down to just 10, or 9. Federal policy has obstructed our access, our opportunity to the great outdoors. Federal policy, on one hand, is conflicting the Great Outdoors Initiative, and it is preventing our ability to enjoy our outdoors the way we like to do it at home in Louisiana. 

Mr. Chairman, I was a natural resource manager. It is what I 

did, and I am a big proponent of sustainable management, and you 

have got to have good science. And, as we have dug into this issue 

in trying to understand it, we now understand that you have got 

rookie science. You have got science that is insufficient. For red 

snapper, for example, they are using stock assessments that they 

do not assess the fisheries in reef areas. The only problem is that 

red snapper is a reef fish. Of course, the stock assessments are 

showing that they are low volume, low quantity of fish. It is a 

flawed process. 

Magnuson-Stevens, the federal law that governs our fisheries, it 

was named after Senator Stevens, who I used to work for. I assure 

you, of the time I spent with him, this is not his intent, to have 

federal policy obstruct and impede. It is not his intent to allow for 

regional solutions, as we have reached in the Gulf, to be obstructed 

by federal policy. And it would not be his intent to prevent people, 

parents, children, and grandchildren, from being able to fish as federal policy is today, does today. 

I will say it again. We have some of the top restaurants in the 

United States. It is a huge part of our tourism economy in Louisiana. Foodies come to our state to eat because of the great, bountiful resources we have. We also have the top commercial seafood 

industry in the continental United States. It is a huge part of our 

economy. It is a huge part of our culture. And, we cannot screw 

that up, either. 

But, there was a recent article that was in the Alabama newspaper that, Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask if you could include 

this in the record, that lays out—— 

Chairman VITTER. Without objection. 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

53 

Representative GRAVES [continuing]. The obstructions in federal 

policy that are preventing our ability to sustainably manage our 

fisheries and access. 

[The information of Mr. Graves follows:] 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

54 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 46 here 24388.046

Alabams 

Kingpins of the Gulf make millions off red snapper 

harvest without ever going fishing 

• By Ben Raines I bralnes®al.corn 

.Alia Email the author j Follow on Twitter 

on January 24, 2016 at 7:00AM, updated January 26, 2016 at 10:26 AM 

A little-known federal program has turned dozens of Gulf of Mexico fishermen into the lords of the sea- able to earn millions 

annually without even going fishing- and transformed dozens more into modern~day serfs who must pay the lords for the right 

to harvest red snapper. 

A four-month probe by AL.com has found that roughly $60 million has been earned since 2007 by this small number of 

fishermen whose boats never left port. That money was collected from the labor of fishermen who have no choice but to hand 

over more than half of the price that their catch brings at the dock. 

As it stands today, the right to catch 77 percent of the annual red snapper harvest is controlled by just 55 people, according to a 

AL.com analysis of hundreds of pages of federal documents, reports and websites. 

The lion's share of the commercial harvest was concentrated in the hands of a very few in 2007 when a federal program known 

as the Individual Fishing Quota system, or IFQ, was established. The National Marine fisheries Service divided up the Gulf's 

snapper harvest like a pie, with the largest pieces going to the fishermen who landed the most fish in the preceding years. A 

handful of snapper fishermen got shares as large as 5 or 6 percent of the Gulf's total harvest, while others received shares as 

small as a ten thousandth of a percent, which granted the right to catch about a dozen fish a year. 

"I sold my first snapper when I was 16 or 17," said Ricky Wilson, a welder who lives in a small cottage on Mobile Bay. Commercial 

snapper fishing provided part of his income for 20 years. 

When the IFQ portions were handed out, his share amounted to about 430 pounds, which would have taken him one or two days 

to catch and brought less than $1.000 at the dock. 

"My percentage was 0.000187 percent of the total allowable quota. There just wasn't any point in fishing it," Wilson said, 

standing in front of his snapper boat, the Gulf Rambler, which sits on a trailer in his yard, covered in mildew and leaves.lt hasn't 

been in the water since 2007. the year that the IFQ program started. "I've never made more than $30.000 in my llfe.l couldn't 

afford to lease (the right to catch) snapper from somebody." 

Almost immediately, in the new system's first year, the fishermen who had received the largest shares realized that fishermen 

like Wilson were in a desperate fix. They were no longer allowed to pursue their livelihood. unless they could come up with a 

share of the harvest. 

Taking advantage of the situation. an average of 86 fishermen who receive a share of the federal bonanza each year have turned 

to renting or selling their entire allotment to the highest bidder Instead of fishing it, according to federal records. They have 

become the kingpins of the Gulf, trading the right to harvest red snapper for cash. Called "Sea Lords" by federal officials. these 

11J.p:/lwNw.al,com/naw8/ia:fe)(,ssfl2016101/ldngplns_of_the_gulf_make_mm.html#lncart_emaU February 25, 2016 
55 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 47 here 24388.047

K!ngplns of the Gulf make millions off red snapper harw1s1 Without ever going flsll!ng I ALcom Page2of8 

kingpins control a significant portion of the fishery and make a llvlng off of the fish without ever untying the:r boats. 

Meanwhile, the fishermen who missed out have been turned Into sharecroppers of the sea. 

''These guys are making tremendous amounts of money not working. All they are doing is taking advantage of the fact that they 

were gifted this pubhc resource," said Bob Shipp, the retired chairman of the Gulf ot Mexico Fishery Management CounciL 

The council, along with the National Marine Fisheries Service, approved and established the !FQ program. The program ctlme 

1nto being during Shipp's tenure as chairman. 

The IFQ program succeeded in its goals of making the snapper fleet smaller and safer, keeping the harvest within the annual 

quota, and providing the public a year~rouncl source of red snapper, Shipp said. 

"But the system has also evolved in ways the council never anticipated, and created a wildly unfair situation." he said. 

"This business of leasing shares. J don't think that's something that ever occurred to any of the council members or the (fishery 

service) people either. It just evolved," Shipp said. "There are people making lots and lots of money from a gifted public resource 

We are talking mi!!lons each year. These people who are no longer fishing, no longer lifting a finger, just making money off their 

peers, that really needs to be corrected." 

rhls government distribution o1: a public commodity to private lndividuals who are then legally allowed to sel! it for a profit is 

Llnprecedented in the modern age. The fish swimming in the nation's oceans are a publicly owned resource, just like the oil 

Jeneath the seafloor, the trees in our national forests, or the minerals buried beneath federally owned !and. For a !I those 

resources, the federal government holds auctions and sells the right to harvest the publicly owned commodities to the highest 

Jidder. 

But that tS not what happened wlth red snapper. 

IFQs and dashed dreams 

fhe !FQ system went into effect on Jan. 1. 2007 after a vote by commercia! fishermen. By all accounts, the effort was weUntentioned. The idea was to correct the problems with the trad!tional management of t11e fishery, which pitted the fishermen 

:~gainst each other in a race to land as many snapper as possible before federal officials decided the annual quota had been 

-eached and closed the fishery. Some years, that took as little as 52 days. Over time, a system evolved that opened the fishery 

for the f!rst 10 days of every month. 

::veryone agrees the old way of doing things meant all the snapper hit the market at the same time, driving down prices. It also 

neant that fresh red snapper was only available for a week or so each month, and fishermen were forced to go to sea even in 

:!angerous conditions. lest they miss (Jut on the harvest. 

Jim Clements, a commercia! fisherman from Carrabelle, Fla., received about a lOth of a percent of the Gulf's annual snapper 

1arvest, roughly 4,500 pounds. worth about $24,000 at the dock. 

'For people who are jealous of the fishermen who have quota that the government gave thE!m, well. they don't understand what 

our fishery was like before the IFQ. It solves the problem of the tragedy of the commons," Clements said, explaining that he has 

Jince purchased a larger share, and sits on the board of directors of the Gulf Fishermen's Association, which lobbies in support 

oflhe IFQ program. 

'The old system, if the weather was good, everyone would run out, catch the fish, dump it on the dock and the price would fall 

)Ut. Then the fishermen had to run right out and do it again because you only had 10 days," Clements said. "The restaurants 

;ould never put a permanent red snapper itE!!TI on the menu. We had to fish in terrible weather. And there were too many boats 

:atching too many fish." 
56 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 48 here 24388.048

N!tyJJH!b 1.11 u~ ..,u11 wc:u1.~ HHUIQrll:i Qtr rt:U :m~:~ppt:r narve~n W!UIQU{ ~:~ver gQ~ng nsnmg 1 .... -..com 1-'age:.sot(S 

David Walker, a commercial fisherman from Alabama who is one of 18 voting members of the Gulf CounciL agrees. He said the 

IFQ program has rescued the snapper fishery from chaos and overfishing. Walker receives about 2.5 percent of the Gulf snappe 

harvest each year. one of the 20 largest shares, worth $600,000 at the dock. He said he fishes almost all of his portion each 

year. 

"It's been great. I don't know any fist1ermen who want to go back to the way it was." Walker said. "It has been hitting all the goal 

of the National Marine Fisheries Service, and all the goals of the Magnuson-Stevens Act. It's been very agreeable for everyone 

involved." 

Based on that success, the IFQ program was expanded to the multimillion-dollar grouper and tilefish fisheries in 2010. But it ha 

also created this new class of milHonaire fishermen who essentially own large shares of the harvest. 

"The lFQ created a system of haves and have·nots. And a lot of the people who got to vote are the same people who are getting 

rich without working today," said Pete Barber, president of the Alabama Seafood Association. 

The vote that Barber mentions has become a point of contention for some. While federal websites report that the IFQ passed 

W!th 81 percent support from commercia! fishermen, it was not a typical, one~man/one-vote poll. Instead, only the top 167 

fishermen- those who had caught at least 5,000 pounds of snapper the previous year- were allowed to vote, and their votes 

were weighted according to how many fish they caught. For instance, a vote by a captain who caught 5 percent of the harvest 

counted as 5 percent of the total vote. 

Meanwhile, about 350 of their fellow fishermen were not allowed to vote. ln the end, the top fishermen who voted for the lFQ 

were the very fishermen who stood to benefit the most under the new system. In effect, they were allowed to vote for a system 

that has granted them the rights to the lion's share of the Gu!t's snapper harvest each year since 2007. And the people who 

stood to lose the most could not vote at all. 

Whall see is that we'we 

l11rned a11r lishermen into 

shares:rappers 

"I thought it was a good idea initially, but the devil is in the details." Barber said. 

"And the details are that a lot of hardworking fishermen are supporting a lot of 

people who have been able to quit working." 

Stock market of the sea 

Perhaps the strangest aspect of the IFQ program was the emergence of a privat 

market at which you can buy the right to go fishing. There are even traders using this market who have never fished and don't 

own boats. They just buy and sell the right to f!sh like brokers buying stock on Wall Street, buying when prices are low and sellir 

when prices are high. 

"Leasing red snapper allocations, $2.75/pound! Call ... " reads an ad on the Boatsandquota.com website, which is part of the 

private market. Another offers "1,135 pounds Red Snapper for lease, $3.05/lb." 

Thirty-five such ads selling the right to fish have been posted on the Boatsandquota.com Twitter account in the last two weeks. 

This week, you can lease the right to catch 500 pounds of red snapper for about $1,500. But those fish are worth only about 

$2,500 back at the dock. That means a ·fisherman who missed out on the federal windfall ends up paylng $3 per pound for the 

right to catch a fish that sells for~ little less than $5 a pound wholesale. 

Walker, who was appointed to the Gulf Council as a commercial fishing representative, said the !easing system works well. 

"I fish most of my quota. Sometimes! lease a few fish. Mostly, l'J! trade snapper for grouper with another fisherman. I'll lease 

some grouper from a few folks. We try to keep it all in the system, trade fish back and forth," Walker said. "Every fisherman 1 tal 

to loves it. They are happy to lease fish from others. It's capitalism. People are only going to pay what the fish are worth to !east 

them." 

hllp:I/Www.al.com/news~ndex.ssf/2016101/kingplns_of_the_gulf_make_mm.htm!#incart_email February 25, 2016 
57 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 49 here 24388.049

Kingpins of the GUf make millions off red snapper harvest w!lhoul ever going fishing 1 AL.com Page4of8 

Meanwhile, say the critics, the sea lords sitting at the dock make more money off of each fish than the men who actually do the 

work of pulling the snapper from the sea. 

ALcorn has obtained the fishery records that detail how much of the quota each snapper captain gets every year. However, 

federal officials have refused to identify the captains who sell their right to go fishing, arguing they are required to protect such 

business information by the Magnuson~Stevens Act. which regulates the nation's flsher!es. That protection makes it difficult to 

pin down who the sea lords are. 

But an examination of federal transaction records- which do not contain the names of the fishermen- proves conclusively th' 

many one· time fishermen are indeed selling aU of their shares instead of fishing, 

The Sea lords 

Federal fishery managers said the term "Sea Lords'' was a reference to those making a living primarily by renting the Gulf to 

other fishermen, !ike landlords with tenant farmers. 

Federal officials say they are only beginning to understand the scope of the issue because of the complex web of seafood 

dealers. captains, boat owners, and brokers who trade in the right to fish. 

For instance, federal records indicate that perhaps 10 percent of the trades made ln the private markets may be between peop!~ 

who are actually business partners or relatives, and though the transactions appear to be sales, they are really not. Likewise, 

some seafood dealers buy shares in the market so they can provide them at a favorable rate to the fishermen who bring snappe: 

to them. Others barter for goods or services with their share of the harvest. so those transactions don't show up as sales in the 

federal records. Reporting the sale price for a trade is also voluntary, further confounding the data. 

But no one disputes that most trades are "necessarily for monetary gain," as a chart in a 2015 fishery service document 

described the majority of such transactions. 

Meanwhile, th~ amount of snapper sold on the market has increased steadily since the program's inception. In 2007, the first 

year, the right to catch just over 300,000 pounds was sold this way. By 2013, that number had jumped to 2 million pounds. 

An AL.com analysis of federal records suggests that, collectively, the sea lords may have reaped upward of $60 million since 

2007 without fishing, either by renting their shares or permanently selling them. Exact figures are difficult to obtain because 

fe(ieral officials consider most of the detaUs regarding the IFQ system to be business secrets. As such, they are classified as 

"confidential" and exempt from Freedom of Information Act requests. 

But, in 2013 and 2014, the most recent years for which figures are available, at least 76 of the fishermen receiving a share of the 

federal harvest did not fish at all. Instead, they traded a!! of their portions on the private market. Those 76 people together woulc 

have earned $17 million without evE~r leaving the dock, according to average price estimates for such trades m the fisheries 

service documents. That's an average of $223,000 per person, though some of the fishermen would have earned less, and somt 

a great deal more. 

The money involved in the transactions is impressive, whether a sea lord goes fishing or not. For Instance, a captain with a 4 

percent share of the harvest who actually went fishing would earn about $1 million this year, minus the cost of fuel, crew and 

bait. Mean white, If that same captain elected to lease his share to another fisherman at the market price of $3 per pound, he 

would earn $606,000 without venturing onto the water. 

Finally, if the captain elected to permanently sell his 4 percent portion on the market- where shares sell for $40 per pound 

he could walk away from the fishing industry with around $8 million in his bank account. 

In response to AL.com questions, federal officials noted that some captains choose to lease or stdl their share because "greater 

profit could be earned from selling allocation than harvesting allocation." 
58 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 50 here 24388.050

KI119Pins of the GlAf make millions off red snapper harvest without ever going Hshmg 1 ALcorn Page5of8 

The strangely lucrative arrangement was born out of an attempt to save the Gulf's red snapper population from extinction and 

help the fishermen at the same time. Whl!e federal officials say they never intended for some foH<s to end up making so much 

money by taking advantage of this unforeseen loophole, the Gulf Council has done nothing to change the way it works, even afte 

eight years. 

Plantation owners and sharecroppers 

"You've got shareholders who think it is wonderful and I don't blame them. We've made them millionaires." said Glen Bryant, 

owner of Bryant Products Inc., a seafood distributor in Bayou La Batre, talking about the snapper kingpins. "Everyone told me 

how wonderful it was going to be. I don't see it. What I see is that we've turned our fishermen into sharecroppers. They go work 

for these people who actually own the fish." 

And that group of people who "own" most of the fish turns out to be a very small group indeed. 

An AL.com analysis of federal records reveals that just 28 people hold the right to catch 58 percent of all the red snapper 

harvested from the Gulf each year. That's about 3 mHiion pounds of fish, worth $14 million at the dock. 

Only one of those 28 people fished hls entire portion of the harvest in 2014. The other 27- who were each given between 1 and 

percent of the total harvest- leased some or all of their shares. Two out of every three pounds given to the 28 largest 

shareholders was leased for profit. 

Expand that group just a little more to include fishermen and brokers with at least half a percent of the harvest and you wi!! find 

that just 55 people own the right to catch fully 77 percent of a!! the snapper in the Gulf, a haul worth $18 million annually. 

With so much of the harvest concentrated in the hands of a mere 55 people, the remaining 25 percent of the harvest, a little ove 

1 million pounds, Is split among about 500 people, which means there are a lot of very small shares. And a lot o1 fishermen who 

must buy tile right to fish. 

Bryant said many of the captains who brought their fish to his processing house in years past lost out when the IFQ program 

came in. Mostly smaller family operations, their annual harvest totals were simply not big enough to qualify for a share of the IF< 

pie when the fishery was divided up. 

"I've got fishermen who have fished all their lives, and they didn't get any quota. Now they are having to lease it from these 

people who get to own the resourcE!," Bryant said. "The rea! question is how do you own a resource? I don't understand it. How 

can it be that these people get to SE!II the resource to fishermen who are actually working for a living?" 

Bryant's question gets at the most contentious issue with the IFQ system: Why should people who have quit flshlng be allowed t 

reap profit from those willing to go out and work for a living? 

"There are some people who are trying t{) make it a big issue. They call them 'arm chair fishermen' because they just lease it 

OLit." said Clements, the Carrabelle fisherman. "Well, we need those guys in the armchairs, otherwise there wouldn't be any 

allocation to !ease out. Nobody new would be able to enter the fishery. If I'm catching too many snapper, I can buy some 

(snapper) allocation and keep them. And if I'm catching less grouper, I can sell some of that. So you need those guys who don't 

fish It to help the system work." 

Likewise, Walker said the trading was a good thing. Fishermen haven't complained to him, 

"I haven't heard this talk of the sea lords," Walker said. "I think most of this talk is coming from outside opponents, Every 

fisherman I talk to is happy." 

David "Punkin'" Simms was born 10 minutes after midnight on Halloween. He is a third generation fisherman and owns three 

snapper boats. He voted for the IFQ in 2006. He received 12,000 pounds when the lFQ system came in and was surprised. Othet 

fishermen he knew who harvested about the same amount of snapper he did every year, received over 100,000 pounds worth oi 
59 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 51 here 24388.051

Kingpins of the GUlf make mil!loos off red snapper harvest withOut ever going fishing J AL.com Page6of8 

the quota. 

"!own three boats. Split three ways, ! didn't see where I could make a profit off 12.000 pounds," Simms said. He decided to sell 

his share in 2009 and concentrate on the other species he fished, including Spanish mackerel, king mackerel, vermillion snappe 

(a smaller relative of the red snappet·, better known as beellners), grouper and amberjack. 

But then something unexpected happened. The red snapper population exploded. 

"You never used to see red snapper out past 300 feet of water. Now! see them in 450 feet. You can't fish without catching 

them," Simms said. "It got to whew I was catching 2,000 pounds of snapper a trip, along with 3,000 pounds of the other fish. 

Rather than throw them back, float 'em off and feed them to the sharks, I said we might as well be able to keep them. So 

therefore we lease them." 

In 2015, Simms estimated that he leased the right to catch 50,000 pounds worth ot red snapper, for more than $150,000. He 

leased about 15,000 pounds worth from an Alabama charter boat captain who decicled not to fish it this year, and the rest from 

broker. Preparing for a sfx~day trip recently, Simms put in a cal! to an IFQ broker in Dun lin, Fla. 

"Can you find me about 1,000 pounds? OK, I'll head to the bank and wire you the money. There's a check on the way for what yo 

got me last time," Simms said during a phone call that lasted about three minutes. Talking to a reporter, he said it burned him 

that his money was going to guys "sitting on their butts while we do al! the work. I'm totally against it." 

Back at the dock Thursday after a three-day trip, Simms had about 1,000 pounds ol snapper. After paying $3.25 a pound to 

lease the right to catch them. Simms earned $1,750, while the person he got the quota from reaped $3,250. 

"If it was up to me, I'd go back to the way things were before the IFQ in a minute," Simms said. "You earned the money you madE 

by catching fish, not by trading while you sat at home." 

Chris Nelson, owner of Bon Secour Fisheries in coastal Alabama, who serves on the Gulf States Marine Fisheries Commission, 

said adopting the system seemed like a good idea at the time, but problems were quickly exposed. 

"It created this huge plantation owner and sharecropper situation. I don't think anyone thought it would become nearly so 

lucrative for some of these guys," Nelson said. "The downside for us, we had a boat that fished for us for years and it didn't get 

any quota, so they couldn't fish tor snapper anymore. That meant we lost our traditional source of red snapper. If I wanted a boz 

to bring snapper in here I'd have to buy shares to give them." 

