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

97–311 PDF 2016

H.R. 3094, ‘‘GULF STATES RED 

SNAPPER MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY ACT’’ 

LEGISLATIVE HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON WATER, POWER AND OCEANS 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES 

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

Thursday, October 22, 2015 

Serial No. 114–22 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Natural Resources 

( 

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

or 

Committee address: http://naturalresources.house.gov 

(II) 

COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES 

ROB BISHOP, UT, Chairman 

RAU ́ L M. GRIJALVA, AZ, Ranking Democratic Member 

Don Young, AK 

Louie Gohmert, TX 

Doug Lamborn, CO 

Robert J. Wittman, VA 

John Fleming, LA 

Tom McClintock, CA 

Glenn Thompson, PA 

Cynthia M. Lummis, WY 

Dan Benishek, MI 

Jeff Duncan, SC 

Paul A. Gosar, AZ 

Rau ́l R. Labrador, ID 

Doug LaMalfa, CA 

Jeff Denham, CA 

Paul Cook, CA 

Bruce Westerman, AR 

Garret Graves, LA 

Dan Newhouse, WA 

Ryan K. Zinke, MT 

Jody B. Hice, GA 

Aumua Amata Coleman Radewagen, AS 

Thomas MacArthur, NJ 

Alexander X. Mooney, WV 

Cresent Hardy, NV 

Darin LaHood, IL 

Grace F. Napolitano, CA 

Madeleine Z. Bordallo, GU 

Jim Costa, CA 

Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan, CNMI 

Niki Tsongas, MA 

Pedro R. Pierluisi, PR 

Jared Huffman, CA 

Raul Ruiz, CA 

Alan S. Lowenthal, CA 

Matt Cartwright, PA 

Donald S. Beyer, Jr., VA 

Norma J. Torres, CA 

Debbie Dingell, MI 

Ruben Gallego, AZ 

Lois Capps, CA 

Jared Polis, CO 

Wm. Lacy Clay, MO 

Jason Knox, Chief of Staff 

Lisa Pittman, Chief Counsel 

David Watkins, Democratic Staff Director 

Sarah Parker, Democratic Deputy Chief Counsel 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON WATER, POWER AND OCEANS 

JOHN FLEMING, LA, Chairman 

JARED HUFFMAN, CA, Ranking Democratic Member 

Don Young, AK 

Robert J. Wittman, VA 

Tom McClintock, CA 

Cynthia M. Lummis, WY 

Jeff Duncan, SC 

Paul A. Gosar, AZ 

Doug LaMalfa, CA 

Jeff Denham, CA 

Garret Graves, LA 

Dan Newhouse, WA 

Thomas MacArthur, NJ 

Rob Bishop, UT, ex officio 

Grace F. Napolitano, CA 

Jim Costa, CA 

Ruben Gallego, AZ 

Madeleine Z. Bordallo, GU 

Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan, CNMI 

Raul Ruiz, CA 

Alan S. Lowenthal, CA 

Norma J. Torres, CA 

Debbie Dingell, MI 

Rau ́l M. Grijalva, AZ, ex officio 

(III) 

CONTENTS 

Page 

Hearing held on Thursday, October 22, 2015 ........................................................ 1 

Statement of Members: 

Fleming, Hon. John, a Representative in Congress from the State of 

Louisiana ....................................................................................................... 1 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 3 

Gosar, Hon. Paul A., a Representative in Congress from the State of 

Arizona ........................................................................................................... 6 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 7 

Graves, Hon. Garret, a Representative in Congress from the State of 

Louisiana ....................................................................................................... 7 

Huffman, Hon. Jared, a Representative in Congress from the State of 

California ....................................................................................................... 3 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 5 

Statement of Witnesses: 

Barham, Robert, Secretary, Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, State 

of Louisiana, Baton Rouge, Louisiana ......................................................... 10 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 11 

Bittermann, Haley, Corporate Executive Chef and Director of Operations, 

Ralph Brennan Restaurant Group, New Orleans, Louisiana ................... 60 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 61 

Questions submitted for the record ......................................................... 64 

Cresson, David, Executive Director/CEO, Coastal Conservation 

Association, Baton Rouge, Louisiana .......................................................... 66 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 67 

DeLaCruz, Jason, President and COO, Wild Seafood Company, East 

Madeira Beach, Florida ................................................................................ 54 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 55 

Questions submitted for the record ......................................................... 57 