Pushback and fixes 

As the private market developed, fishermen left with no choice but to buy quota began complaining, especially as it became 

apparent that the sea lords were living off their labor. Complaints from those left out in the cold became a regular feature at 

public meetings of the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management CounciL which has been hard pressed to agree on a fix. 

"The increase in the number of shareholders not landing any fish has led to perceptions that many are profiting from the 

program at the expense of hard~working fishermen," reads a fisheries service report from February 2015. 

Another report stated that sea lords and brokers buying up ever larger chunks of the fishery, coupled with an increase in the 

number of shareholders not landing any fish, "have led to the perception that many people are profiting simply by transferring 

("leasing") allocation and not fishing." 

Despite the recognition that there is a problem, nothing has changed. For the last eight years, federal officials have doled out th; 

shares based on catch records that are a decade old. The same handful of fishermen receive the greatest part of the quota each 

year, whether they go fishing or not. 
60 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 52 here 24388.052

Kingpins of the Gutf make mll!wns off red snapper harvest without ever going fishing! AL.com Page7ofE 

However, nothing in the federal rules guarantees fishermen will receive the same size portion of the quota from year to year. T 

Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council, made up of state officials and members who represent recreational and commerc 

fishermen, could change the system, including who gets the right to catch the fish, at any time that it wlshes. So far, the counc 

has declined to change anything. 

Shipp, who w,as chairman of the GuH Council when the iFQ program began, said that no one realized the extent of the problem 

for years. And then, there was little interest in opposing the commercial interests that were defending the program. 

"The commercial guys who had shares, they showed up at every meeting. They were pretty much intimidating," Shipp said. 

He said that the commercial captains who were benefitting the most moved to shut down any talk of redistribution by talking 

about how much safer the fleet was under the new system. "But nobody on the council realized the scale ot what was going on. 

had no idea it was as bad as it is," Sbipp said. 

Today, Shipp advocates an immediate redistribution of the harvest based on current catch records. He would take shares awa; 

from the sea lords and give them to the fishermen who have been stuck renting tile right to fish, like Simms. 

"Tt1at would be fantastic, but I don't see it happenlng. There's too much money and too much politics," safd Simms, who spend: 

about $150,000 a year to lease snapper quota."! would Jove somebody to look at ttle paperwork and say, 'My God, what's golnf 

on here?"' 

Both Shipp and Sims were quick to draw a distinction between fishermen who received a large share of the quota and still go 

fishing anc! catch those fish themselves every year, versus the fishermen who simply lease their quota to others. 

"!don't mind guys having a lot of quota based on their historical catc!l if they fish it. But if they are just leasing their quota, that' 

not right. There are a lot of guys making a really good living who don't ever lift a finger." Shipp said. "These guys making money 

as if they own the resource. That's absurd. Selling the right to fish for $40 a pound, that's abusive! It's not thelrs. It belongs to 

the nation .... !f they are not going to fish it, they should lose it, not be able to sell it." 

But so far, the council has refused to endorse a so-called "use-it or lose· it" provision. 

A federal report states that the council. "evaluated alternatives for use-It or tose-it provisions that would have revoked and 

redistributed shares from accounts using less than 30%, or 50%, of the allotted RS·!FQ shares, over a 3-year, or 5-year, movln~ 

average period. Ultimately, the Councl! selected no action and did not adopt this uso-it or lose-lt provision." 

Federal officials said the Gulf Council is again weighing this issue, including at a meeting this week, and have begun work on an 

amendment tffiat might include both a ''use· it or !ose·tt provision·· and a redistribution of the quota. Walker said he did not think 

the council would adopt such a provision, because "there is no need." 

Fist1ery officials said that in any case. the council will probably wait to take action on snapper once a five-year review of the 

grouper and tilefish IFQ has been completed. That process will take about a year. 

In the meantime, Gulf snapper fishermen are busy !easing and buying the right to catch the 2016 harvest. 

The most recent trade listed on the Boatsandquota.com website was a permanent sale of the right to catch 7,048 pounds of red 

snapper a year for $267,000. 

"We don't have a choice," said Simms. "H we want to go fishing, we've got to pay up.'' 

Updated Jan. 26 to correct that Chris Nelson served on the Gulf States Marine Fisheries Commission. 

This ts the first in an ongoing series, 
61 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 53 here 24388.053
62 

Representative GRAVES. The states have proven that their management practices across the board do not result in over-fishing. 

They manage species all over the place in their own waters, and 

in some cases, Mr. Chairman—the Atlantic striped bass, statebased management; Alaska salmon, state-based management; Dungeness crab on the West Coast, state-based management. We are 

asking for the same thing, not to take away from commercial or 

charter or anything else, to get better science to better manage the 

species, to provide access and allow my kids and grandkids to have 

the same opportunities that I did—that I had when I grew up. 

Lastly, Mr. Chairman, I just want to thank you for taking on topics like this. You know, since 2009—since 2009—we have had more 

small businesses lost in the United States than we have had created, and as I understand from NFIB. That is the first time in recorded history whereby that has occurred, we have had a net loss 

in small businesses. And I think in many cases, some of these federal decisions and management practices and regulations are having a profound effect, and people are not looking at the effect on 

the small businesses like our fishermen that have been pounded in 

Louisiana by Hurricane Katrina, Rita, Gustav, Ike, and Isaac, 

pounding their infrastructure and their livelihood and their way of 

life. 

And, I appreciate you doing this and I appreciate the opportunity 

to testify today. 

Chairman VITTER. Absolutely. Thank you, Congressman, and we 

hope to hear from your colleague, Congressman Scott. 

In the meantime, we will turn to our second panel and they can 

get seated as I introduce all of them, and then they will testify in 

the order of introduction. 

Pam Anderson is the Operations Manager for Captain Anderson’s Marina in Panama City Beach, Florida. Pam has served as 

the First Vice President of the Panama City Boatman’s Association 

and has served the fishing industry on the Bay County Chamber 

of Commerce’s Government Affairs Committee since 2007. 

Hughes Andry serves as the representative and Vice President of 

Fishing Sales for Sportco Marketing, a representative agency that 

acts as a subcontractor for manufacturers in the tackle business. 

In 2014, Hughes was appointed to the Government Affairs Committee for the American Sports Fishing Association. 

Brad Gentner is the President and Chief Economist of Gentner 

Consulting Group. He previously worked as an economist for the 

National Marine Fisheries Service, NMFS, and he also chaired the 

National Economic Impact Working Group. 

James Hayward is a second generation commercial fisherman. 

He owns and manages Heidi Seafood Services, the only federal licensed groundfish dealership at the state facility in Portsmouth 

Harbor. 

And Dr. Josh Wiersma has over 15 years’ experience working 

with commercial fishermen in New England to improve their businesses. He is now the Manager of Northeast Fisheries at the Environmental Defense Fund, where he continues to work with fishermen to shape effective management, to improve fishery science and 

data collection, and to develop better seafood markets and other 

business conditions. 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

63 

We certainly look forward to hearing from all of you and we will 

start with Ms. Anderson. 

STATEMENT OF PAMELA W. ANDERSON, CO-OWNER AND OPERATIONS MANAGER, CAPTAIN ANDERSON’S MARINA, PANAMA CITY BEACH, FL 

Ms. ANDERSON. Thank you, Chairman Vitter and committee 

members. I am Pam Anderson, co-owner and Operations Manager 

of Captain Anderson’s Marina, Panama City, Florida, First Vice 

President of the Panama City Boatman’s Association, and the fishery rep for our Chamber of Commerce Government Affairs Committee, and I am honored to be here today to represent our company to give testimony to this committee. 

My husband grew up in the fishing industry and we have managed a dinner cruise boat for 40 years and the marina and fishing 

boats since 2001, after his father passed. 

Small businesses in our industry have been unreasonably burdened by the extreme deadlines and mandates dictated by the Magnuson. Compounding the problem, the Gulf Council, under the direction of NOAA Fisheries, has picked winners and losers in the 

commercial industry through catch shares. Now they are attempting to do the same in the for hire industry. Catch shares are designed to reduce access and put people out of business. 

Angling is all about access and opportunity, opportunities to 

share memorable experiences with family and friends. It is often an 

activity that vacations are built around. It is also an important economic engine for our Nation and our communities that continue to 

grow. 

At Captain Anderson’s Marina, next year, we will be celebrating 

our 60th anniversary in that location, supporting 40 small businesses. We have 5 large head boats, 4 dive boats, 27 charter boats, 

and most of them are owned by third- and fourth-generation families. In our business, we employ—in just our businesses only—we 

employ about 40 people. 

In addition to the marinas, local tackle shops and bait and ice 

suppliers, fuel suppliers, and boat repair shops all play a role in 

our industry. Johnny Patronis, co-owner with his brother of Captain Anderson’s Restaurant, has said more than once, ‘‘When I look 

out in the morning and see the parking lot full of fishermen, I 

know we are going to have a good night in the restaurant.’’ If you 

are not fishing much, business is slow. That applies to a lot of the 

businesses around our area. 

Our anglers make vacation plans well in advance so they will be 

able to secure lodging and to request time off from their workplace 

for the June 1 start of red snapper season. Unfortunately, every 

year, it is a guessing game as to the season length until February, 

March, or April, and when we are given dates and take reservations, the dates may change. 

For example, in February 2014, we were told by the Council that 

our red snapper season would be 40 days, 40 to 45 days, and begin 

June 1. I called back to the office to say they could book red snapper trips for a 40-day season. They immediately put the word out 

and we were almost booked full for all boats, all trips, within a few 

weeks. 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

64 

At the very next Council meeting in April, we were told that due 

to a ruling on a lawsuit by EDF and commercial fishing groups 

against NOAA, our federal season was cut to 11 days. In May, the 

season was cut again to just nine days. We were forced to contact 

our customers and cancel more than 30 days of booked trips just 

a few weeks before the start of the season. The situation was not 

good for our businesses, and it was certainly not good for Florida’s 

tourism. Just one of the charter boat owners said he lost 40 trips 

between his two boats at $1,000 each. 

The catch share program that has been put in place for the commercial red snapper sector is now being seriously considered for 

charter boats. This management model has made sharecroppers 

out of the small commercial businesses, as you will see in the provided article by Ben Raines, and I do not support it for our business. Our family has not stayed in business since 1935 by hurting 

others to make a profit for ourselves. 

The stock recovery short will show the NOAA data that red snapper is growing faster than NOAA expected. The states know how 

to adapt regulations to the changing needs of their coastal communities and that is why we have advocated for true regional management of this fishery. 

The best way to ensure fair regulations and ample opportunities 

to access healthy fisheries is for NOAA to accept the state’s more 

accurate harvest data and more robust independent fishery data as 

best available science; for NOAA to allow Gulf States to have full 

regional control out to 200 miles, as was originally proposed under 

Amendment 39; for the Gulf Council to take seriously the testimony of all stakeholders, whether they are present in the meetings 

or not; for NOAA to direct funding to research and development of 

ways to increase fishery habitat in the Gulf, such as artificial reef 

programs and dealing more seriously with negative impacts of nonnative species, such as lionfish. These programs would grow the 

fisheries to meet the demands of the Nation’s anglers instead of 

placing undue limitations on the industry, assuming a limited fishery. 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. I will be happy to 

answer any questions. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Anderson follows:] 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

65 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 10 here 24388.054

WRITTEN TESTIMONY OF 

PAMELA W. ANDERSON, Co-owner/Operations Manager 

CAPT. ANDERSON'S MARINA, TO 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP 

THE IMPACTS OF FEDERAL FISHERIES MANAGEMENT ON SMALL BUSINESSES 

March 3, 2016 

Dear Chairman Vitter and Members of the Committee, 

I am Pamela Anderson, co- owner and Operations Manager of Capt. Anderson's Marina, Panama 

City, FL, First Vice President of the Panama City Boatman's Association, and fishery 

representative on our Bay County Chamber Governmental Affairs Committee. While my 

husband and I operated a large Dinner Cruise boat for 40 years, until 2013, we have managed the 

marina and fishing boats since 200 I after his father passed. 

I am honored to be here today to give testimony to the Senate Committee on Small Business and 

Entrepreneurship regarding 'The Impacts of Federal Fisheries Management on Small Businesses'. 

Fisheries management has resulted in negative economic impacts on the fishing industry and 

associated businesses that have been caused by the Reauthorization of the Magnuson-Stevens 

Act of2007. 

Today you will hear from me, a small business owner in the recreational fishing industry, about 

how thousands of similar businesses tied to recreational fishing in the Gulf have been 

unreasonably burdened by the excess deadline mandates in the 2007 MSA. From others you will 

hear a different opinion, and this is why- the Gulf Council, under the direction of NOAA 

Fisheries, is picking winners and losers in the industry through catch shares programs. You will 

not hear from the losers, not because they don't care, but because they have become 

sharecroppers to those who were granted large portions of shares early on in the process and 

have given up and because they cannot afford to continue to fight. 

Recreational angling is a $168 industry in the Gulf States. According to Florida's Fish & 

Wildlife Research Institute , $12.5B is attributed to all of Florida's anglers. It is important to our 

economies to offer opportunities to fish in our coastal communities. Unfortunately, NOAA's 

interpretation of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, is to manage for a finite number of fish, and, since 

the popularity of fishing is increasing, they must stop that increase through choosing winners 

and losers in the fishery. That has been done in the Commercial sector in the Gulf, shrinking the 

Red Snapper commercial shareholders from 800 to less than 400, with less than 55 controlling 

77% of the total harvest. They call it reducing overcapacity, I call it eliminating jobs, businesses 

and gifting a public resource. The Council plans to reduce the number of recreational angling 

charter boats and head-boats in the Federal for-hire industry. from the original 1600 to less than 

1000. Right now there are about 1250 licensed captains. In the private angler arena, the plan is to 

develop fish tags to sell, lease, auction or use in a lottery system, allowing only the most affluent 

anglers to fish recreationally. 
66 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 11 here 24388.055

[Type text] 

Currently the commercial fishermen who were fortunate enough to be granted their own share of 

the fishery through an Individual Fishing Quota (IFQ) are the only winners, with a handful of 

very outspoken leaders who have become quite wealthy. These commercial beneficiaries are 

trying to force the same type of regulations on recreational anglers. An excellent article was 

written recently by Ben Raines, an investigative reporter for the Alabama Media Group 

(AL.com). His eye-opening article is in your packet***. It clarifies what has happened in the 

management of our fisheries and where it is headed. 

Recreational angling is all about access and opportunity-the opportunity to catch fish, with a 

chance to catch a big fish, while sharing the experience with family friends. While it is a 

growing sport and because modern technology allows anyone to find fish and access these public 

resources themselves, that should not be viewed as a bad thing. Fishing is about recreation, 

taking a break, enjoying wholesome family time, and often what vacations are built around. 

But it's not just about the experience. It's also about the jobs created and supported by 

recreational anglers-the tackle shops and manufacturers that supply them, hotels and restaurants 

(from local coffee shops to fine dining) that house and feed them, and the other attractions that 

are used when anglers go to the coast and fish on head-boats, charter boats, or their own private 

boats. It's about businesses being able to offer their employees a reasonable, predictable season 

that they can count on, which was at least 6 months up until 2007. Even then, most who worked 

in the recreational fishing industry had winter jobs working in commercial fishing, construction, 

and some even worked in the school system. 

In Bay County, our Tourist Development Council is promoting more year-round tourism, and 

although people are coming, we cannot offer them much in the way of catching and keeping the 

fish they prefer. We have made the decision to add advertising to our marina costs in addition to 

what the individual boats pay*. Visitors would love the opportunity to catch a red snapper in 

April or October, as before, and take it to a local restaurant that offers 'hook n cook', preparing 

their fish with sides to go with it. This is not possible for most species, but it is not necessarily 

due to their being depleted fisheries. 

For Red Snapper, it is due to excess regulations and/or arbitrary deadlines for rebuilding the 

fishery, to a lack of transparency in assessing or revealing the health of the fishery, and failing to 

look for ways to grow the fishery to meet public demands beyond limiting harvest. It is due to 

inaccurate NOAA fisheries harvest data that has prompted each of the Gulf States to implement 

their own data program focusing on the reef fish anglers. 

I have spoken numerous times with Dr. Bonnie Ponwith, NOAA's Southeast Fisheries Science 

Center Director, about what was needed to gather more accurate information on harvest levels. 

She stated two simple pieces of information were needed-the 'universe of anglers' who fish for 

reef fish and their 'contact information' so they could survey actual reef fish anglers for harvest 

data. I was rather taken back that the Magnuson-Stevens Act had been in place for 30 years at 

that time, and those responsible for collecting information on our fishery had not even figured 

out a way to collect that data. Ms. Ponwith also said better recreational results could be gained 

*See annual advertising expenses on Capt. Anderson Marina graph 

**See Slide 6 in 3rd section in packet and next page for explanation. 

**Southerland graph is in section 3. 

***Ben Raines article/ AL.com 
67 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 12 here 24388.056

[Type text] 

by using estimates instead of a census, the latter requiring I 00% participation, which is cost 

prohibitive and not practical because !00% would not be collected. 

Florida's Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) will be reporting the results of 

their new data collection program, which is significantly different from the NOAA data, at their 

April 2016 meeting. To gather the necessary information, FWC simply asked anglers to check a 

'box' to their recreational salt water licenses in 2015 if they planned to target reef fish. They 

were then able to use this new, narrowly focused database to contact actual reef fish anglers for 

harvest information instead of using ineffective, random phone surveys of households. Our 

Panama City Boatman's Association was instrumental in assisting the FWC with this plan. 

NOAA's MRIP has just implemented a mail survey for anglers which is better than the previous 

survey of land line phone numbers, but is still not as focused specifically on reef fish anglers, as 

the individual Gulf States are doing. 

NOAA Fisheries, with the aid of the Gulf Council, continues to implement overbearing 

regulations on a fishery that is growing, without knowing exactly how much it is growing. 

Because of 'the uncertainty in their data', they believe they must be more stringent in their 

regulations for a fishery that, no matter how much they believe anglers have overfished using 

their poor data, has rebounded significantly. Regulations are set very conservatively, with added 

buffers so anglers will not overfish the limits that are set on uncertain data. If you do overfish 

their arbitrary limits, there are accountability measures to reduce your quota and season days for 

the next season. As you are given fewer days to fish, their statistical assumptions are that a much 

higher percentage of anglers will catch their limit each day**; therefore, the next season the 

numbers show as much or more overfishing. It doesn't work that way in real life, but I'm afraid 

common sense is not a factor in the statistical equation that determines seasons for Red Snapper 

or any NOAA-regulated fishery in the Gulf. 

How does this affect our small businesses? At Capt. Anderson's Marina next year we will be 

celebrating our 60th Anniversary in that location. We have 5 large head-boats, 4 dive boats, and 

27 charter boats. Our businesses are providing the service of taking recreational anglers who do 

not have their own boats out into the Gulf to fish for reef fish. 

In addition to those fishing boats, we have 2 sightseeing boats, a gift shop, photo shop, a seafood 

market and a large seafood restaurant with several others close by. Local tackle shops and bait 

and ice suppliers, fuel suppliers, and boat repair shops are just a few of the supporting 

businesses. 

The Capt. Anderson Marina graph* I have provided shows gallons of fuel sold at our marina in 

and out of Red Snapper season with numbers of anglers in and out of Red Snapper season. We 

have been able to continue our businesses but not without a price. If you look to the right of the 

graph you can see that additional 'Advertising' expense has been added in recent years. Until 

2007, the boats were able to operate successfully with their own marketing, but now, we are 

supplementing that to keep everyone as busy as possible. The graph shows that, even with the 

*See annual advertising expenses on Capt. Anderson Marina graph 

**See Slide 6 in 3rd section in packet and next page for explanation. 

**Southerland graph is in section 3. 

***Ben Raines article/ Al.com 
68 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 13 here 24388.057

[Type text] 

additional marketing, we are not selling as much fuel as we did in our 194-day Red Snapper 

season. The passenger counts for the head-boats are broken down between the shorter 5 & 6 

hour trips, compared to the longer 8, 10, and 12 hour trips. I did this to show how regulations 

have changed the way people fish and to show that the change has made a difference in income. 

As the Red Snapper bag limit was changed to 2 fish and then shorter seasons, the guests began to 

switch from long trips to shorter trips. We heard a lot of 'if I can only catch two snapper I don't 

want to go on the more expensive trip'. We knew they were more likely to catch those snapper 

on the longer trips, but that was their choice. The monetary difference is two-fold; the owner of 

the shorter trips got a windfall and the owners of the longer trips took quite a financial hit, 

especially the one with the 12 hour trip. That is the reason we added the 8 hour trip, to help his 

business. In addition, the head-boat owners pay a percentage on ticket sales. The shorter trips 

cost less, so the marina makes less per person on ticket sales. 

Our anglers, during high tourism months, make vacation plans well in advance so they will be 

able to secure hotel or condo reservations for their families and to request time off from their 

workplace. Many want to make reservations in January or February tor the June 1st start of Red 

Snapper season in NW FL. 

Unfortunately, every year we go through an endurance game of not knowing what the seasons on 

different species will be until February, March or April. Sometimes when we are given dates and 

take reservations, the dates change. Each year the story is different. And each year we must 

work harder to keep our customers updated so they will continue to come. 

For example, in February, 2014, we were told by the Gulf Council that our Red Snapper season 

would be 40-45 days starting June I st as long as the states didn't change their seasons and they 

didn't. I called back to the office to say they could book fishing reservations for Red Snapper 

trips from June 1st for a 40 day season. They immediately put the word out through social media, 

website, and the TDC. We were booked almost full for all boats, all trips within a few weeks. 

At the very next Gulf Council meeting in April, we were told that, due to a ruling on a lawsuit by 

EDF and commercial fishing groups against NOAA claiming the recreational sector was 

overjishing and unaccountable, our season had been cut to II days. In May the season was cut 

again to 9 days, just a couple of weeks before the season began June I st. So, we were forced to 

contact our customers and cancel more than 30-days of booked trips on our boats, just a few 

weeks before the start of the season. It was not good for our businesses and it was not good for 

Florida's tourism for us all to be put in this position. Some came anyway, but most either 

cancelled their trip to Panama City or just decided not to fish that year. On Charter boats, some 

of their long-time customers had been coming for generations, but didn't come back. The smaller 

businesses were hit the hardest. 

At this time I want to stop and discuss two words that you will hear a lot in these discussions. 

One is 'overfishing' which means in reality that we are, again according to poor harvest data, 

harvesting more than the overfishing limit set by the Gulf Council. It does not mean we are 

even close to reaching the Overfishing level as defined by Magnuson. For accountability, all 

*See annual advertising expenses on Capt. Anderson Marina graph 

**See Slide 6 in 3rd section in packet and next page for explanation. 

**Southerland graph is in section 3. 

***Ben Raines article/ AL.com 
69 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 14 here 24388.058

[Type text] 

these millions of anglers are and have been abiding by the rules that have been set by the Gulf 

Council. Possibly, the Gulf Council or SERO is not getting it right, but we are abiding by 

current laws, and the stock is still increasing as much or more than ever. 

To be accountable, the Gulf Council and EDF pundits are pushing to require a VMS (vessel 

monitoring system) on each of the head-boats and charter boats in the Federal fishery. These 

systems cost a minimum of$3500.00 up front with a monthly maintenance cost of$65-85.00 per 

month on an annual contract to produce data for less than a two month season. 

Up until 2007 our tourists and locals alike could count on making plans for a 194 day season, 

and now, it may be 9 days, or 40 days or anything in between. It is very difficult to run a 

business with this degree of uncertainty. In our industry, we need to be able to offer fish that the 

consumer wants when they are going to be in town. In the shoulder months, that is mostly 

weekends, but starting mid-May when schools are out until Labor Day, we need fish to offer. 

When we have Red Snapper the boats are full, when we don't they may run half full, or not at all. 

Reservations drop off like closing a water faucet. The States know how to adapt to the changing 

needs of their coastal communities, so they adapt State regulations accordingly. That is why we 

have advocated for true Regional Management. 

Johnny Patronis, co-owner with his brother of Capt. Anderson's Restaurant, has said more than 

once, "When I look out in the morning and see the parking lot full of fishermen, I know we are 

going to have a good night in the restaurant. If you're not fishing much, business is slow." 

In the package I have prepared for you in section 3**, you will see on slide one a graph that was 

presented to the Gulf Council in 2013 by Melissa Thompson, District Deputy Director for 

Representative Steve Southerland. This is a culmination of graphs and information regarding the 

Gulf Red Snapper stock approved by Dr. Bonnie Ponwith, Exec. Director of the NOAA Science 

Center in Miami. The Gulf Council had, up until that time, always been presented the overfishing 

level that scientists set on the stock, but not the whole biomass-the whole estimated stock status. 

Then they were shown the acceptable biological catch, set by the Science & Statistical 

Committee, and then the annual catch limit set by the regulatory arm, SERO and the Gulf 

Council. But never altogether like in this graph. 

The Gulf Council was quite surprised. Many quick comments to discredit the presentation were 

made but the info was out there, and it was NOAA data. It didn't show as much stock as 

independent scientific studies, but this graph told an incredible story- the Red Snapper fishery is 

very healthy. 

In 2000, the graph shows the stock at 15 million red snapper (fish) that are 2 pounds each or 

greater (which are what anglers called 'keepers' then). We went from a year-round season with a 

7 fish bag limit to a 194 day season with a 4-fish bag limit that year. The for-hire industry 

participants agreed to enter a limited access privilege program to prevent future industry growth 

in the Federal reef fish fishery and were given Federal reef fish permits. A bad move we would 

find out later with Amendment 30B implemented in 2009. 

•see annual advertising expenses on Capt. Anderson Marina graph 

**See Slide 6 in 3rd section in packet and next page for explanation. 

**Southerland graph is in section 3. 

***Ben Raines article/ AL.com 
70 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 15 here 24388.059

[Type text] 

But on the graph you can see the fishery began to rebound. The Blue is the stock and the red 

area at the bottom is the recreational angler harvest estimates by NOAA each year.(lf you add 

the commercial harvest, both rec and commercial together are under 4.5 million fish at their 

highest points.) In 2006, the stock shows it had increased from 15 million fish to about 23 

million, with the 6 month season and 4 fish bag limit. By 2013 it had grown to more than 30 

million fish with 5-7 pound average. It is continuing to grow exponentially, but as you can see 

and hear from testimony, our access, the harvest levels, have continued to be low due to the 

excess regulations and Gulf anglers are asking why. 

One answer is politics. Not you, NOAA, EDF, OC, PEW trusts vs recreational anglers. In 2009 

when Dr. Jane Lubchenco was head of NOAA fisheries (and former board member of EDF who 

designed the fishery catch share program), she called a meeting here in DC. In that meeting she 

directed NOAA's Regional managers and the Chair of the Gulf Council at the time to go back to 

their regions, see what the objections to catch shares were and fix them. All this at a time the 

catch share program was being introduced as a stakeholder choice, from the bottom up, that 

NOAA would not implement unless requested by stakeholders. In addition, EDF operatives 

boasted at Council meetings that their organization had designated $50 million to promote Catch 

Shares in the Gulf. 

Being a simple, common-sense type person, I was thinking, 'If it is going to take $50 million to 

talk us into this plan, it is probably not what we want.' A meeting was called with a group of 

anglers, Council members and EDF to introduce catch shares to us. I attended the first one in 

Sarasota, FL. The Council member who was a professor there at New College was very good at 

moving the meeting participants toward the preferred goal of attempting to convince us all that 

this would be good for our businesses. The premise was then, as it is now, that if you get 

on board with this social engineering project called catch shares, you will be one of the winners. 

The EDF rep said several times, if you join us you can be one of the winners, and own more than 

enough shares and even lease them to others at a 400% profit. I asked, who are the others? He 

said they are the ones that don't have as large a business as we do, without as much catch history. 

There would be a limited number of'shares' to go around so many would be left out or have so 

few shares they would have to close their operation. He went on to say if we wanted, we could 

just lease shares to others for a profit and not even have to operate a boat any more. That is what 

many commercial shareholders are doing now. They have basically made sharecroppers out of 

the smaller commercial businesses. 

(Catch Shares and Sector Separation documents came before the Council and have passed with 

95% of stakeholders comments to the Council being 'no, we don't want them'.) 

My answer to the EDF rep then and now is-it is not right. Our family has not stayed in business 

since 1935 by hurting others to make a profit. It will not be sufficient to keep our marina 

operating if a number of the charter or head-boats go out of business. The marina depends on 

rent and fuel sales to survive. We need all of them running trips as much as possible. As fishing 

opportunities increase so does participation in the other services we offer, like sightseeing and 

dining. 

*See annual advertising expenses on Capt. Anderson Marina graph 

**See Slide 6 in 3rd section in packet and next page for explanation. 

**Southerland graph is in section 3. 

***Ben Raines article/ ALcorn 
71 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 16 here 24388.060

[Type text] 

Remarkably, according to NOAA's own data, a catch share is not 'owned' by the shareholder. It 

can be taken away at any time. There are no guarantees in law or in NOAA rules that say we 

will keep the shares forever. They are not tangible assets and therefore, not a good business 

option in my opinion. 

The best way to ensure fair regulations and ample opportunities to access healthy fisheries is for 

NOAA to accept the States' more accurate harvest data as best available science; for NOAA to 

accept the States' more robust independent fishery data as best available science; for NOAA to 

allow Gulf States to have full Regional control out to 200 miles as was presented in the 

originally proposed document, Amendment 39; for the Gulf Council to be directed to take into 

consideration testimony of all stakeholders, whether they are present in the meetings or not, 

weighing comments equally from all participants; for NOAA to direct funding to research and 

development of ways to increase fishery habitat in the Gulf, such as a robust artificial reef 

program and dealing more seriously with the negative impacts on the reefs of non-native species 

such as lionfish, to reduce their impacts on the fishery. These programs would grow the fishery 

to meet the demands of the Nation's anglers. 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. I will be happy to answer any questions this 

committee may have to the best of my ability. 

Thank you. 

Respectfully submitted, 

Pamela Anderson, Operations Manager, 

Capt. Anderson's Marina 

5550 N. Lagoon Drive 

Panama City, FL 32408 

850-234-3435 

*See annual advertising expenses on Capt. Anderson Marina graph 

**See Slide 6 in 3rd section in packet and next page for explanation. 

**Southerland graph is in section 3. 

***Ben Raines article/ AL.com 
72 

Chairman VITTER. Thank you very, very much. 

And next, we will hear from Mr. Andry. Welcome. 

STATEMENT OF HUGHES ANDRY, REGIONAL MANAGER, 

SPORTCO MARKETING, RICHMOND, TX 

Mr. ANDRY. Good morning, Chairman Vitter and members of the 

committee. I want to thank you for the opportunity to testify before 

you today. 

My name is Hughes Andry and I work for a sales and marketing 

agency called Sportco Marketing. Sportco is a representative agency that acts as a subcontractor for manufacturers within the fishing tackle business. I have been in the tackle business since the 

early 1990s and have worked throughout various market channels 

within. Over the years, I have worked in four out of the five Gulf 

states selling fishing tackle at every level. The Gulf of Mexico is 

my fishery and is my home. 

What I would like to discuss this morning is the importance of 

planning for opportunity and how small and large fishing tackle 

businesses capitalize on opportunities by planning. It is no secret 

that effective planning is what makes the difference between a successful business and an unsuccessful one. 

Fishing tackle dealers are often balancing a very tight line with 

their open to buy dollars, available monies that they have to spend 

on fishing tackle, trying to assure that they bring in just enough 

product to cover the demand of a specific fishery or season, but not 

too much. There will almost always be some sort of anomaly in historical patterns, such as major weather events or an oil spill. 

Dealers rely on historical information to plan their purchases, oftentimes as far out as a year in advance. Manufacturers that bring 

in fishing tackle typically have lead times that range from 90 to 

120 days and farther out to land goods in the United States. Even 

domestically made products, such as G Loomis fishing rods or 

Power Pro fishing line, take months to produce from the time that 

the goods are ordered to the time that they land on the dealers’ 

shelves. Larger tackle dealers and chain stores plan their sets at 

the beginning of every spring in anticipation of the fishing season 

and often have little flexibility with making adjustments during 

mid-season. 

This level of planning is designed to be able to capitalize on opportunity. When the opportunity is reduced or lost, so are sales. 

Fishermen and women will buy fishing tackle regardless if they actually go fishing if there is opportunity. 

With a 9-day recreational snapper season in 2014 and a 10-day 

recreational season in 2015, there has been virtually no opportunity for anglers and dealers to capitalize. The current federal 

management plan makes it very difficult to near impossible for 

tackle dealers to plan and take advantage of opportunity. With seasons and bag limits not set until the 11th hour, a fishing tackle 

dealer can only be reactive with anticipating demand. 

In the years prior to the current federal mismanagement of Gulf 

red snapper, a dealer would expect a 25 to 30 percent lift in his 

business leading up to and during the spring and fall seasons. 

Some dealers were reporting as much as a 40 percent deficit in 

sales due to the current management. That is a fairly significant 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

73 

amount to any level of tackle dealer, much less the mom-and-pop 

independent dealers. 

Fortunately for these dealers, they operate in states, like Louisiana, that have sound and successful management plans for species that they are tasked with managing. Several years ago at a 

Gulf Council Gulf of Mexico Fisheries Management Council meeting, I spoke with Mark Mathews, the owner of Superior Bait and 

Tackle in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Mark said that it is not the lack 

of fish that is crippling his business, it is the Gulf Council constantly messing up the federal red snapper season. He stated that 

the state seasons have helped him to get through the slow months, 

and without the states’ red snapper seasons, Mark said he would 

hardly sell any snapper tackle at all. Mark and Superior Bait and 

Tackle is just one example of an abundance of coastal dealers that 

employ anywhere between 3 and 30 employees each. 

Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and Florida all have species that they manage independently from one another based upon 

the health of the fishery and the needs of the community. These 

regulations are set well in advance of the start of the season and 

are relatively stable from one year to the next. This creates opportunity that can be planned for and capitalized on. 

Federal management of our Gulf fisheries is extremely volatile 

and ultimately produces ever-changing regulations and decreasing 

recreational fishing opportunities, despite healthy and recovering 

stocks. There is seemingly no consideration whatsoever by NOAA 

Fisheries or the Council about how their unpredictable and last 

minute decision making impacts small recreational fishing-dependent businesses all along the coast that are tremendously important 

to coastal communities. 

It is time for Congress to step in and set a new course for the 

Gulf red snapper management. The Gulf states are significantly 

better equipped to manage this public resource in a way that maximizes its benefits, both recreationally and commercially, to the Nation. I urge Congress to act now to set the Gulf red snapper management on a new course and away from the current system that 

is failing small businesses throughout the Gulf region. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Andry follows:] 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

74 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 17 here 24388.061

SI=)O~TCO 

M®.~KETING 

Hughes Andry 

19840 FM 1093 Ste. Gll 

Richmond, TX 77407 

Cell: 504.352.0306 

Fax: 832.437.9246 

Good morning, my name is Hughes Andry and I work for a sales and marketing agency called Sportco 

Marketing. Sportco is a representative agency that acts as a sub-contractor for manufacturers in the 

tackle business. Some of the lines we currently represent are Shimano, Power Pro and G Loomis. 

Sportco provides the tools and tactics for the manufacturers we represent to take their products to 

market in specific regions throughout the country as well as helping the dealer base to strategize getting 

that product to the consumer. The region I am specifically responsible are the TALO states- Texas, 

Arkansas, louisiana, and Oklahoma but I also have indirect responsibilities throughout the Gulf south as 

well as upper Midwest and northeast. 

I have been in the tackle business since the early 1990's and have worked throughout various market 

channels within, as retail counter staff for Puglia's Sporting Goods in Metairie, LA to wholesale 

representative with Big Rock Sports, and have been in a manufacturers representative position for the 

last 16 years. Since then, I have worked in four of the five Gulf states, selling fishing tackle at every 

level. The Gulf of Mexico is my home, and my fishery. 

What I would like to discuss this morning is the importance of planning for opportunity and how small, 

and large, fishing tackle businesses capitalize on opportunities by planning. It is basic business 101 that 

effective planning is what makes the difference between a successful business, and an unsuccessful one. 

The majority of the dealers that we service have recognized the importance of developing buying 

strategies that allow manufacturers the insight as to what they feel as though the demand will be on any 

one product or series of products. In many cases, manufacturers have partnered with these dealers to 

ensure that the product assortment, mix and depth that is brought in to accommodate a particular 

season or fishery, is enough to fulfil the needs of the dealer and eventually the consumer. 

Dealers are often balancing a very tight line with their open to buy dollars, trying to ensure they bring in 

just enough product to cover the demand of a specific fishery or season but not too much. There will 

almost always be some kind of anomalies in historical patters, such as major weather events- or an oil 

spill. Dealers rely on historical information to plan their purchases often times as far out as a year 

ahead oftime. 

Manufactures that bring tackle in typically have lead times that range from 90-120 days and farther out 

to land good in the US. Even domestically made products such as G loomis fishing rods take months to 

produce product from the time the goods are ordered to the time they land on the dealer's shelves. 

larger tackle dealers and chain stores plan their sets at the beginning of the spring in anticipation of the 

fishing season, and often have little flexibility with making adjustments during mid season. 
75 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 18 here 24388.062

This level of planning is designed to be able to capitalize on opportunity. When the opportunity is 

reduced or lost, so are sales. Fishermen and women will buy fishing tackle, regardless if they actually go 

fishing, if there is opportunity. With a 9-day recreational red snapper season in 2014, and only a 10-day 

season in 2015, there has been no opportunity for anglers and dealers to capitalize on. 

The current federal management plan makes it very difficult to near impossible for tackle dealers to plan 

and take advantage of opportunity. With season's and bag limits not set until the 11'" hour, a fishing 

tackle dealer can only be reactive with anticipating demand. In the years prior to the current federal 

mismanagement of Gulf Red Snapper, a dealer would expect a 25-30% lift in business leading up to and 

during the spring to fall seasons. Some dealers are reporting as much as a 40% deficit in sales due to the 

current management. That is a fairly significant amount to any level of tackle dealer, much less the 

mom and pop independent retailer. 

Fortunately for these dealers they operate in states that have sound, and successful, management plans 

for the species that they are tasked with managing. Several years ago at a gulf council scoping meeting 

for amendment 40 in Baton Rouge, Mark Mathews from Superior Bait & Tackle said it's not a lack of fish 

that's crippling his business, it's the Gulf Council constantly messing up the snapper season. He said that 

the state seasons have helped get him through slow months. When the state opens its season, he gets a 

good infusion of business, guys coming in to get reels spooled, by new tackle, line, hooks etc. Anglers are 

buying snapper tackle along with trout and redfish tackle. Without the state season, Mark said he 

wouldn't sell hardly any snapper tackle. Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and Florida all have 

species that they manage independently from one another based upon the health of the fishery and the 

needs of the community. These regulations are set well in advance of the start of the season and are 

relatively stable from one year to the next. This creates opportunity that can be planned for and 

capitalized on. 

Federal management of our Gulf fisheries is extremely volatile, and ultimately produces ever-changing 

regulations and decreasing recreational fishing opportunities, despite healthy and recovering fish stocks. 

There is seemingly no consideration whatsoever by NOAA Fisheries or the Gulf of Mexico Fishery 

Management Council about how their unpredictable and last-minute decision-making impacts small 

recreational fishing dependent businesses all along that coast that are tremendously important to 

coastal communities. It's time for Congress to step in and set a new course for Gulf red snapper 

management. The Gulf states are significantly better equipped to manage this public resource in a way 

that maximizes its benefits- both recreationally and commercially- to the nation. I urge Congress to act 

now to set Gulf red snapper management on a new course and away from the current system that is 

failing small businesses throughout the Gulf region. 
76 

Chairman VITTER. Thank you very much, Mr. Andry. 

Now, we will turn to Mr. Gentner. Welcome. 

STATEMENT OF BRAD GENTNER, PRESIDENT, GENTNER 

GROUP CONSULTING, LLC, TUCSON, AZ 

Mr. GENTNER. Chairman Vitter and members of the committee, 

thank you for inviting me to testify today. My name is Brad 

Gentner. I have been doing economics research and political consulting in fisheries for about 20 years now. 

What I would like to talk to you today about is the fundamental 

difference between commercial and recreational fisheries and how 

that difference is currently being ignored by federal managers. 

Commercial fishermen are small in number, typically. They catch 

as many fish as possible, bounded by their own costs. They try to 

be as efficient as possible. And, as an economist, we talk about that 

as profit. They try to operate their business and maximize their 

profits, and councils recognize this and they try to manage commercial fisheries with those goals in mind. 

Recreational anglers, on the other hand, are very different. They 

are very large in number. There are millions of us. And, we make 

our choices about how to take trips in a very dynamic fashion. We 

are driven by abundance. We are driven by weather on any given 

day. We are driven by our own personal economy. We are driven 

by macroeconomic factors. And, what that boils down to is because 

of all of those factors, we need opportunity. We need opportunity 

to get out on the water when it fits with our lives and when it fits 

with our political—our own personal economy. 

And, so, it is this—primarily, when it comes right down to the 

individual management, it is fisheries’ abundance that drives effort, and it is effort that drives the spending that drives the livelihoods in our coastal communities. It drives the vibrancy and the 

economic resiliency of these coastal communities. And, that currently is being ignored and that is currently being squandered by 

the way we manage our fisheries. 

And, particularly, I want to use red snapper in the Gulf of Mexico as an example of this failure to recognize how recreational fisheries are different than commercial fisheries. When you have a 

stock with an inadequate allocation for the recreational sector and 

that stock is in a rebuilding cycle, you end up in what is called— 

I like to call the stock recovery drought, and Pam’s in-depth testimony that she handed in goes into great detail about what that 

means. 

And, as a stock recovers, it is easier to catch fish. And, so, recreational anglers are attracted to abundance. That abundance 

drives higher effort. That effort generates higher catch per unit effort because the stock is increasing. What ends up happening is 

you end up with this downward spiral of fewer and fewer days in 

each season in the face of a recovering stock. We have a stock that 

is bigger than we have ever seen before in recorded history and 

perhaps bigger than a lot of scientists ever thought possible, and 

yet we are still stuck in this rebuilding schedule. 

And, so, as a recreational angler and from the recreational community and the recreational businesses supported by this fishery 

look at this, they are confused because they see catch shares being 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

77 

put in with the justification of enhancing or maximizing commercial fisheries value while their value is being completely ignored. 

We tried to address this by doing an allocation amendment, 

Amendment 28 in the Gulf Council, and the analysis that was used 

in the examination of that allocation was conducted by National 

Marine Fisheries Service and that analysis showed that recreational value is four times higher than commercial value for that 

next fish, suggesting we should move some fish. 

So, we put in all kinds of suggestions on how to move some fish 

and how to create more opportunity for recreational anglers and all 

of those were suggested until we come upon a recalibration attempt. The Marine Recreational Information Program changed the 

way they estimated effort, back-casted to that original flawed allocation that happened in the 1980s, and showed that the allocation 

should be higher for the recreational fishery. 

And, so, currently, that is the only allocation amendment that is 

before the Secretary of Commerce to be signed, and it is not even 

a reallocation. It is not recognizing any increase in value. It is simply a recalibration of data. And, yet, we are being sued currently 

to stop that, even though that recalibration would be nearly automatic in any other council in this country. 

So, what are we doing about that? Well, we are ignoring this 

value. We are squandering this value. We are not maximizing 

value in these fisheries and we are harming local communities and 

local livelihoods. 

Reallocation only addresses part of this problem. It is a symptom 

of a larger issue of not focusing on the correct thing in our management for recreational fisheries. We need a completely new paradigm to focus—to look at how to manage recreational fisheries. 

And, it is only new at the federal level. The states already manage 

for opportunity. They manage for opportunity in freshwater. They 

manage for opportunity in saltwater, and they do a very good job 

of that. They treat their recreational anglers like clients and that 

is something we need to do at the federal level, as well. 

I thank you for my opportunity to comment. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Gentner follows:] 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

78 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 19 here 24388.063

Brad Gentner 

President 

Gentner Consulting Group 

Recreational Fishery Management and Small Businesses: A Red Snapper Case 

Study 

Commercial fisheries are managed for yield and are prosecuted by a relatively few fishers, all with the 

same goal- to catch as many fish as possible as efficiently as possible, in order to maximize profit from 

the sale of whatever species they pursue. Recreational fisheries, on the other hand, are dynamic in 

nature, prosecuted by millions of individuals with diverse goals; some try to catch fish for food, some 

like to catch and release fish, some just fish in order to enjoy the outdoors. Anglers are responding to 

stock abundance, weather, the economy or any of a myriad of factors. As fish populations increase, so 

does recreational effort and catch and, as fish populations decrease, effort and catch decrease as well. 

Abundance drives effort. Effort drives spending and value for small businesses. Which should be a good 

thing, but at the moment that value is not only being ignored, it is being squandered. 

During rebuilding, effort increases as the stock increases. Because the stock is increasing, catch per unit 

of effort also increases, meaning it takes less effort to catch the same weight of fish as the stock grows. 

In fisheries with inadequate recreational allocations, this can induce a downward spiral of ever 

tightening regulation in the face of rebounding stocks when the recreational sector is managed like a 

commercial fishery. The original allocation of red snapper is widely accepted to be totally flawed. It was 

based on a brand new survey during a period when abundance, and therefore effort and catch, was at 

an all-time low. That early catch data was so awful it has been rejected for stock assessment use, but 

that data is the basis for this current allocation. Recently, new NMFS Marine Recreational Information 

Program estimates have been used to adjust these historic catch estimates upward. In other fishery 

management councils, this data adjustment would have triggered a nearly automatic allocation 

correction. Instead, the Gulf Shareholders are suing to stop this fair and equitable correction of the 

recreational red snapper annual catch limit in the Gulf. This flawed and unfair allocation has created this 

downward spiral that has all but crushed the recreational red snapper fishery and the businesses 

supported by recreational red snapper fishing, while the stock continues to grow rapidly. Many would 

say we have a bigger red snapper stock than we have ever seen or that many even thought was possible. 

Yet this rebuilding has been a disaster for the recreational industry jobs and income through the ever 

decreasing season while the commercial sector has thrived under rationalization. 

This brings up an excellent point. Catch shares and fishery rationalizations are justified because they 

capture the resource rent, or economic value, from our shared, public resources that traditional 

commercial fisheries management drains. So if maximizing value, or at least vastly increasing value for 

the commercial use of red snapper, is a goal of our commercial fisheries management, why doesn't that 

same argument transfer over into recreational fisheries management or for fisheries management as a 

whole? The National Marine Fisheries Service's own scientists have shown the Gulf Council that 

reallocating fish to the recreational sector would further enhance value, perhaps to the tune of four 

times more value than the current rationalized commercial value, but that advice has been ignored. 

Other resource management agencies are bound to maximize economic value subject to minimizing 

harm on small business. MSA and its various reauthorizations, also call for maximizing value tempered 

by small business impacts. 
79 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 20 here 24388.064

Brad Gentner 

President 

Gentner Consulting Group 

The latest analysis of commercial and recreational fisheries conducted by NMFS in support of 

Amendment 28, the reallocation amendment, showed that commercial value, or economic profit, was 

$2.75-$2.95 per pound of red snapper (Agar and Carter, 2012). That study established a recreational 

value of $11.21 per pound for those same fish; over four times the commercial value (Table 1). Those 

NMFS economists concluded that the current allocation was economically inefficient and more value 

could be realized by the American public if commercial allocation was shifted to the recreational sector. 

The Socioeconomic Science and Statistical Committee (SESSC) of the Gulf Council agreed with those 

findings. The Griffin eta!. (2009) study went so far as to simulate a market where recreational anglers 

could buy red snapper quota. There simulation model showed that not only would the recreational 

sector purchase all the red snapper quota, they would also buy a significant portion of the shrimp quota 

to reduce bycatch and increase the red snapper stock further. Disregarding this NMFS analysis and the 

SESSC's recommendations, the council has yet to increase recreational allocations. 

Table 1: Recreational Red Snapper Values Per Pound from the Scientific literature 

Red Snapper Values Available in the literature. 

Study Authors Year Species Recreational 

Value 

Gillig eta!. 2000 Red Snapper $20/fish 

Haab, T. et al. 2008 Red Snapper $108/fish 

Griffin et al. 2009 Red Snapper $52-$155/day 

Carter and Liese 2012 Red Snapper $20-$63/fish 

Agar and Carter 2012 Red Snapper $11.21/pound 

Lately, the Gulf Shareholders have been fighting any sort of reallocation because they don't want to 

have their privatized public wealth, which they were granted for free, taken from them. They have been 

using the argument that the American public is owed red snapper protein. Nothing could be more 

disingenuous coming from this sector. The American public is owed the highest return on their 

resources. Particularly when that highest return benefits a larger number of small, coastal businesses. 

Recently, on the NatGeo show "Big Fish, Texas," a prominent red snapper commercial fisherman, Buddy 

Guidon, left 11,000 pounds of red snapper on the deck too long and those fish had to be sold for "dog 

food." Using the analysis above, those fish would be worth $123,310 dollars to the recreational sector. 

Buddy sold those fish for only $49,500 and his profit, or economic value, was only $30,250. If those red 

snapper were caught by recreational fishermen, they would generate four times more value. Instead 

they ended up as dog food. Why doesn't Buddy Guidon think enough about the value of red snapper as 

a food for America to keep those fish from ending up as dog food? 

State wildlife agencies recognize that recreational fisheries provide more value and economic activity 

than commercial fisheries. That is why the majority of the inshore species in the states are allocated 

predominantly or completely to the recreational sector. The states treat anglers not as regulated 
80 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 21 here 24388.065

Brad Gentner 

President 

Gentner Consulting Group 

entities, as the Councils and the National Marine Fisheries Service do, but as clients. Recreational 

anglers, through license sales and excise taxes, pay the full cost of their own management and, 

generally, the lion share of enforcement and management of federal commercial fisheries too. As a 

result, the states tend to have a much less adversarial relationship with the recreational angling 

community. 

To add insult to injury, the Gulf Council is currently considering giving recreational allocation in both the 

king mackerel and red drum fisheries to the commercial sector without any economic analysis at all. All 

the commercial sector had to do was ask for it. I have been valuing recreationally caught fish for most of 

my fisheries career and I would guarantee that those red drum and those king mackerel are worth more 

to anglers, worth more to the American public, in the recreational allocation. We can no longer ignore 

this double standard. It is time for allocation guidelines. Economic value must be considered when 

moving fish from sector to sector. The way this has been approached and is currently being approached 

is unfair, not transparent, inequitable and destroys economic value. We must be pro-active about 

examining allocations and allocating based on economic value or we risk damaging coastal livelihoods 

and the economic resilience of coastal communities. 

References 

Agar, J. J. and D.W. Carter. 2012. Is the 2012 allocation of red snapper in the Gulf of Mexico economically efficient? 

National Marine Fisheries Service. Southeast Fisheries Science Center. National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration. 34pp. 

David W. Carter & Christopher Liese (2012): The Economic Value of Catching and Keeping or Releasing 

Saltwater Sport Fish in the Southeast USA, North American Journal of Fisheries Management, 

32:4, 613-625 

Gillig, D., Woodward, R., Ozuna, T., Jr., and W.L. Griffin. 2000."The value of the Gulf of Mexico 

recreational red snapper fishery." Marine Resource Economics, 15(2): 127-139. 

Griffin, W.L., R.T. Woodward and H.N. Kim. 2009. Supplementary Technical Document to the Final 

Report: Bioeconomic Analysis of the Red Snapper Rebuilding Plan and Transferable Rights 

Policies in the Gulf of Mexico. Grant ending report, grant number NA17EF2873. 249pp. 

Haab, T., Hicks, R., Schnier, K., and Whitehead, J. 2008. Angler Heterogeneity and the Species-Specific 

Demand for Recreational Fishing in the Southeast United States. Final Report Marine Fisheries 

Initiative (MARFIN) Grant #NA06NMF4330055. December 29, 2008. 
81 

Chairman VITTER. Thank you very much. 

And now, we will turn to Mr. Hayward. Welcome. 

STATEMENT OF JAMES HAYWARD, OWNER, F/V HEIDI AND 

ELISABETH AND HEIDI AND ELISABETH LLC, AND PRESIDENT, XI NORTHEAST FISHERIES SECTOR, INC., PORTSMOUTH, NH 

Mr. HAYWARD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Shaheen, and members of the committee. My name is James Hayward, 

a lifelong second-generation commercial fisherman. 

I am primarily a day boat gillnet fisherman operating out of the 

Gulf of Maine. I currently own two fishing boats located in Portsmouth Harbor, New Hampshire, as well as use four fishing permits 

on those boats. I own and manage Heidi Seafood Services, the only 

licensed federal groundfish dealer at the state facility in Portsmouth Harbor. I am President of the community’s groundfish sector, Northeast Fisheries Sector XI. I am also Treasurer of the New 

Hampshire Community Seafood, the local community-supported 

fishery. 

I want to start by saying in 2010, the fleet transitioned over into 

a catch share program. At that time, New Hampshire’s roster of active boats comprised of 26 vessels. Many new requirements were 

put into place at that time, for instance, an at sea monitoring program as well as a dockside monitor program, and fishing continued 

for a couple of years and vessels were able to survive. 

And in early 2012, a NOAA trawl survey indicated that cod 

stocks were not as healthy as anticipated and the cuts to the ACLs, 

annual catch limits, began. Since 2012, ACLs on cod have been reduced by a total of 95 percent. For New Hampshire, cod is the lifeblood for our fleet. Not only did cod represent the majority of the 

fishermen’s quota in the sector, but also its state permit banks. 

Currently, our fleet has been reduced to seven vessels. Our sector is operating on a $60,000 budget and is predicting a $35,000 loss. 

Our state’s offloading infrastructure is on the verge of bankruptcy. 

Permit holders that invested in additional permitting to secure 

their businesses are left with deflated permits barely worth pennies on the dollar. 

As if that was not damaging enough, beginning in March, NOAA 

Fisheries has passed the at sea monitoring expense on to the fishing fleet, introducing an industry-funded at sea monitoring program at the cost of nearly $4 million annually. Although difficult 

to predict the damages it will impose, many owners are calling this 

the final nail in the coffin for the fleet. 

In my honest opinion, much of this hardship could have been 

avoided. Reducing total allowable catches greater than 20 percent 

in any one year on any one species only creates hardship. We are 

clearly at the infant stages of understanding fisheries science, models, and how to effectively use them to manage a large multi-stock 

ecosystem. 

The repairs that need to be made to fix this industry are going 

to clearly take many years to come, but in order to prepare for the 

future, some steps need to be taken immediately to preserve the 

fishing culturing in the small ports of the region. I would suggest 

the following. 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

82 

Congress should direct NOAA Fisheries to continue to fund the 

at sea monitoring program until the time where the fleet is viable 

enough to assume the costs. 

They should also integrate new sources of fisheries dependent information, like cost per unit effort, and environmental factors, especially climate change factors. 

Congress should make additional funds available for communities most affected and direct those funds to be allocated to state 

permit banks to provide an additional level of protection in investment in a sustainable—of the at-risk community sectors. 

It is in my opinion that those areas are the most important, that 

these areas of fisheries management were improved through actions taken by Congress and NOAA Fisheries could grow over time 

and this catch share program become sustainable and provide new 

opportunities and better jobs for the future. 

Thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Hayward follows:] 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

83 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 22 here 24388.066

TESTIMONY OF MR. JAMES HAYWARD 

OWNER, F/V HEIDI & ELISABETH AND HEIDI & ELISABETH LLC 

PRESIDENT, XI NORTHEAST FISHERY SECTOR 

BEFORE THE U.S. SENATE COMMITIEE ON SMAll BUSINESS AND ENTREPENEURSHIP 

REGARDING THE IMPACT OF FEDERAL FISHERIES MANAGEMENT ON SMALL BUSINESSES 

MARCH 3, 2016 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

Mr. Chairman, distinguished members of the committee, my name is James Hayward, a 

second generation commercial fisherman. First off I am a husband, married for 16 years, and a 

father of one beautiful two year old daughter. I'm primarily a day boat gill net fisherman 

operating in the Gulf of Maine ranging from 20 to 120 miles from port. I currently own two 

fishing boats located in Portsmouth Harbor New Hampshire, F /V Heidi & Elisabeth and F /V 

Isabelle Nicole. 1 also own four federal fishing permits that I use with these boats. I own and 

manage Heidi Seafood Services, the only federal licensed groundfish dealership at the State 

facility in Portsmouth Harbor. I am President of the communities' groundfish Sector, XI 

Northeast Fisheries Sector, Inc. I am also Treasurer of New Hampshire community supported 

fishery, NH Community Seafood. I am board member of the Northeast Seafood Coalition and 

the Northeast Sector Services Network. I am also, as community leader, a member of the 

Seafood Harvesters of America. 

Having been raised in a fishing family it was relatively easy for me to get involved at a 

very young age. In fact I started at the age of 12 spending my summers on boats doing what I 

could to provide for the business. From that young age I developed a passion for fishing. Today 

at 42, with 30 years on the water I understand why so many before me had risked as much as 

they had to make a career in this business. Most fishermen will say they enjoy their work, 

finding their duties very noble. Harvesting their catch, feeding families, providing for their own 

is very rewarding to most. Today's fishermen have the pride and passion to protect the 

resource and ecosystem in order to preserve the tradition for the generations that follow. 

I began fishing in the groundfish fishery full-time in 1993. Regulations were far different 

then, than they are today. We took about three observers a year. There were no trip limits, no 

area closures; the only rule was on the mesh size of your nets. I'm not saying management was 

better then. I want to paint the picture of how far and how fast the fishing industry in the 

Northeast Region has been squeezed by the seemingly endless means of regulatory 

management. 
84 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 23 here 24388.067

In 2004, after working 10 years as full time Captain and crew I finally made the big step 

and bought my first boat. At the time I knew that there was a level of risk involved but I chose 

to invest my life savings into what I wanted to make as a career. At this time, managers had the 

fleet working in a DAS (days at sea) system and days had already been reduced by one half of 

what they were when the system was introduced in 1997. Each vessel had about SO days a year 

to make their living. 

During this era, which ended in 2010, various reductions in DAS took places, including 

two for one counting. There were varying trip limits on cod, as well as other species like 

monkfish and dogfish. We took about two federal observers a month. Vessels purchased 

acoustic devices in order to protect marine mammals, commonly referred to as pingers. Most of 

the vessels in my community were able to survive by leasing DAS from other permits or 

diversifying fisheries. In my opinion in the years leading up to 2010 fisheries managers were 

growing weary that too many groundfish vessels were engaging in fisheries activities even 

though managers were taking great measures to slow fishing capacity. Although the 

community's fleet was shrinking at this point it wasn't at an alarming rate. It was somewhat 

consistent to the 20 year average. 

In May of 2010 managers and regulators changed the currency of which the fleet 

operated under. Instead of the DAS system where vessels were allocated so many days per 

year, vessels were allocated PSC (potential sector contribution). Fishing community started 

entities to pool and manage their community's allocation. This would be known as the Sector 

catch share system. 

In New Hampshire, the first year of catch shares saw a few more small businesses 

decide that they were too small to participate and choose to take an inactive role. My sectors 

roster comprised of 26 active vessels. Some new requirements were put into place, for instance 

an at sea monitoring program or ASM as well as dock side monitoring. The ASM federal 

observer would be notified of the trip 48 hours in advance of the trip, and they would join the 

vessel on the fishing trip weighing and measuring what the vessel would keep and discard. The 

dockside monitor required from the vessel a two hour notice upon landing. They would record 

the offloaded weights breaking them down by species for every trip landed. 

During the first couple of years under catch shares the sectors leaders were able to 

create a permit bank in conjunction with the States Fish and Game Department. They were able 

purchase a couple of permits with the help of federal funding from within the community. 

These permits were basically comprised of cod. The leaders understanding the local resource, 

knowing the high value that the cod represented, choose these permits knowing that they 

directly assisted the needs of the community, for both near term and long term objectives. 

Although skeptical about the future, our fishing fleet remained active harvesting roughly three 

million pounds of fish each of the first two years. 
85 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 24 here 24388.068

Early in 2012 NOAA trawl surveys indicated that cod stocks were not as healthy as 

anticipated and the cuts to the total allowable catch began. In 2012 the total allowable catch on 

cod was reduced by roughly twenty percent. This coinciding with more cuts looming on the 

horizon created acceleration in consolidation throughout the region. By the start oft he fishing 

year in 2013 managers and regulators were left with no choice but reduce catch limits by an 

additional seventy-five percent solely based on a trawl survey that had been knowingly 

inaccurate in the past. 

This in itself was devastating to small business. Vessels that fished in small vessel near 

to shore were impacted the hardest. They had run out of options and many were forced out of 

business. New Hampshire's struggling groundfishing community was reduced to 13 active 

vessels many of them part time working only one or two months of the year. The fallout of 

these reductions triggered the federal government to declare a Fisheries Disaster upon the 

region. Unfortunately for all permit holders the worst was yet to come. 

In August of 2014 news broke that NOAA had completed another trawl survey, an 

unscheduled survey much to the surprise of the ones invested in the fishery. This survey stated 

the cod stocks were in their worst condition in history. By November NOAA regulators imposed 

an emergency action plan closing the majority of the inshore waters and imposing strict trip 

limits on cod in other regions. This cost the fleet millions of dollars. Regulators essentially took 

the fleets remaining quota for that fishing year and made it unharvestable. Any stakeholder 

that was holding cod quota to harvest in the second half of the fishing year was not only unable 

harvest it but was also unable to recoup any of the value that they had invested in it. 

With the start of the next fishing year, 2015, regulators imposed a second seventy-five 

percent reduction in Gulf of Maine cod. This in itself was an additional disaster not recognized 

by the original Disaster Declaration. This essentially reduced permits holding Gulf of Maine Cod 

P5C to less than five percent of what it had originally acquired only five short years prior in 2010. 

The effects of this were catastrophic. Landings by all vessels in our small sector had 

already been cut in half prior to 2015. I can predict our Sector's landings in fishing year 2015 will 

not eclipse one million pounds. Our current fleet has been reduced to seven vessels. Our sector 

operating on a $60,000 budget is predicting a $35,000 loss. Our States offloading infrastructure 

is on the verge of bankruptcy. Permit holders that invested in additional permitting to secure 

their business are left with deflated permits barely worth pennies on the dollar. 

As if that wasn't damaging enough beginning in March NOAA fisheries has passed the 

ASM expense on to the fishing fleet. Introducing an industry-funded ASM program at a cost of 

nearly four million dollars annually on this fleet greatly reduces its chances of survival. The 

nearly four million dollars represents an estimated 10-15 percent of gross revenues for the 

entire Northeast Region. Although difficult to predict the damages this will impose on small 

business owners many are calling it "the final nail in the coffin". 
86 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 25 here 24388.069

In my honest opinion much of this hardship could have been avoided. Reducing total 

allowable catches by greater than twenty percent on any one species annually only creates 

hardship. We are clearly at the infant stages of understanding fisheries science models and how 

to effectively use to manage this large multi-stock ecosystem. 

The repairs that need to be made to fix this industry are clearly going to take many years 

to come. But in order to prepare for the future some steps need to be taken immediately. To 

preserve the fishing culture in the small ports of the region I would suggest the following: 

1) Congress should direct NOAA to continue to fund the ASM/future EM programs 

until the time where the fleet is viable enough to assume costs. 

2) Congress should direct NOAA to integrate new sources of fisheries dependent 

information (like CPUE information) and environmental information (especially 

climate change factors) as additional reference points for stock assessments in order 

to reduce uncertainty and provide greater stability for ACLs. 

3) Congress should make additional funds available to the communities most affected, 

and direct those funds to be allocated to the State Permit Banks to provide an 

additional level of protection and investment in the sustainability of the at-risk 

Community Sectors. 

4) Congress should direct NOAA Fisheries to develop and implement new technologies 

for real time, monitoring, reporting, and increased accountability, like EM/ER, and 

use these new streams of fisheries dependent data to inform stock assessments. 

5) Congress should streamline the size of NOAA Fisheries agency-especially the 

fisheries sampling branch-- so that new technology and integrated management 

systems replace the bloated systems that is subject to much human error. 

6) Direct Congress to make sure the Office of Law Enforcement is adequately funded to 

address the myriad of new challenges, and level the playing field for everyone and 

improve the level of fleet wide accountability. 

7) Congress should cap the amount of allowable variability in ACLs from year to year, 

so that uncertain science and poor stock assessments don't lead to extreme changes 

in mortality estimates greater than X percent from year to year. 

8) Congress should redefine the definition of "Over-Fishing" to reflect the fact that 

almost all overfishing determinations have been a result of poor science and 

management advice. The perception is that fishermen just over-harvest ACls, and 

this leads to poor perceptions of the fishery and low ran kings on seafood watch lists 

that prevent market opportunity-e.g. GOM cod price remained low even after 

severe cuts and limited supply. 

9) Congress should direct NOAA to develop management incentives that encourage 

the fleet to adopt higher levels of accountability. For example, if EM is implemented 

on a fleet wide basis, it should also eliminate the 48 hour pre-trip notification 

system; or, fishermen should get management uncertainty back in their allocations. 
87 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 26 here 24388.070

It is my opinion, that if these areas of fisheries management were improved through actions 

taken by both Congress and NOAA Fisheries that the New England ground fishing industry could grow 

over time, become sustainable, and provide new opportunities and better jobs for the future. Thank 

you for this opportunity to testify before you today. 
88 

Chairman VITTER. Great. Thank you very much. 

And next, we will hear from Dr. Joshua Wiersma. Doctor, welcome. 

STATEMENT OF JOSHUA B. WIERSMA, Ph.D., NORTHEAST FISHERIES MANAGER, ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND, BOSTON, MA 

Mr. WIERSMA. Thank you. Chairman Vitter, Ranking Member 

Shaheen, and distinguished members of the committee, thank you 

for this opportunity to testify on the impacts of federal fisheries 

management on small businesses. 

My name is Dr. Josh Wiersma. In 2006, I began my career working at the Massachusetts Fishermen’s Partnership in Gloucester as 

an economist and research assistant, finishing up my Ph.D., looking at the value of collaborative research to New England fishermen. In 2008, I began working at the Northeast Seafood Coalition 

as a New Sector Policy Analyst, where I became a lead architect 

for the development and eventual implementation of the new sector 

system in 2010. 

I went on to manage New Hampshire’s two groundfishing sectors 

over the next five years, and while Sector Manager I also co-founded and was the Executive Director of New Hampshire Community 

Seafood, our small community-supported fishery program. I am 

now the Manager of Northeast Fisheries in Environmental Defense 

Fund, where I continue to work with fishermen, the government, 

and other stakeholders to shape effective fisheries management. 

Sector management has helped the industry deal with strict 

quotas, but as you know, fishermen are still struggling. Small businesses need stability to thrive, and for fishermen, stability is driven from good science and stable management. 

Currently, fisheries science and management is plagued by uncertainty in stock assessments, non-transparent quota leasing markets, and outdated monitoring and reporting technology, and low 

levels of fleet accountability and enforcement. The result has been 

a severe economic depression for both the individuals and the waterfront communities reliant on New England groundfish. 

The time is now to address these issues, because despite the obstacles, there is hope for a better, more stable and sustainable fishery. Regulators could make improvements in monitoring and accountability, stock assessment methodology, collaborative research, 

the quota leasing and permit markets, and overall electronic and 

integrated infrastructure. 

But first, the agency must improve monitoring, reporting, and accountability, because rebuilding New England key groundfish 

stocks, especially cod, has been unsuccessful, due in part to the 

high levels of uncertainty that plague assessment models, and part 

of the answer is to fully account for fishing activities and to adopt 

modern technologies, like electronic monitoring, because if everyone 

knows that everyone else is playing by the same set of rules, the 

entire business landscape becomes more efficient and less uncertain, a good characteristic for any business. 

The second, stock assessments must be more accurate. Developing more accurate stock assessments and catch limits requires 

better data streams continually feeding the stock assessment procDeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

89 

ess, and it requires that climate change and other environmental 

variables that significantly affect fish stocks are taken into account. This is another area where EM and electronic reporting 

could be useful, as the data could be used to send real-time ecosystem, biological, and effort information from fishing boats to 

science to improve current assessment models and also to develop 

more refined and standardized Catch Per Unit Effort models based 

on fishing effort to ground traditional independent trawl surveys. 

The more accurate models and estimates would provide more stable 

quotas while rebuilding important stocks to the benefit of all small 

fishing businesses, restaurants, and others. 

Third, collaborative research should be expanded and better integrated into decision making. The level of investment in collaborative research has been both inadequate and inconsistent. Collaborative research gives fishermen a direct voice in the science and 

management process and an understanding of how and why the 

data is used as fisheries managers. And through broad co-research 

projects and through providing more granular, more frequent reporting at sea or field testing new technology, fishermen can directly contribute to the science and management. In fact, if the 

whole fleet used integrated and new technologies like electronic 

monitoring, electronic reporting, it could effectively turn every boat 

into a cooperative research vessel, similar to the study fleet that 

has been implemented through NOAA’s Fishery Science Center. 

Fourth, we badly need more transparent quota leasing and permit markets. Currently, data confidentiality restrictions restrict information about quota leasing, leading to high price volatility and 

the inability to effectively make a business plan. The opaqueness 

of both the quota lease markets and permit sales market restricts 

access to private capital through the high level of risk financial institutions bear because of their inability to value fishing assets. As 

a result, fishermen have a very difficult time using their fishing 

permits as collateral when applying for a loan to improve their 

business and often take second or third mortgages on their homes 

or sacrifice important benefits like health insurance. 

Finally, data reporting, collection, and storage issues are stymieing innovation in the fisheries. NOAA Fisheries has prioritized 

the development of new systems of integrated EM/ER in their fisheries modernization plan, but they continue to push back the time 

of full implementation and will not commit to some type of final 

transition. Currently, only 20 percent of the fleet reports electronically, which is unfortunate because the information collected at sea 

through a modernized system if integrated reporting and monitoring would have broad benefits to both the fishery and the fleet. 

This type of catch inventory would be extremely beneficial to local 

restaurants, stores, and fish markets trying to plan, sell, and promote local seafood. 

In conclusion, on behalf of all fisheries-dependent small businesses, I thank you for holding today’s hearing and for the opportunity to testify. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Wiersma follows:] 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

90 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 27 here 24388.071

TESTIMONY OF DR. JOSHUA B. WIERSMA 

NORTHEAST FISHERIES MANAGER, ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND 

BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON SMAll BUSINESSES AND ENTREPENEURSHIP 

REGARDING THE 

IMPACT OF FEDERAL FISHERIES MANAGEMENT ON SMAll BUSINESSES 

MARCH 3, 2016 

WASHINGTON, DC 

Chairman Vitter, Ranking Member Shaheen, and distinguished members of the Committee: 

Thank you for this opportunity to testify on the impacts of federal fisheries management on 

small businesses. My name is Josh Wiersma. I have a BS in Environmental Management and Policy from 

the University of Maine, an MS in Resource Economics from the University of New Hampshire, and a 

PhD in Environmental and Natural Resource Economics from the University of Rhode Island. In 2006, I 

began my career working at the Massachusetts Fishermen's Partnership in Gloucester, MA, as an 

economist/research assistant, finishing up my PhD looking at the value of collaborative research to New 

England fishermen. In 2008, I began work at the Northeast Seafood Coalition (NSC) as their Sector 

Policy Analyst, and became one of the lead architects for the development and eventual 

implementation of the new Sector system in 2010. 

I went on to manage New Hampshire's two groundfishing sectors over the next five years. 

Although the transition to sectors was difficult for many of our state's fishermen, we were able to 

accomplish some very positive programs focused on community preservation, sustainable fishing, 

ecosystem protection, and advancing local markets. While a Sector Manager, 1 also co-founded and was 

the Executive Director of New Hampshire Community Seafood Association, a successful community 

supported fishery cooperative that offers fresh, local, underutilized fish to the New Hampshire public 

through a type of fish share model. I am now the Manager of Northeast Fisheries at Environmental 

Defense Fund, where my job is to continue to work with fishermen, the government, and policy makers 

to shape effective fisheries management, improve monitoring and accountability, improve fisheries 

science and data collection, and develop better seafood markets and other business opportunities. 

In short, I am here today after spending more than ten years working to improve fisheries 

management in New England and considering, based on my economics training as well as my practical 

experience with the fishing industry, how federal fisheries management impacts small businesses. My 

testimony will focus on how improving federal management can help small businesses, including but not 

limited to fishermen, in New England. 
91 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 28 here 24388.072

2 

Challenges of Current Fisheries Management and Science 

As noted above, I worked with many others in New England to develop the sector program, 

which allocates fish quota to 17 sectors, primarily defined by geography and gear type. In its nearly fiveyear existence, sector management has redefined the culture and economy for New England's ground 

fish industry. Fishermen changed their harvesting strategies, fished more selectively with different gear, 

implemented new and more robust data-collection and reporting systems and technology, accepted 

new monitoring requirements, entered into financial and legal arrangements with other fishermen, and 

created new transaction schemes with buyers. The new flexibility and efficiency of the Sector system 

resulted in fleet-wide revenue increasing to its highest level in recent history over the first two years of 

the Sector program. 

However, starting in 2012-2013, the quotas for key stocks like Gulf of Maine cod and many 

flounder stocks were dramatically slashed to address severe flaws in the stock assessments for these key 

species. For other stocks, quotas have varied widely, by as much as 600% from one year to the next. 

Processors and buyers are intolerant to that level of volatility, and out of necessity have reduced their 

dependence on New England groundfish in favor of more consistently available domestic sources and 

foreign imports. That movement away from local landings exacerbates the financial stress fishing 

businesses are already facing. 

The current climate of uncertainty in stock assessments, combined with a non-transparent 

quota leasing and permit market, outdated monitoring and reporting technology, and low levels of fleet 

accountability and enforcement threaten to worsen the economic problems for both the individuals and 

the waterfront communities reliant on New England ground fish. The time is now to address these 

issues. Our best fishermen are exiting the fishery at an alarming rate, because even those fishermenthe ones our nation needs to be fishing to serve as stewards of this resource-can't figure out how to 

make a business plan from year to year, and therefore can't figure out how much to invest in the 

fishery's future and in their families' future. 

Opportunities to Improve Fisheries Management and Science 

I'm pleased to say that federal regulators have tools available to them to address these 

challenges and improve the stability of fishing businesses and the sustainability of the resource. This is a 

critical juncture for the future of New England fishing businesses. Despite the obstacles, there is hope 

for a better, more stable and sustainable fishery. I address below areas where fisheries management 

and science could do to benefit the stability of small fishing businesses and the long term sustainability 

of the fishery resource. They are: 

1) Improve Monitoring, Reporting, and Accountability 

2) Improve Stock Assessment Methodology 

3) Increase Reliance on Collaborative Research in Science 

4) Create a More Transparent Quota leasing and Permit Market 

5) Improve Data Reporting Systems and Infrastructure 

1· Improve Monitoring, Reporting, and Accountability 

Rebuilding key New England ground fish stocks, especially Atlantic cod, has been unsuccessful 

due in part to the high levels of uncertainty that plague assessment models. Scientists must rely on 

limited information to predict fish populations, which yield highly variable estimates from year to year. 

One of the biggest unknowns is what volume and type of fish that fishermen discard into the sea on 
92 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 29 here 24388.073

3 

each fishing trip. A significant part of this uncertainty is due to the low levels of at-sea monitoring (ASM) 

that NOAA provides; scientists must rely on discard estimates from a few observed trips to assume what 

is happening on all remaining unobserved trips. As a result, scientists continue to underestimate 

discards and therefore overestimate abundance from year to year for some stocks-even for healthy 

stocks-a statistical anomaly known as a "retrospective pattern."' This pattern delays the rebuilding 

process for overfished stocks and could eventually jeopardize the health of the rebuilt stocks. 

The answer: find the best, most cost-effective means to provide complete information about 

what is happening to fish stocks. The answer, more specifically, is to set a goal of full accounting of 

fishing activities, and to adopt modern and tested technologies- electronic monitoring (EM)- to 

achieve this goal in a cost-effective manner. EM is an unbiased and scientifically valid form of 

monitoring that can provide full accountability to the fleet, which is critically important, at a reasonable 

cost. If everyone knows that everyone else is playing by the same set of rules, then the entire business 

landscape becomes more efficient and less uncertain-two characteristics good for any business. 

Under the current human observer program, fishermen fill out paper vessel trip reports (VTRs) 

to record what they caught and discarded at sea. However, much of the information from these reports 

is not used in stock assessments because the reported data cannot be verified. EM offers a way to 

validate fishermen's observations, giving them direct input into the science that informs management. 

This opens up a wealth of scientifically valid fisheries-dependent information currently unavailable to 

fisheries managers, with the added benefit of reducing conflict and distrust of management decisions 

since those decisions would then be based on verifiable records that fishermen trust. 

2) Improve Stock Assessment Methodology 

In recent years, Annual Catch limits (ACls) have varied significantly as a result of poor 

information, and highly uncertain scientific models. These models repeatedly over-estimate how much 

fish is in the ocean. Often, the true population size isn't known until years later, and has led to more 

fishing than stocks could sustain. In addition, continually altering scientific assessments, retrospectively, 

to address this over-estimation problem has led to significant distrust of the entire scientific process and 

eroded social capital and stakeholder participation. Generally speaking, the northeast region has among 

the most robust bodies of fisheries science anywhere in the world, but it also needs to adapt to the new 

management system, the new technology, and to new sources of information (e.g. biological, 

ecosystem, bio-economic). 

Developing more accurate catch limits requires better data streams feeding into the stock 

assessment process, and it requires that climate change and other environmental variables that can 

significantly affect fish stocks be taken into account. Climate change is causing fundamental shifts to the 

underlying ecosystem, including warmer waters and other effects such as ocean acidification and 

changing currents. Warming waters are causing some species to shift their abundance either northward 

or into deeper waters in search of more suitable habitat, and the Gulf of Maine is warming faster than 

99.9% of the world's oceans. In short, a warmer ocean is a different ocean. Yet today's fisheries science 

does not account for this significant and dynamic factor. A recent study found that not accounting for 

1 Dr. Paul Rago (Population Dynamics Branch) Ground fish Operational Assessments 2015 (Summary)--presented to 

the New England Fishery Management Council Plymouth, MA September 30, 2015 

http:/ /www.nefsc.noaa.gov/groundfish/operational-assessments-2015/ 
93 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 30 here 24388.074

climate change caused stock assessment scientists to overestimate the size of the Gulf of Maine cod 

stock and set catch limits too high.' 

4 

An improved stock assessment methodology could account for dynamic environmental factors 

and lead to more accurate catch limits, more certainty and trust, and less risk of fishing at unsustainable 

levels. This is another area where EM and electronic reporting (ER) would be useful. Because electronic 

data is more robust, complete, and accessible, monitoring data can be used not just to verify compliance 

but also for stock assessment science. It provides not only catch numbers, but detailed geographic and 

time information that is often missing or erroneous with the VTRs used today. This data could be used to 

generate real-time ecosystem, biological, and effort information at sea from fishing boats to scientists so 

they could better formulate models about the dynamic changes in the fisheries and oceans-and 

develop more refined and standardized Catch Per Unit Effort (CPUE) assessment models to ground-truth 

traditional independent trawl survey stock assessment models. 

3) Increase Reliance on Collaborative Research in Science 

The level of investment in collaborative research has been both inadequate and inconsistent. 

The inconsistency of funding is just as problematic as the overall level of funding. Fisheries science 

depends upon long term time-series information about the environment, stock biology and abundance, 

and the efficiency and effectiveness of new gear technology. 

Federal funding for collaborative research has historically been constrained to two-year 

projects, which severely limits the usefulness of the projects as well as the engagement of a broad 

number of industry participants. As a result, data from collaborative research projects is very rarely 

used in fisheries management for stock assessments, and new selective and efficient gear technology is 

rarely transferable industry-wide.' 

The Magnuson-Stevens Act (MSA), as amended in 2007, calls for the establishment of regionallybased cooperative research and management programs to address the needs identified under the MSA, 

and to address any other marine resource laws enforced by the Secretary of Commerce.• It specifies 

that these research priorities be addressed through collaborative research projects-where fishermen 

and scientists work together in all phases of the project, including development of the research 

question, the project design, the performance of research, the analysis of the results, and the 

dissemination of study findings. 

Collaborative research gives fishermen a direct voice in the science and management process as 

well as an intimate understanding of how and why the data collected will be used by fisheries managers. 

Therefore, the efficiency and cost effectiveness of expanded cooperative research programs may be 

improved if policy makers use fishermen as research partners and prioritize research that evolves from 

the ground up. If a full-blown collaborative research project is not appropriate, fishermen can also be 

, httv:l/science.sciencemag.org/content/3So!6262/8o9 

"Slow adaptation in the face of rapid wafmlng leads to collapse of the Gulf of Maine cod fishery" Andrew Pershing, et al. 

'The most notable exception to this is the "ruhle trawl", also known as the "eliminator trawl", which allows 

fishermen to target haddock and avoid cod based on a unique net design that takes into account the behavior of 

captured fish. If they use this technology, fishermen are allowed to fish with a different discard rate than if 

utilizing other gear, and are allowed exemptions to previously closed fisheries. More investment in transferable 

gear technology like this will be a critical part of sustaining a healthy bio-economic ecosystem moving forward. 4 [cite] 
94 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 31 here 24388.075

incentivized to participate in a limited manner, for example by agreeing to report fisheries-dependent 

information on a more granular or more frequent basis, filling in additional reports, or field testing new 

technology. In fact, if the whole fleet used EM/ER, it would effectively turn every boat into a 

cooperative research vessel. 

4) Create a More Transparent Quota Leasing and Permit Market 

5 

Quota leasing is the system of transferring Annual Catch Entitlement (ACE) between Sector 

fishermen, or between Sectors. Individuals within Sectors are allowed to fish, lease, or trade the 

amount of allocation that they brought into the Sector through their permit allocations. This is critical 

because fishermen are allocated a share of 16 different stocks even though most fishermen don't target 

all these stocks. Instead, they are allowed to trade the fish they don't want to catch for another type of 

fish, or for cash. This creates a type of "stock market" for fishing rights. But currently, there is not a 

transparent leasing market for this quota (ACE), and price volatility is a major issue, inhibiting a 

fisherman's ability to plan. The season's market trajectory typically starts in May and June with high 

lease prices, and then plummets at the end of the season as unused quota and diminished effort drive 

prices down. Participants are often uncertain of when to invest in more ACE, as they cannot predict 

whether they'll be able to land the fish they lease, and do not know the price they'll receive for their 

catch. 

Information about the price and quantity of what fishermen are "asking" for their ACE is 

currently available through disparate emails between managers, text messages, or private phone calls. 

Almost no information about the actual execution prices of ACE trades is available, especially on a real 

time basis useful for making dynamic fishing decisions in a changing ecosystem. These inefficiencies in 

the quota lease market can have significant economic impact. In 2013, over 17.8 million pounds of 

quota ($15M) was leased between sectors, which accounted for 30 percent of total landings. Fishermen 

either wait too long to sell their ACE, or accept a price well below market value because no other 

information is available. The market is currently distorted because asymmetrical information is 

benefiting a disproportionate number of businesses. These businesses then set the market for those 

who don't possess the same information. 

Fisheries permits sales are also subject to the same level opacity, which degrades their value to 

fishermen and limits their use as collateral. The value of fishing permits changed significantly after the 

DAS management system based on leased days transitioned to the Sector Management System based 

ACE. Because ACE is determined by catch history, some permits with high catch history became highly 

valuable, others lost most of their value. Given all the changes in management and uncertainty in ACLs 

in recent years it is very hard to predict a permit's value. This is exacerbated through lack of 

transparent information about recent permit sales. 

The opaqueness of both the quota markets restrict outside capital from interested financial 

institutions from actively investing or providing loans to New England fishing businesses because of the 

difficulty in calculating the cash-flow potential from leasing and, thus, the value of the permit and fishing 

enterprise. In addition, no mechanism exists to validate the presence of a lien on a permit with the 

financial community before a transfer, and no third party verification exists for valuing assets (like 

quota). While sector managers facilitate transfers, traditional markets rely on appraisers and brokers to 

value assets so financial institutions can invest in or lend against the asset. This mechanism is not 

functioning in New England. As a result, fishermen have a very difficult time using their fishing permits 

as collateral when applying for a loan to improve their business, and as a result they often take second 

or third mortgages on their homes, or sacrifice important benefits like health insurance. 
95 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 32 here 24388.076

6 

5) Improve Data Reporting Systems and Infrastructure 

Investment in overhauling the fleet's hardware, like old computers and other electronics, would 

significantly help the broad transition towards things like EM/ER. Computer hardware takes a beating at 

sea, and programs that could help recycle old electronics for new ones would help greatly. A good 

example is the Gulf of Maine Research Institute's program to provide a free new laptop to all fishermen 

who transition to Electronic Reporting. 

But currently, only 20 percent of the fleet uses ER, and the system that is in place is not 

adaptable to new "smart technology." NOAA Fisheries has prioritized the development of new systems 

of integrated EM/ER in their "Fisheries Modernization Plan," but they continue to push back the time of 

full implementation and won't commit to some type of final transition date. The information collected 

at sea through a modernized system of reporting and monitoring would have broad benefits to both the 

fishery and the fleet. 

Currently, managers, dealers and fishermen are disparate entities that don't fluidly 

communicate with one another. We need an integrated and real time network of data flow and 

communication that connects Vessel Trip IDs with dealer-reported trip landings to government and 

sector records. The sustainability oftoday's fishing communities depends on the move towards this 

type of integrated approach to data collection, management and integration. 

An integrated information management system would channel single-entry landings 

information in real-time to an information network of software services and devices that enable 

efficient reporting and compliance, improved dealer business management, more efficient ACL 

utilization, improved bycatch avoidance, and enhanced marketing capacity by facilitating locallybranded, traceable, and immediately available harvest inventory to community marketing efforts. This 

type of real time inventory of catch would be extremely beneficial to local restaurants and fish houses 

trying to plan their promotion of local seafood. This information network would form the infrastructure 

for multiple user interfaces with existing software platforms (e.g. Sector business management tools, or 

marketing tools like traceability and catch verification). 

In addition, this real-time integrated approach to data collection and management is a prerequisite for a robust trading platform. First, we need real-time landings information flowing 

continuously to the National Marine Fisheries Service and to the commercial fishing industry via sectors. 

This is a necessary condition for a successful trading clearinghouse because in order to execute trades in 

real time, it is necessary for individuals to have knowledge of their remaining ACE allocations in real 

time. Currently, this information is eight days behind, which makes it difficult to plan a business. 

Conclusion 

In conclusion, addressing these key areas of fisheries management and science would lead to more 

certainty in the system, higher levels of investor confidence, reduced risk (both financial and safety) to 

fishermen, improved science, more equitable distribution of the fishery resource, and better business 

opportunities. Clearly, not all of these areas can be addressed and improved at once, and some need to 

be addressed before the full benefit of others can be realized. So, I prioritize the areas from to focus on 

the most important area first. It starts with better monitoring and accountability, which will lead to 

better reporting and data systems integration, which can then facilitate real time quota trading 

exchanges, and also new streams of environmental data feeding into more real time and adaptable 

management and science. Thank you for the opportunity to provide this testimony to address this 

important topic. 
96 

Chairman VITTER. Thank you very much. Thanks to all of you. 

Your testimony was really enlightening and really excellent. 

As we continue the conversation, let me first make a few points 

about the Gulf side of things, which is my obvious focus, three 

points in particular. 

Number one, no one involved in the effort to improve the situation in the Gulf, certainly including me, wants to move away from 

sound fisheries management based on real science. We are absolutely committed to that. Nobody wants to move away from that 

and end up over-fishing any stock and ruining the situation for everybody, which it would do. We are absolutely committed to sound 

science and sound management. We just do not think that is happening now on the federal side and know it can be done better. 

Number two, I certainly appreciate and value the impact, economic and otherwise, of the commercial sector, and nobody wants 

to harm that or shove that out of the picture. And, in fact, several 

of our proposals to improve the situation in the Gulf have been 

made with the built-in caveat that if this lessens the catch on the 

commercial sector by one fish, it will be negated. We will go back 

to the old way. So, we have offered sort of an absolute hold harmless that the commercial sector will not be hurt by a single fish because we do not want to hurt that sector and we recognize their 

importance. 

And, number three, let me just point out with regard to our proposal specifically, moving state management from three nautical 

miles to nine nautical miles, in the Gulf, that is already the case 

off Texas and off Florida. So, this is not some radical idea in the 

Gulf. In the Gulf, a whole bunch of the Gulf is under that rule already, specifically off Texas and off Florida. 

So, with all those issues in mind, Mr. Gentner, I wanted to ask 

you, do you consider the science and the data in the Gulf on issues 

like red snapper better on the federal side or on the state side? 

Mr. GENTNER. Thank you, Senator. Because they have not been 

sort of in charge of red snapper, let us say, I think that the states 

are sort of playing catch-up at the moment. But, I think their systems for collecting recreational data have made leaps and bounds 

recently with—I think every state in the Gulf has an electronic, an 

automatic electronic reporting system for private recreational anglers either in the works or on the ground, and they have instituted such things as special license check-offs for red snapper fishing so that they can have a dedicated survey frame for red snapper 

fishermen to make survey efforts much more efficient and much— 

be able to make catch estimates much more quickly than the current federal effort. 

Chairman VITTER. All of the Gulf states, as I think you know, 

Mr. Gentner, have come together and agreed on a management 

plan that would apply, including if their jurisdiction were extended 

to nine miles. This strikes me as very significant, that all the 

states have agreed. I mean, obviously, those states, those governors, those offices deal with and have to acknowledge and represent all the sectors, commercial, charter, recreational. How would 

you describe the significance of their coming to that agreement in 

terms of a plan, Mr. Gentner? 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

97 

Mr. GENTNER. I think it is very significant. I think any time you 

have sort of entities with their own sovereignty that can come together and agree to managing something jointly, I think that is 

huge. And I think that is mainly driven by the states’ recognition 

of the value of recreational fishing. They understand how this 

works. They understand that opportunity drives economic value. 

And they benefit directly from license sales and excise taxes. 

And if they are not selling tackle, those states are not filling 

their management budgets. They are not able to provide the enforcement, the enforcement that enforces commercial regulations as 

well as recreational regulations. They are not able to provide that 

infrastructure that supports both commercial and recreational fishing through recreational excise taxes and license sales. 

And, so, I think the recognition of the sort of economics that are 

driven by that opportunity drives them to want to be able to participate and collaborate on this management. 

Chairman VITTER. Right. Let me ask all of the Gulf witnesses, 

is there any evidence right now with regard to fisheries that are 

managed at the state level of mismanagement, of bad data, of overfishing? Sure, Mr. Andry. 

Mr. ANDRY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. No, I think that the 

states independently have done a very good job of managing the individual species that they have been tasked to manage. In many 

cases, it is the same fish, the same fisheries, but each state has 

their own individual needs. And for the states to be able to recognize that and manage it, at this point in time, no, there is no significant over-fishing that is being documented or occurring on the 

species that the states are managing. 

Chairman VITTER. Okay. Mr. Gentner. 

Mr. GENTNER. I think we have an excellent example in the State 

of Florida with snook management of crises being treated 

proactively. I think we had a very severe freeze a couple of years 

ago that wiped—almost wiped out the spawning capability of the 

snook population, and they were able to get in front of that and decide that we are not going to have a snook season until this fishery 

is able to be fished again. And the recreational anglers agreed with 

that, thought it was a wonderful idea, and they were able to get 

in front of and stop this crisis from happening. 

So, I think instead of failure, we see the opposite of failure. We 

see environmental conditions driving them to be proactive and keep 

opportunity alive. 

Chairman VITTER. Ms. Anderson. 

Ms. ANDERSON. Yes, sir. Thank you, Chairman Vitter. I see the 

states being a very positive thing for them to have control because 

of the flexibility. In state management, they can go in and propose 

something that they know needs to happen in order to not only protect the industry, but also the fishery, and they can have that done 

within two meetings. If it were NOAA, it would take two years, 

possibly, to go through all the hoops that they have to go through 

to do the same thing. 

So, flexibility is very important because nature changes. There 

may be an issue next year. Maybe it will not be there next year. 

But, it is important that they have that flexibility. They also have 

flexibility in that Northwest Florida has needs that are different 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

98 

from Central Florida, that has needs that are separate from South 

Florida or on the East Coast. So, they have the flexibility of making those changes, where if it is all one-size-fits-all, it is not the 

same. 

Chairman VITTER. All right. Okay. Thank you very much. 

Senator Shaheen. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I would like 

to thank all of the witnesses who are here today. While there are 

different issues that we face in New England than you all have in 

the Gulf, I think our goal is the same and that is to see a wellmanaged fishing stock and a robust industry for fishing in the 

United States, whether it is commercial or for private fishermen. 

I want to particularly thank Jamie Hayward and Josh Wiersma 

for being here. They, as you heard in Senator Vitter’s introduction, 

they have been involved in all aspects of the fishing industry and 

New England and so you can bring that experience and understanding to today’s testimony. 

And, I want to start with you, Mr. Hayward, because you talked 

about the range of fishery management decisions over the past several years that have really effectively decimated New Hampshire’s 

fishing industry. Can you talk more about why small fishermen are 

affected more than some of the larger fishing operations and why 

it is a particular issue for New Hampshire and for some other 

states that have our kind of fishing. 

Mr. HAYWARD. Certainly. It boils down to the smaller vessels are 

not out there. Like you said earlier, the cost of the monitoring per 

day is the same on each vessel, but the amount of dollars that a 

vessel is targeting certainly is not the same between a small vessel 

and a larger vessel. So, in a lot of cases, when the smaller guy is 

paying a larger percentage of his income for the monitoring program, it is basically just—you know, it has to do with how far from 

shore you go. It has to do with the amount of horsepower you have 

in your boat, your—pretty much your fishing capacity, what your 

vessel and your crew are capable of. 

Senator SHAHEEN. And you all spoke to the need to move towards an electronic monitoring system, and I think that is an issue 

in the Gulf, as well. I wonder, Dr. Wiersma, if you could talk more 

about what NOAA needs to do and how we in Congress could urge 

that more rapid movement to that electronic monitoring system. 

Mr. WIERSMA. Sure. Thank you for the question, Senator Shaheen. I think from my experience working with the agency, it is a 

matter of really taking strong leadership on this position and stop 

delaying the implementation time frame. You know, there have 

been pilot projects that have been ongoing since early 2009, yielding enough data that at this critical time, where the fleet needs 

these options for them to be able to understand what their best 

business plan is moving forward, you know, the option to have electronic monitoring, electronic reporting is critical. 

And, so, we were on track to approve that actually this year, and 

again, the agency seemed to get cold feet and decided that they just 

did not have enough information yet, and so there will be that option available to a limited amount of boats next year. I believe 

there are 20 boats that are going to be participating under an exDeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

99 

empted fisheries permit. But, that is not the same and it does not 

provide the broad opportunity for the entire fleet. 

Senator SHAHEEN. So, as I have the opportunity to question Secretary Pritzker about this issue, what would you all like for me to 

say to her about what the impact of the Department of Commerce 

and NOAA’s delay in moving to this system means for people on 

the ground who are trying to keep their businesses alive? And, I 

would ask either or both of you. 

Mr. HAYWARD. I will answer saying that time is crucial and the 

road we are heading down now is not a good one. It is pretty much 

the end is near, and if things are not changed soon, at least to 

some extent, that the fleet is going to look a lot different in 36 

months, I can assure you of that. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Will we still have any fishing in New Hampshire if we do not see some changes in NOAA’s decision in some 

of these areas? 

Mr. HAYWARD. What will happen is the infrastructure will be 

gone, and when that is gone, then the boats will leave. The ones 

that want to remain, they will be forced out because they will have 

no place to offload or even markets to sell. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Dr. Wiersma, do you want to add anything to 

that? 

Mr. WIERSMA. Yeah, I think—and Jamie really hit the nail on 

the head. It is a matter of presenting these options in a timely 

manner to the fleet, you know. And, I think, I like to describe it 

as the fleet has kind of been in a state of limbo for the last year 

with the uncertainty about both the switch to the at sea monitoring 

program, but also about, really, a lack of opportunity for them to 

modernize their boats to be able to adapt new technologies, you 

know, be able to participate directly in the science through those 

programs. You know, I think it really comes down to giving fishermen these opportunities and doing so in a timely manner with 

strong leadership. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman VITTER. Thank you. 

Senator Ayotte. 

Senator AYOTTE. Thank you, and I certainly share Senator 

Shaheen’s concerns and am so glad that this hearing is happening 

today. I appreciate it. 

And, I wanted to ask you, Mr. Hayward, you are in our position. 

What are the most immediate steps that we need to take to ensure 

that the fishermen do not go out of business? So, your answer to 

Senator Shaheen is very, I mean, compelling and dire, and we do 

not want you to go out of business. We appreciate what you do. So, 

what are the things you feel the most urgency for that you want 

us to do? 

Mr. HAYWARD. Well, the most critical thing at this point right 

now is the ability to use cod to harvest other fish. With our cod allocations being reduced by 95 percent in a 36-month period, it has 

become nearly impossible to operate a profitable business. So, I 

mean, yes, that needs to be corrected and that probably needs to 

be corrected through a science procedure and—— 

Senator AYOTTE. But, it has got to happen pretty quickly here, 

does it not? 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

100 

Mr. HAYWARD. It certainly does. I mean, yeah. These vessels are 

not going to hold on a great deal longer. I mean, first and foremost, 

yes, the at sea monitoring funding issue—— 

Senator AYOTTE. We have got to get that immediately. You cannot afford it, right, so we have got to—— 

Mr. HAYWARD. Basically, no. The small communities cannot afford it. I do not even know that the bigger vessels can afford it. I 

mean, it might have—the damages that it is going to cause to infrastructure are the ones that concern me the most, is if the volumes of fish reduce so much that the shoreside infrastructure cannot stay open, they cannot do anything, then once they are gone, 

then it is not going to matter how much fish is left in the ocean 

because nobody is going to have any place to put it. Nobody is 

going to have a way to get it off their boat. No one is going to have 

the tools that they need to operate a fishing business. 

Senator AYOTTE. So, I mean, I certainly understand and appreciate the idea of moving to technology for this, but we have got an 

issue right before us, right, that you need to be—the at sea monitoring costs have to be covered now or people will be out of business. And, we can change the monitoring system any way we want, 

but if you are out of business, then we no longer have our fishermen. 

And, this is an issue that I know Senator Shaheen and myself, 

others in New England have written on. The language in the Appropriations Committee, I think, is clear, that NOAA is not following, that they should be funding this at sea monitoring, and I 

am sure we will continue to put that language in and clarify and 

we have got—but, I think we have got to do whatever we can to 

get that funded right now. 

What other issues do you want to make sure that we address, 

the immediate, obviously, burning fire, but what is your view on 

the research and the information in terms of the science? 

Mr. HAYWARD. I think that the models need to be adjusted, to be 

honest with you, and I think that more tools need to be implemented into stock assessments, like even at sea monitoring data, 

even, you know, Catch Per Unit Effort data. Things like this need 

to be included. I mean, the information that is acquired by the 

commercial fleet needs to have a role in the stock assessment, in 

the science models. One way or another, it has to get in there, because—— 

Senator AYOTTE. Because you are on the waters—— 

Mr. HAYWARD. The commercial—— 

Senator AYOTTE [continuing]. And it is a pretty important observation you are making, right? 

Mr. HAYWARD. The commercial fleet is not comfortable with the 

ability for scientists to harvest fish. 

Senator AYOTTE. Now, I have heard that. I have heard that—— 

Mr. HAYWARD. Or count fish, for that matter. 

Senator AYOTTE. Yeah, because you are out there on the waters 

and you are seeing different information that you feel like is not 

taken into account. 

Mr. HAYWARD. In some cases, yes. 

Senator AYOTTE. Yes. Great. 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

101 

Dr. Wiersma, I know before your current position, you know, you 

have been very active also with the New Hampshire Cooperative, 

and I had the chance, as you know, to come down and visit what 

is happening. So, I see our fishermen also trying to take on new 

creative ways, obviously, to market fish and different species. But, 

as I look at sort of the emergency before us, would you agree we 

have got to address the emergency and then go forward on if we 

are going to look at new technologies or development of sales of 

new species and things. So, I wanted to get your observation on 

that. 

Mr. WIERSMA. I appreciate the question, Senator Ayotte. I think 

Jamie made some really compelling arguments, and it does come 

down to providing fishermen the opportunities to be able to stay in 

business. You know, since I have transitioned to EDF last year, I 

was actually very proud to be able to work hard—as you know, 

Congress has appropriated $3 million for electronic monitoring, 

which is immediately available for fishermen if they want to use 

that technology this year, but it is really the agency who has not 

approved it for use. So, we are stuck in a position where there is 

some short-term relief in that way, yet it is not broadly available 

to the entire industry. 

You know, there has to be an understanding of a path forward 

that can get us out of this mess, and addressing these short-term 

needs really is critical now so that we can look at building more 

information into the stock assessment models, trying to provide 

that level of stability moving forward, which, as Jamie says, has 

to depend on more levels and increased amounts of data, new 

streams of data from fishermen, observations directly into science, 

addressing climate change and other factors in those models which 

currently is not taken into account and is critical to look at. So, I 

think that those are probably the largest immediate concerns. 

Senator AYOTTE. Great. Thank you. I want to thank both of you 

for being here, and also, I appreciated the testimony of the other 

panelists, too, who I know are facing challenges, as well. We all 

want to ensure that we continue to have the fishermen thriving 

and being able to really hope there is a third generation, really, for 

you, Mr. Hayward, and that is what we care about. So, I appreciate 

you being here. 

Chairman VITTER. Great. We have some additional time, so I am 

going to invite another round and participate in that myself. 

You know, in the Gulf situation as it relates to red snapper and 

other things, another thing I am really concerned about is the extent to which we are really taking a public resource and privatizing 

it and putting it in the hands of a very select number of people as 

the public, particularly recreational fishermen, can participate and 

enjoy the resource less. 

I mean, for red snapper, there are right now in the Gulf 418 

what are called IFQs, Individual Fishing Quotas, sort of permits, 

essentially, on the commercial side. That is a significant decrease 

from five years ago. So, you need one of these to participate on the 

commercial side. They are not—new ones are not created very often 

at all. They can be passed down generation to generation. 

And, by the way, the way this is split up, 49 percent of the 

shares are held by Florida residents, 30 percent by Texas residents, 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

102 

18 percent only by Louisiana and Mississippi and Alabama combined, and two percent by non-Gulf state residents. About 19 people in Louisiana hold a commercial red snapper IFQ, even though 

40 percent of the red snapper biomass is off the Louisiana coast. 

So, that is a whole another level of concern I have, of really 

privatizing a public resource. 

Do any of you, particularly the Gulf witnesses, have any comments or thoughts about that? 

Ms. ANDERSON. We have made it clear as we testified in Gulf 

Council meetings that we do not approve—we do not believe that 

the catch share system is the proper system to apply—be applied 

most definitely to the recreational industry. Whether you are charter for hire, head boats, or private anglers, we are all recreational 

anglers. 

And, the—it surprises me that we have had to go this far to— 

in discussions knowing that, I believe, that Congress’ intent with 

this law was to protect fisheries and the fishing industry, and yet 

NOAA’s goal of the way they are going to do that is by limiting the 

number of opportunities people have to fish in the recreational sector and limiting the number of people who have shares in the commercial fishery, and I do not think that was the intent of Congress 

to do that, to eliminate jobs and businesses. So, I believe that it 

is very important that we look at that and question that. 

Chairman VITTER. Thank you, Ms. Anderson, and I think your 

comment is particularly relevant and noteworthy given that because of you all’s charter business, you would really have the opportunity to benefit from that system and from things going in that 

direction by essentially getting that sort of elevated status, correct, 

but you are still against moving in that direction. 

Ms. ANDERSON. Yes and no. The Anderson family would be one 

of the winners. We are picking winners and losers in the catch 

share industry, catch share program. So, the Anderson family 

would be one of the winners because we do—we have been in the 

industry for a long number of years. 

But, then again, we have a marina that has 27 charter boats and 

5 head boats and 4 dive boats. So, a lot of those would be put out 

of business. But, we need all of those boats operating on a regular 

basis in order to pay their rent and to purchase fuel, because that 

is how the marina gains its income. Without the marina, we cannot 

have the boats there. 

Chairman VITTER. Right. 

Ms. ANDERSON. So, it all works together and it is very important. 

And sightseeing, sightseeing cruises that we have, they are dependent on families coming down for fishing, also. We all play off of 

each other. 

Chairman VITTER. Right. Thank you. 

Senator Shaheen, do you have anything else? 

Senator SHAHEEN. I do, actually, Mr. Chairman. 

I wanted to go back, Josh, to two of the issues that you raised 

in your testimony and try and better understand how you envision 

it working. The first was around collaborative research. You talked 

about what NOAA could do that would be more helpful to the industry, and one of the things you mentioned was more collaborative 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

103 

research. Give me more details about how you envision that working. 

Mr. WIERSMA. Sure. Thank you for that, Senator, excuse me, for 

the question, Senator Shaheen. So, collaborative research is actually near and dear to my heart. I completed my Ph.D. looking at 

the value of collaborative research for New England fishermen, and 

one of the things that I found during my research was that not 

only does collaborative research produce this wealth of data that 

currently is not available for science, but it also benefits the fleet 

because they gain the knowledge and information and understanding about what science is, what its objectives are, and how 

they can add to that process. 

And, so, traditionally, collaborative research is kind of funded almost ad hoc, right. Ten years ago was probably the heyday, and a 

lot of times, it comes with different types of disaster declarations 

or other types of immediate short-term thinking which leads to 

very short-term research projects, like two-year projects, and then 

the data just does not get used. It gets put on the shelf. The industry had for a time a very robust industry-based trawl survey that 

was running side-by-side with the government trawl survey. That 

was abandoned about five years ago. The State of Massachusetts 

is just thinking about how they can get that research project up 

and running again. 

And, it is really because of the demand from the industry to say, 

you know, listen, we want fisheries-dependent information used in 

the stock assessment process. We think we have a lot to contribute 

for that, or those purposes. And, prioritizing collaborative research, 

you know, is a priority of the Magnuson-Stevens Act. It should be 

a priority of NOAA Fisheries. And it should be implemented in a 

way that is formal and has a process for that data that is collected 

to then be flowed into management. 

Senator SHAHEEN. So, what you are suggesting is that we really 

need some funding that will allow NOAA to work with the industry 

in putting together the research in particular areas where we need 

to get more information about what is happening and to be very 

directive about that. 

Mr. WIERSMA. That is true, and also to allow the industry to 

prioritize what those research agendas are, and I think that is also 

part of the problem, is that, typically, it has been this top-down 

driven process where research priorities come from the top, and 

they might not necessarily coincide with what the fishing industry 

feels like are the research priorities they would like to address. 

Senator SHAHEEN. So, give me an example. 

Mr. WIERSMA. So, as an example, you know, the government 

typically has focused a lot on conservation gear research, and while 

some of those efforts have been very successful, like how to accept 

radar trawl and others, fishermen want more collaborative research to do stock assessment science. They would like to have 

these side-by-side research trawl vessels going along to ground 

truth the independent trawl surveys. 

And, just as another example, I think there are two levels. There 

is kind of a lower level, where you are not necessarily having a fullblown research project, but fishermen can also act as co-manage cooperative research participants by agreeing to have more frequent 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

104 

reporting at sea, to take new technologies like electronic monitoring, electronic reporting, to integrate haul by haul information 

that gives you that level of temporal and spatial information that 

can really do interesting things, like develop robust Catch Per Unit 

Effort index models to really understand where the footprint is of 

these species, especially in an environment now that is rapidly 

changing, and from year to year, you know, I think it is clear in 

the Northeast that climate change is having a significant impact on 

the movement of these stocks. We need all eyes and ears out on 

the water as we can at this point. 

Senator SHAHEEN. And, talk a little bit more, if you would, about 

what you were suggesting with more transparent quota leasing. 

Mr. WIERSMA. Sure. Yeah. So, as a Sector Manager, that was 

really one of the big issues that I faced, is this system of tradable 

fishing rights. While it produces efficiency in the system, it can 

also lead to inefficiencies if that level of market data is not available to everyone. 

I will give you an example. Imagine trying to sell your house in 

an environment where you do not know any of the prices of the 

houses that sold around you, but the buyer that comes to buy your 

house does and he offers you anything that he wants and you are 

likely to accept that because you do not have any other information 

to know what those comparable sales are. That is generally how it 

kind of works in the permit and the quota trading market through 

disparate e-mails, different types of communications. 

Senator SHAHEEN. So, who is actually pushing to keep the leasing system opaque? 

Mr. WIERSMA. So, I think there are a combination factors that— 

you know, it starts from very strict data confidentiality rules. You 

know, the government has certainly been—— 

Senator SHAHEEN. Right. 

Mr. WIERSMA [continuing]. Slow in trying to address those and 

pushing for their role in trying to develop more transparent markets. I think, obviously, there are certain players in the industry 

who are benefiting from disproportionate amounts of asymmetrical 

information. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Okay. Can I ask one more question? 

Chairman VITTER. Sure. 

Senator SHAHEEN. The other thing that I just wanted to get you 

to comment on, because it is good news, one of the few bright spots 

we have got in New Hampshire and Northern New England with 

respect to fishing, and Senator Ayotte mentioned it, and that is the 

business model that you are both involved in in the Community 

Seafood Initiative. So, I wonder if you could talk a little bit about 

how that works and the positive aspects of that that you have seen, 

and Jamie, you are the Treasurer, and Josh, you are one of the cofounders, so I do not know which one of you wants to address that. 

Mr. WIERSMA. Sure. I will start first. So, as you mentioned, you 

know, that has certainly been a highlight of my experience working 

in the industry, and really just because of the level of innovation 

and collaboration that it took to start it. You know, Jamie was 

there from the beginning, helping me create it. 

It is a cooperative of New Hampshire fishermen, but it is also a 

cooperative of the New Hampshire public, where we allow the local 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

105 

New Hampshire public to become shareholders of the organization. 

So, not only do they pick up a share of fish directly off the boat, 

so they are getting the freshest, best fish that is available, they can 

also invest in the organization as a stockholder and they have a 

seat on our Board of Directors as a consumer stockholder. They collectively make decisions with our fishermen about how we are 

going to develop our business for the following year, what species 

we would like to offer. And, it has been very beneficial that way. 

And, so, in over three years now, we have 18 different drop-off 

locations throughout the state. We are working directly with 15 different restaurants who are sourcing groundfish directly from New 

Hampshire boats. It has been extremely successful in highlighting 

our traditional fishing community and giving them a voice, I think, 

that maybe they did not have before. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Thank you. 

Anything you want to add, Jamie? 

Mr. HAYWARD. Well, from the fishermen’s standpoint, it has been 

enjoyable to watch the local consumer enjoy the product that the 

fishermen harvest and have the availability that was not always 

there in the past. And, it has been a great pleasure to make that 

availability possible. 

Senator SHAHEEN. Well, thank you all very much, and it is nice 

that we have at least one positive—we can end on a positive note. 

And, I want to thank all of you. It is clear that we have a lot 

of work to do here to help address some of the concerns that exist 

within the industry, and I certainly intend to work with this committee, I know Senator Vitter does, as well, and other Senate committees to see if we can address some of these issues in a way that 

is more positive. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman VITTER. Thank you very much, and thanks to all of 

you. This was a great discussion because of your background and 

experience in your testimony. So, thank you. 

We obviously have two different situations in the Gulf and New 

England. However, the common thread is an enormous impact of 

fisheries on small businesses, both on the commercial side and on 

small businesses related to that and the recreational side. So, it is 

a big, big small business issue. 

But, I also think this discussion underscores that different regions and different fisheries have very different challenges, and so 

the best solution, in my opinion, is not some cookie cutter federal 

approach, which is another reason we would like more state involvement in the Gulf. 

So, thank you all very much and we will certainly be following 

up with legislation and other proposals. 

And with that, the hearing is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 11:25 a.m., the committee was adjourned.] 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

(107) 

APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

108 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 33 here 24388.077

Senator Edward J. Markey 

Statement for the Record 

THURSDAY, March 3, 2016 

!O:OOAM EST 

Small Business Committee Hearing Room 

428A Russell Senate Office Building 

Washington, DC 2051 0 

The fishing industry in Massachusetts has its roots in the birth of our nation, and remains an 

important part of the culture and economy of the Bay State today. From Cape Cod and the 

Southcoast to Gloucester and Fairhaven, the fishing industry adds over $600 million per year to 

the Massachusetts economy, and employs over 8,000 Bay Staters. New Bedford, Massachusetts 

is the highest grossing fishing port in the country. The Atlantic sea scallop accounts for over 

80% of the landing there. 

Fisherman, managers, and scientists worked together to revive the Atlantic sea scallop fishery 

making it the great industry it is today. However, New Bedford's claim as the top seafood port in 

the nation is in danger due to climate change. Acidifying oceans will make it harder for scallops 

to make their shells. Warmer waters will also change the ecosystem of New England's oceans. 

We must begin to address the challenges of climate change today. 

While there are great challenges ahead, I hope the collaborative effort of the fishing community 

that revived the Atlantic sea scallop will be used to create a sustainable and healthy industry and 

oceans for generations to come. 
109 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 34 here 24388.078

All Men Are Equal Before Fish I Congressman Garret Graves https://ga!Tetgraves.housc.gov/mcdiaMccnter/blogMpostslall~menMare~eq ... 

I of3 

All Men Are Equal 

Before Fish 

January 29, 2016 I Blog Post 

How would you feel if the federal government took all 

of the gold in Fort Knox and gave it to a few dozen 

unelected, unaccountable people to decide how to 

manage it behind closed doors? How would you feel 

if that same small group unsurprisingly decided to split 

the country's gold among themselves- each 

becoming multi-millionaires? If our government gave 

away the public's property for free and allowed 

millionaires to be born overnight by diverting that 

public's property to themselves, I'd be pretty upset 

and lam. 

As Ben Raines' weekend article in the Times Picayune 

(http:/ /www.nola.com/news/index.ssf/20 16/01 

/kingpins_of_the_gulf_make_mill.html#comments) 

and AL.com illuminated, the federal government has 

hand-picked dozens of multi-millionaire "Sea Lords" 

by allowing them to control the red snapper fishery in 

3/3/2016 9:21AM 
110 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 35 here 24388.079

All Men Are Equal Before Fish I Congressman Garret Graves https://garretgraves,house.gov/media-ccnter/blog-posts/all-mcn-are-eq ... 

2 of3 

the Gulf of Mexico. While these select few "Sea Lords" 

are making millions from our fish, the season for 

recreational anglers -who used to be able to fish for 

red snapper all year long -has been absurdly 

diminished. In 2015. the recreational red snapper 

season was ten days. 

The agency charged with managing our national 

fishery, the National Marine Fisheries Service, 

conducted a study on the health of red snapper fish 

stocks in the Gulf of Mexico. You'll be shocked to 

learn that federal government's methodology and 

results were grossly inadequate. Their analysis failed to 

include reef areas -the actual habitat at red 

snapper, a reef fish. Think about that. It's like looking 

for polar bears in Louisiana, finding none, and 

declaring the population to be at risk of extinction. 

Let me be clear, the sustainability of our fisheries is 

paramount. II is critical that we employ the best 

science to responsibly manage them and to support 

their long-term viability. It's no secret that Louisiana is 

home to some of the nation's top restaurants that rely 

on the supply of fresh, wild seafood to meet demand. 

Some argue that expanding recreational access 

would lead to overfishing and threaten commercial 

interests. This mentality has bred the current system of 

a government sanctioned oligarchy that monopolizes 

a public resource. And it has punished tens of 

thousands of families across the Gulf Coast that enjoy 

fishing in Sportsman's Paradise. Luckily, there is 

another way. 

In July of last year, I introduced HR 3094, the Gulf 

States Red Snapper Management Authority Act 

(https:/ Jwww.congress.gov /bill/114th-congress/housebill/3094?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%22 

%5C%22hr3094%5C%22%22%5D%7D&resultlndex= 1) in 

3/312016 9:21AM 
111 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 36 here 24388.080

All Men Are Equal Before-Fish I Congressman Garret Graves hnps://garretgraves.house.gov/media~centcr/blog~posts/all·men-are-eq ... 

3 of3 

the US House of Representatives. The bill simply gives 

the five Gulf States' Wildlife Departments the authority 

to manage the red snapper that live offshore their 

coast. This approach favors local control and would 

transfer management decisions to the professionals 

who are closest to the fishery. In Louisiana for 

example, our Department of Wildlife and Fisheries has 

demonstrated a commitment to using the best 

science to sustainability manage our fisheries through 

efforts like the agency's LA Creel program, which 

helps to provide an accurate count of red snapper 

fish stocks in our coastal waters. Today, HR 3094 has 

nearly 30 bipartisan sponsors from across the nation. 

The fisheries in the Gulf of Mexico are public property 

and should be enjoyed by all - not managed like a 

long-abandoned "sharecropper" model that enriches 

a select few. Sometimes all it takes is a little sunshine 

on bad policy to fix things. To quote Herbert Hoover, 

"all men are equal before fish." Let's enact HR 3094 

so we can ALL enjoy the Gulf's bounty. 

3/3/2016 9:21AM 
112 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 37 here 24388.081

313120!6 Column: Don't mess with success in fisheries managemum I Tampa Bay Times 

W'ampa llay W'imeli • WINNER OF 10 PULI'l'ZER PRIZES 

Column: Don't mess with success in fisheries management 

By Brad Kenyon, special to the Tampa Bay Times 

Tuesday1 March 1, 2016 2:02pm 

Under federal fisheries management, red snapper populations in the 

Gulf of Mexico are recovering and the boating and fishing industries 

have grown. But on Thursday, a U.S. Senate committee will hear a 

proposal that could gut a decade of recovery and growth for both. The 

idea floated by Sen. David Vitter, R-La., would create a piecemeal 

system by extending the state waters of Alabama, Louisiana and 

Mississippi from 3 miles to 9. In addition, his plan would loosen some of 

the stronger tenets of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and 

Management Act- like science-based rebuilding timelines and annual 

catch limits. 

The other gulf states' gains would be Florida's loss, particularly for 

anglers in the Tampa Bay area who must travel at least 30 miles offshore 

to find 6o-foot waters where the red snapper population flourishes. In 

effect, those other three states' extensions would create enough extra 

state-water fishing pressure that the stock's rebound would be 

imperiled. To keep the fish populations from plunging, the government 

would have to severely limit the uumber of days for fishing in federal 

waters. As a practical matter, Florida fishermen would have far fewer 

days to catch snapper. 

On Thursday, Vitter will argue before the Senate Small Business Administration Committee that the 3-mile limits 

hurt small coastal businesses across the gulf that rely on healthy fish populations and liberal access to them. He is 

~NTong. And as a small boat dealership and marina owner, I know something about this. 

Under the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the gulf red snapper catch has rebuilt from 5 million pounds in 2007 to more 

than 14 million in 2014. Not to mention, Vitter's arguments fly in the face of the American Sportfishing 

Association's economic reports, which suggest the Southeast has a healthy fishing population and an even healthier 

fishing industry. 

His argument is based on a flawed narrative by fishery rights groups that claim short federal-water red snapper 

seasons are hurting industry growth and that the Gulf of Mexico FishCiy Management Council is broken. But here's 

what is really going on: These groups are part of a growing national move by the states to take public natural 

resources from federal stewardship and pass them to the states. Think of the fiasco of the armed occupation of the 

Oregon Malheur National Wildlife Refuge- but in flip-flops and sunglasses. 

The problem is, red snapper don't respect state boundaries, and the gulf fishery is bigger than any one state. It 

takes a big-picture view to manage it appropriately. 

http:Jiwww,tampabay.com/opinionlcolumnsJcolumn-dont-mess-wJth-suecess-ln-fisheries-managemcnt/2267479 l/2 
113 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 38 here 24388.082

3/3/20!6 Column: Don't mess with success in fisheries management! Tampa Bay Times 

Vitter's narrative threatens Florida's saltwater fishing industry that, according to the ASA's Sportfishing in 

America, supports more than 65,000 jobs with an annual retail sales base of $3.9 billion. This is a huge economic 

driver for Florida, and these jobs and retail sales are complemented by attracting a robust and vibrant fishing 

tourism industry that draws more than 1.2 million anglers annually, resulting in out-of-state tourism spending that 

nudges a $1 billion a year. 

For the gulf region, even more telling is our ability to buck national trends of decreasing fishing license sales; 

excepting Mississippi, all other gulf states enjoyed increased license sales from 2004 through 2013, the last year 

registered in the report. How do these numbers reflect a burden on small business, when the economics and 

participation trends suggest otherwise? 

Vitter's proposal is an attack on public federal natural resources and threatens Florida's economic health and 

Florida gulf anglers. But more frightening for me, the senator's proposal carries the real threat to inject an undue 

level of chaos into a stable fishery management system that will trickle down to uncertainty in Florida's boating, 

fishing and tourism industries. 

Brad Kenyon is an avid angler who has served on fishery advisory panels to the Gulf of Mexico Fishery 

Management Council. He owns and operates Boat and Motor Superstores in Tarpon Springs. He wrote this 

exclusively for the Tampa Bay Times. 

Column: Don't mess with success In fisheries management 03/01/16 

Photo reprints I Article reprints 

© 2016 Tampa Bay Times 

63 63 

Ads by Adb ade 

Articles and offers from around the Web 

http:!/www.tampabay.com/opinion/co!umns/co!umn-dont-mess-with-succcss-in-fishcrics-managcmentl2267479 212 
114 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 39 here 24388.083

March 2, 2016 

The Honorable David Vitter 

Chairman 

U.S. Senate Committee on Small Business and 

Entrepreneurship 

428A Russell Senate Office Building 

Washington, D.C. 20510 

Dear Chairman Vitter and Ranking Member Shaheen: 

The Honorable Jeanne Shaheen 

Ranking Member 

U.S. Senate Committee on Small Business 

and Entrepreneurship 

428A Russell Senate Office Building 

Washington, D.C. 20510 

As fishermen and small-business owners throughout the Gulf of Mexico, we write in support of federal fisheries 

management under the Magnuson-Stevens Act. Our livelihoods and customers depend on healthy fish 

populations. Accordingly, we oppose efforts that could undermine the progress made in ending overfishing and 

rebuilding overfished stocks, and congressional action that could reduce access to fisheries relied on by our 

industry and businesses, all of which are vital to the coastal economies of the Gulf. 

In the past decade, fishermen and managers in the Gulf have worked hard toward ending overfishing. It hasn't 

been easy, but the Magnuson-Stevens Act is working to put many fish populations on the road to recovery. Since 

the Act was last reauthorized, Gulf red grouper, king mackerel, and gag have been taken off the overfished lists. 

last year, Gulf fishermen enjoyed both the largest quota and the largest single quota increase of red snapper 

ever. While not everyone agrees with all management decisions, changes made within the current council 

system that gives each region a seat at the table can address these concerns without again depleting the Gulf 

red snapper population and threatening other species or upending the tested fisheries management system. 

As you consider how federal fisheries management affects small businesses, we want you to know that our 

businesses have thrived because of the conservation and management provisions in the Magnuson-Stevens Act. 

Thank you for your consideration of our views. 

Sincerely, 

Dickie Brennan, Steve Pettus & lauren Brennan 

Brower, Managing Partners 

Dickie Brennan's Steakhouse, Palace Cafe, Bourbon 

House & Tableau 

New Orleans, LA 

Stan Harris, President and CEO 

Louisiana Restaurant Association 

Metairie, LA 

Glen Brooks, President 

Gulf Fishermen's Association 

Clearwater, FL 

Mike Colby, Executive Director 

Clearwater Commercial Marine Association 

Clearwater, Fl 

Destin Charter Boat Association 

Destin, FL 

Charter Fisherman's Association 

Corpus Christi, TX 
115 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 40 here 24388.084

Ryan Prewitt, Owner and Chef 

Pe\che Restaurant 

New Orleans, LA 

Patrick Singley, Owner 

Sue Zemanick, Executive Chef 

Gautreau's Restaurant 

New Orleans, LA 

Seth Hanstead 

Continental Provisions 

New Orleans, LA 

Paul Rotner, COO 

Acme Oyster House 

New Orleans, LA 

Adolfo Garcia, Owner and Chef 

highHat Cafe, Ancora Pizzeria Salumeria, La Boca, 

Primitive 

New Orleans, LA 

Dana Honn, Chef and Co-Owner 

Carmo 

New Orleans, LA 

Tommy Cvitanovich, Owner 

Drago's 

New Orleans, LA 

Chef Pierre S. Hilzim, President 

Kajun Kettle Foods, Inc. 

New Orleans, LA 

Haley Bitterman, Executive Chef and Director of 

Operations 

Ralph Brennan Restaurant Group 

New Orleans, LA 

Capt. Steve Tomeny 

Steve Tomeny Charters 

Port Fourchon, LA 

Clarence Seymour 

Charterboat SYL 

Biloxi, MS 

Capt. Bobby Kelly 

F/V Miss Brianna 

Orange Beach, AL 

Capt. Skipper Thierry 

Escape Charters 

Dauphin Island, AL 

Capt. Gary Bryant 

Red Eye Charters 

Ft. Morgan, AL 

David Walker 

Walker Fishing Fleet, Inc. 

Andalusia, AL 

Capt. Brian Swindle 

Dauphin Island, AL 

Tom Steber 

Zeke's Marina 

Orange Beach, AL 

Tom Steber 

Zeke's Marina 

Orange Beach, AL 

Capt. Brad Gorst 

F/V Gulfstream II 

Clearwater, FL 

Capt. Jim Green 

F/V American Spirit 

Destin, FL 

Capt. Mike Colby 

Double Hook Charters 

Clearwater, FL 

Capt. Billy Archer 

F/V Seminole Wind 

Panama City Beach, FL 

Steve Maisel 

Maisel Marine Inc. 

Palm Harbor, FL 
116 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 41 here 24388.085

Kirby Klys 

F/V Scamp 

Ft. White, FL 

James Zurbrick 

Jolly Rogers II 

Steinhatcheee, Fl 

Richie landry 

Lady lynn 

Steinhatcheee, FL 

Eric Woods 

Bad Behavior 

Steinhatcheee, Fl 

Danny Lanier 

Pair of Dice 

Steinhatcheee, Fl 

Ellis Doshier 

Grouper Snooper 

Steinhatcheee, Fl 

Bill Tucker 

F/V Wing Shot 

Dunedin, Fl 

Bohica Inc. 

Madeira Beach, FL 

Tom Marvel 

F/V Sea Marvel 

Naples, Fl 

Jim Clements 

Carrabelle, Fl 

Edward J.Maccini 

F/V J.U.M.A. 

Seminole, Fl 

Brad Kenyon, President 

Boat & Motors Superstores 

Tarpon Springs, Fl 

Dean Pruitt, President 

Demar Fishing, Inc. 

Madeira Beach, Fl 

Jason De La Cruz, President & COO 

Wild Seafood Company 

E Madeira Beach, Fl 

William ward 

President, Captain's Finest Seafood, Inc. 

Director, Fish For America, USA 

Altamonte Springs, Fl 

Chad Haggart, Manager, V.P. 

Double Eagle Deep Sea Fishing, Inc. 

Clearwater, FL 

Jim Zurbrick 

Owner, Tides Up Fisheries llC. 

Owner, Jolly Rogers II Fisheries LLC. 

Steinhatchee, Fl 

Patty Zurbrick 

Owner, Jolly Rogers II Fisheries LLC. 

Owner, Nature Coast Storage 

Steinhatchee, Fl 

Reef Passage Charters Inc. 

Steinhatchee, Fl 

Landy Fish Company 

Steinhatchee, Fl 

Sammy's Seafood 

St. Petersburg, Fl 

Frank Chivas, President 

Baystar Restaurant Group 

Indian Rocks Beach, Fl 

Brad Kenyon, President 

Florida Family Fisheries Inc. 

Tarpon Springs, Fl 

Julie Reise, Owner 

Rusty Bellies Restaurants 

Tarpon Springs, Fl 

Eric Spalding, Manager, V.P. 

Queen Fleet Deep Sea Fishing, Inc. 

Clearwater, Fl 
117 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 42 here 24388.086

Maxwell Foster, Owner 

Gulfstream Fishing Charters 

Clearwater, FL 

Capt. Jessie Zuban, Owner 

Dolphin Deep Sea Fishing Fleet, Inc. 

Tarpon Springs, FL 

Steve Reise, Manager 

Pelican Point Seafood Inc. 

Tarpon Springs, FL 

Capt. Jessie Zuban, Owner 

Miss Virginia Deep Sea Fishing Head boat 

New Port Richey, FL 

Jason Delacruz, Owner 

Don's Dock Bait and Tackle 

John's Pass, Fl 

Olde Bay Cafe & Dunedin Fish Market 

Dunedin, FL 

Glen Brooks, President 

F/V Miss Donna, F/V U Inc., F/V Miss Aliena Inc., F/V 

Miss Katie, F/V Miss Rebecca, F/V Miss Gail LLC 

GMQinc. 

Lacanto, FL 

Greg Pruitt, President 

Miss Bianca, Inc. 

Seminole, Fl 

Jim Clements, President 

Captain Jim's Charters Inc. 

Carabelle, FL 

Gary Jarvis 

Back Down 2 Fishing Charters 

Destin, FL 

Gary Jarvis 

Brotula's Seafood House & Steamer and Jackacudas 

Seafood and Sushi, Savory Restaurants, LLC 

Destin, FL 

Gary Jarvis 

Sunset Bay Cafe, Jarvis Restaurants, LLC 

Destin, FL 

Brad Kenyon 

Marina & Dealer 

Tarpon Springs, Fl 

Brian Hartz 

Publisher 

Tampa, Fl 

fan lantorno 

State-water Captain 

Fort Meyers, Fl 

James Grove 

State-water Captain 

St. Petersburg, FL 

Jason Kyte 

Federal-Permit Holder, SA 

Jensen Beach, Fl 

John Bourgeois 

State-water Captain 

Panama City beach, FL 

Justin Reiger 

Federal-Permit Holder, SA 

Jensen Beach, FL 

Matt Draper 

Publisher 

Tallahassee, FL 

Mike Newman 

Commercial Fisherman 

Jupiter Beach, FL 

Teresa Gibson 

Commercial Fisherman 

Jensen Beach, Fl 

Tom Marvel 

Commercial Fisherman 

Naples, FL 

Walt Stearns 

Diver, Publisher 

Palm Beach Gardens, Fl 
118 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 43 here 24388.087

Will Davenport 

State-water Captain 

Venice, FL 

Will Geraghty 

Dual Permit Holder, Gulf 

Naples, FL 

Capt. Shane Cantrell 

Galveston Sea Ventures 

Galveston, TX 

Capt. Michael Miglini 

Out to Sea Adventures 

Port Aransas, TX 

Capt. Scott Hickman 

Circle H Charters 

Galveston, TX 

Capt. Mike Jennings 

Cowboy Charters 

Freeport, TX 

Bubba Cochrane 

F/V Chelsea Ann, Southern Seafood LLC 

Galveston, TX 

Bruce Shuler 

State-water Captain 

Salado, TX 

Mitch Richmond 

State-water Captain 

Port Mansfield, TX 

Paul Johnson 

State-water Captain 

Port Mansfield, TX 

Pedro Martinez 

State-water Captain 

Weslaco, TX 

Theodore Springer 

Federal-Permit Holder, Gulf 

Port Mansfield, TX 

TJ Greaney 

State-water Captain 

Corsicanca, TX 

Wayne Deacon 

Federal-Permit Holder 

Port Mansfield, TX 

Chef Pepper 

Ocean Grill 

Galveston, TX 

John Paul 

San Luis Steakhouse 

Galveston, TX 

Robert Jakubus 

Topwater Grill 

Dickinson, TX 

Paco Vargus 

Rudy & Pace's 

Galveston, TX 

Johnny Smecca 

Nona's 

Galveston, TX 

Chef Michael Brewer 

Main Street Bistro 

League City, TX 

Matt Ward 

Woody's Tavern & Grill 

Austin, TX 

Alan McArthur 

McArthur's 

Austin, TX 

cc: Members of the U.S. Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship 

Members of the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation 
119 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 44 here 24388.088

313/20!6 Red Snapper Management: The Irony of Pr<ltectwn and Threats from Washmgton D.C.- Date House 

March 02. 2016 9:ooAM 

Red Snapper Management: The Irony of Protection and Threats from 

Washington D.C. 

In the Gulf of Mexico one species of fish has absorbed the spotlight above all others, and that is the Red Snapper. This 

fishery has been a contentious topic charged with emotion. The Red Snapper fishery is rebounding and stock le-.·els are 

climbing. 

This species is on the road to reeovery and now it faces a threat that would undermine the very congressional bill that 

has given us something to fight for, the Magnuson-Stevens Act (MSA). 

While the MSA is tough on scienct~bascd rebuilding time, lines and annual catch limits, it is responsible for the ending 

of overfishing and the prospect of long-term sustainability. With the ever growing popularity of saltwater fishing one 

has to agree that this type of OYersight is needed to ensure future generations have a thriving resource to enjoy. 

On Thursday, March 3, Senator David Vitter (R~lA) will chair a hearing of the Senate Small Busine..<;..'l and 

Entrepreneurship Committee to discuss the very things that have helped boost Destin and its fiShing community's economic health, 

If Senator Vitter has his way, he will strip the Magnuson~Stevens Act of the very tools that have brought this fishery from the grim fate it had a decade ago. I 

find it ironic that there is an effort lead by a senator to destabilize small businesses that have made sa<~rifices towards new management solutions and provide 

more access, and its coming out of the Small Business and Entrepreneurship Committee. 

Really? Small businesse..<; are the backbone of our economy and the fishing industry. The city of Destin enlisted the Haas Economic Center to do an economic 

study of water related tourism. It concluded that the Destin Charter Fleet brought in 173 million dollars into our local economy annually. To do anything to 

destabilize that would be detrimental not only to Destin, h\lt to all the coastal communities like D('!stin that rely on a thriving fishery. 

The Charter Boat industry Gulf-\.vide has worked hard for many years navigating through the stakeholder driven process provided by the MSA. We are now 

starting to see the benefits of this legacy legislation. The improvement of access that has been shared by all sectors of this fishery proves the success of MSA. 

This process L.:; arduous and moves at what feels like a glacier's pace, but it is a system of checks and balances that keeps emotional reactions from placing 

everyone's fiShery in peril. Very much like the emotion that Senator Vitter and those backing his efforts have at this time. 

It is timE' for the congressional assaults to stop. The groups pushing for this end~around of the MSA have failed at the Gulf Council level, have failed in the 

court room, and arc now using congressional Representatives and Senators to launch an attack on the Mom and Pop business that make up the Gulf Chatter 

Boat industry, the access point of the American non~boat owning public. 

Capt. Jim Green 

Vice Pn·-'>-ident of the D0>i:in Charter Boat Association 

http !lm.theda$lin!og,comlartlcle/20160:W2/NEWS/160309969 

http://www.thedcstinlog.com/artic!e!20160302/NEWS/!60309969?tcmplate:::.printarl Ill 

Insert offset folio 45 here 24388.089DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

Capt. Anderson Marina 

I W'WI I ''IOi VI " for Head ___ boat _ Charter _ _ Boat Fleet HB P c 

............. ""'' ""' -"""''-

Apr I May I June I July I August Total Gals Jan Feb Mar Sept Oct Nov Oec Total of fuel A

2006 .I Gag/Red Grouper no closures •••• Red Snapper open April21· October31 .•• 4/per person bag limit J Anglers J _I 

Gals: Fuel· : 40$85.6 27009.6 '5406:5 1146:6 319509.2 

HB pass. 516hr 0 53 216 306 986 2346 3017 1147 623 386 194 57.00 9331 HB pass. 1 0112hr 0 1361 4261 12781 1879T 22421 29581 1259 11611 1155 237 38.00 12775 

$ 

2007 Gag/Red Grouper closure Feb 15-Mar 15 .... Red Snapper open April21·0ctober 31 2/person bag limit after May 2nd 

Gais; !:U'el t;,: 6072lli8 :29267.15 r ' 21032 . 6706'.61 .711.1 

HB pass. 516hr 0 0 489 574 860 2317 2844 1325 971 797 40 0 102171 HB pass. 1 0112hr 56 901 4481 9761 1613 1943 2350 1244 964 720 98 0 10502 

$ 

2008 Economy bad/Fuel prices up/Gag/Red Grouper closure Feb 1· Mar 31 ... Red Snapper open June 1-Aug 52/person bag limit 

·: > 

0.1429\9 : •30'39c1ji888\l 314464 • 5017,3:65 47455 21036.7 13734.!15 15380;3 32tl4j'69M1 i 215()'1lHll 

HB pass. 516hr 0 Ol 5581 10451 10551 2162.1 30891 1208 374 716 0 61 10268 HB pass. 10112hr 0 0 347 547 476 1999 2147 830 426 485 0 0 7257 

T I I I $ 

2009 Economy bad/Fuel prices better/Gag/Red Grouper closure Feb 1-Mar 31 ... Red Snapper open June 1-Aug 14 2/person bag limit 

Gals: Fuel.' .• ·• .... · '" ?54-'178'2 55672..2• 33176.8 8993:8:' t4l!9$.516002:8: 221847 

HB pass. 516hr 0 Ol 4761 4281 661T 22281 27721 1326 7431 810 31 0 9475 HB pass. 1 0/12hr 0 0 98 455 622 2197 2179 346 505 373 0 0 6775 

I I $ 

2010 Economy bad/Fuel better/Gag/Red Grouper closure Feb. 1-Mar 31 ... BPS PILL ... Red Snapper Open June 1· July 23 +Fall Wken

Gals:Fuel ·''· .. ·<'415:6 ·4941:14368. 151()1 4123M '24879:3 9958:4 13052.4 18239.3 5680,'1,>1040.8, .1500·11).71 

HB pass. 516hr 0 0 132 999 1086 3489 2700 821 849 1069 57 0 11202 HB pass. 1 0112hr 0 0 136 413 433 2026 1108 363 462 904 4221 0 6267 

$ 

2011 Economy bad/Fuel better/Gag Grouper closure Jan.1-Sept. 15 • .AJ closed June-July .. Red Snapper Open June 1-July 18, 2/person 

oats>F'uet · . , •. •·. ?1397.a '12269:9 . 16151 3488 '1343 • 205:tll8,12 

HB pass. 516hr 0 0 611 1224 1546 5401 6084 2727 1012 881 118 83 19687 

HB pass. 10/12hr 0 63 244 515 784 2539 2386 643 357 420 0 0 7951 

I I I $ 

2012 Federal Red Snapper season June 1-July 10 (40days) 

GafS.F;!Jtll I 1666 

1 

I I 792 2159481 

HB pass. 516hr 0 0 974 1208 2047 4422 5373 2207 1011 927 33 ol 182021 HB oass. 10112hr 0 0 305 512 652 2391 2583 773 559 429 28 0 8232 

Insert offset folio 46 here 24388.090DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

Capt. Anderson Marina 

FueiR teDO rt for Head boat Charter Boat Fleet HB P ass en :~er c ---··-ts 

I I I • $ 6

Jan Feb Mar Apr I May I June July I August Sept Oct Nov Dec 

2013 Federal Red Snapper season June 1·28th (28 Days) 

Gals. Fuel 2405 1ff4~1 789~11415~1 2504~1 6045~ I 3941 ~I 3427~ I 1801i, 23434 256~1 1721 163751 231324 HB pass. 5/6hr 0 0 712 880 1509 4297 3490 2431 1469 14061 100 81 

HB pass. 1 0/12hr 0 01 1651 4361 5701 30221 14111 7581 4011 967 01 0 77301 

I I L I J I I I I • $ 8

2014 Federal Red Snapper season June 1-June 9 I Added additlonal8 hr night trip for Red Snapper season (9days) 

Gals.Fi.iE!Iz ·•;P3~ (?i42lg,i!355'114827'• ~~8366·~ 5346Q.5 · ··4165$' 32900 1864~1 .• t7~~, . 2753 77~1 ,, 2~191.51 

HB pass. 5/6hr . of o[ . s8ol 1in1 198o( . 5685 5748! 33171 1279 1499 98 0 21859 

HB pass. 1 0/12hr 0 Ol 2271 4791 7931 2985 19181 915 5381 4431 0 0 82981 I 

I I I I I I I I • j$12

2015 Added Bhr trip to choices in long trips all season/ Red Snapper Federal season June 1-July 15th (For·hlre 44/Pvt rec 10 days) 

~='~!~/6hr 

• I ~s~:}.~'f~P :~lft{~~~f: ~~~!1 6161~1 5453~1 3313~1 21622 15329 .1754 .. 2979 • · ..... 252400 4398 5430 2557 1484 1378 70 116 19688 

HB pass. 8/1 0/12h 0 01 2601 6291 9001 35681 29951 811 830 575 250 26 10844 .. 

•• added 8 hr trips I I I I I I • $ 12

In 2015 many of the charter boats who are dually permitted ran more commercial trips in the winter. 

(They have recreational and commercial permits and are leasing catch shares.) I 

• In addition to the increased budget for advertising, we have hired a marketing director for the purpose of bringing more anglers to the marina. 

Notice each year the short, lesser expensive trips have increased and the longer trips have decreased. I I I I I 

This trend has continued. The ticketed trips/boats pay a percentage of sales for their dockage. I I I I I 

Since the shorter,lesser expensive trips bring less revenue to the marina, that is another negative economic impact. I I 

Insert offset folio 47 here 24388.091DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

40,000,000 

35,000,000 

I 3o,ooo,ooo 

Numbers 

of 2 year 

& older 

red 

m the 

Gulf of 

Mexico 

10,000,000 

Predicted Abundance Trends w/Annual Rec. Sector Landings 

Insert offset folio 48 here 24388.092DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER

Gulf of Mexico Red Snapper 

Predicted abundance trends 

35,0001000 ~~···~·~~-,~,·--~~~,,-,~-~·-·,,~,,, ~-·,~~~,,,,,~,,,,,,,,,_,,,,,,~,,_, __ ,_,,,_,_,,~,,-,,,,,,,,,,,,,,_,,,,,,,,,,~,,-,,-,,,,,,,,, 

-

Ill 

; 30,000,000 

.a 

§ 25,000,000 c 

-

... !. 20,000,000 

Q. 

tO ~ 15,000,000 

, ~ 10,000,000 + N ~ 5,000,000 

cs: 

Quota reduced from 9.12 mp to 

Recreational bag limit reduced from 4 to 2 

CommerciallFQ 

0 ,+_,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,_,,,~~=:::', 

·~ 
124 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 49 here 24388.093

-en 

.a .... -

s::: 

a.- OJ ·-

a.. en 

n:J"'C 

c c 

V) 2! 

"'C..., 

OJ OJ a:: u 

0 c 

u n:J 

·- "'C )( c 

OJ ::s ~.a 

'+- n:J 

O-a 

'+- OJ - ...., ::s u ~:s 

2! 

a.. 

0 0 0 0 

0 0 0 0 

0 0 0 0 .. 0 .. .. 0 0 0 

0 0 0 0 

0 0 0 0 ... .. .. .. 0 0 0 0 

o::t N 0 00 

M M M 

0 0 

0 0 

0 0 ... 0 0 

0 0 

0 0 .. 0 0 

\C) o::t 

0 

0 

0 .. 0 

0 

0 .. 0 

N 

'l710l 

El:Ol 

l10l 

110l 

010l 

600l 

~ sooz 

~ LOOl 

l900l 

! 

0 

SOOl 

'l700l 

EOOl 

zooz 

100l 

OOOl 

(sq1) Jaddeus paH +z~ase JO ssewota 
125 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 50 here 24388.094

-n:s 

c 

0 

·.;::; 

n:s 

cu 

... 

u 

cu 

0::: n:s 

0 

J 

CJ 

I 

"' t>O 

c: 

'i5 

c: 

~ 

I 

N 

.... 

0 

N 

0 

.... 

0 

N 

00 

0 

0 

N 

"' 0 

0 

N 

'<t 

0 

0 

N 

N 

0 

0 

N 

8 

0 

N 
126 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 51 here 24388.095

-ro 

·-

~ Q) 

E 

E 

0 

u 

N 

..... 0 

..... 

co 

-

0 

::3 

Cf 

I 

I 

N 

..... 

0 

N 

0 

..... 

0 

N 

00 

0 

0 

N 

1.0 

0 

0 

N 

<::!" 

0 

0 

N 

N 

0 

0 

N 

0 

8 

N 
127 

Æ 

DeShaun on LAP51NQ082 with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 52 here 24388.096

0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1.0 N 0 0 N ,..., ,..., 00 '<t 0 

M 

,..., 

0 

N 

N 

,..., 

0 

N 

,..., 

,..., 

0 

N 

0 

....... 

0 

N 

m 

0 

0 

N 

(/) 

c. 00 

0 

~ 0 

N 

,... 

0 

0 

N 

-

"' 0 

..0 

"0 1.0 "' 0 CIJ 0 ::r: N 

I Ll) 

Q.. 0 

a:: 0 N 

~ 

I '<t 

0 

0 

N 

0 0 0 0 0 § § 0 0 8 8 0 8 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '<t N 0 00 1.0 '<t N ,..., ,..., ,...,