Horton, Christopher M., Fisheries Program Director, Congressional 

Sportsmen’s Foundation, Bismarck, Arkansas ........................................... 37 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 38 

Questions submitted for the record ......................................................... 40 

Jarvis, Gary, Owner, Back Down 2 Charter Fishing, Destin, Florida ......... 43 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 44 

Risenhoover, Alan, Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, NOAA 

National Marine Fisheries Service, Silver Spring, Maryland ................... 12 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 14 

Wiley, Nick, Executive Director, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation 

Commission, Tallahassee, Florida ............................................................... 18 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 20 

Zales, Robert F., President, National Association of Charterboat 

Operators, Hurley, Mississippi .................................................................... 47 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 49 

Questions submitted for the record ......................................................... 53 

Additional Materials Submitted for the Record: 

Barham, Robert, Secretary, State of Louisiana, Department of Wildlife 

and Fisheries, August 7, 2015 Letter submitted for the record in 

support of H.R. 3094 ..................................................................................... 81 

Fishing Community Coalition, October 16, 2015 Letter submitted for 

the record in opposition to H.R. 3094 .......................................................... 84 

Friedkin, T. Dan, Chairman, Texas Parks and Wildlife, October 20, 2015 

Letter submitted for the record in support of H.R. 3094 ........................... 83 

Page

IV 

Additional Materials Submitted for the Record—Continued 

Group of Commercial and Charter Fishermen, October 20, 2015 Letter 

submitted for the record in opposition to H.R. 3094 .................................. 88 

Group of Commercial Fishing Organizations and Seafood Suppliers, 

Letter submitted for the record in opposition to H.R. 3094 ...................... 90 

Gulf of Mexico Reef Fish Shareholders’ Alliance, October 19, 2015 Letter 

submitted for the record in opposition to H.R. 3094 .................................. 85 

Guy, N. Gunter Jr., Commissioner, State of Alabama, Department of 

Conservation and Natural Resources, September 23, 2015 Letter 

submitted for the record in support of H.R. 3094 ...................................... 80 

Miller, Jamie M., Executive Director, State of Mississippi, Mississippi 

Department of Marine Resources, September 24, 2015 Letter submitted 

for the record in support of H.R. 3094 ........................................................ 82 

Wiley, Nick, Executive Director, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation 

Commission, August 6, 2015 Letter submitted for the record in support 

of H.R. 3094 ................................................................................................... 81 

(1) 

LEGISLATIVE HEARING ON H.R. 3094, TO 

AMEND THE MAGNUSON-STEVENS FISHERY 

CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT ACT TO 

TRANSFER TO STATES THE AUTHORITY TO 

MANAGE RED SNAPPER FISHERIES IN THE 

GULF OF MEXICO, ‘‘GULF STATES RED 

SNAPPER MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY ACT’’ 

Thursday, October 22, 2015 

U.S. House of Representatives 

Subcommittee on Water, Power and Oceans 

Committee on Natural Resources 

Washington, DC 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:00 p.m., in room 

1324, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. John Fleming [Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding. 

Present: Representatives Fleming, Gosar, LaMalfa, Graves, 

Newhouse, Bishop; Huffman, Bordallo, Lowenthal, and Torres. 

Also present: Representative Scott. 

Dr. FLEMING. The Subcommittee on Water, Power and Oceans 

will come to order. 

The subcommittee meets today to hear testimony on H.R. 3094. 

Opening statements at today’s hearing are limited to the Chairman, the Ranking Minority Member, the Vice Chair, and a designee of the Ranking Member. The bill’s sponsor will also have an 

opportunity to provide an opening statement on his bill. This will 

allow us to hear from our witnesses sooner. 

Parenthetically, we expect votes in about an hour, so we will 

probably have to recess for one vote series, and then we will continue the hearing. 

At this time, I yield myself some time for an opening statement. 

STATEMENT OF THE HON. JOHN FLEMING, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF LOUISIANA 

Dr. FLEMING. Today, the subcommittee will conduct a hearing on 

H.R. 3094, the ‘‘Gulf States Red Snapper Management Authority 

Act.’’ Since our hearing in December 2014, while there have been 

several major developments related to the policies governing the 

fishery, not much has changed in terms of outcome. The Gulf of 

Mexico red snapper fishery is still a mess. The status quo is 

unsustainable, which leads us to the bill before us. 

Let’s start by looking at a bit of context. The red snapper fishery 

is a key economic driver for many Gulf communities. Private anglers contribute to a growing support industry that includes everything from boat building to tackle shops. The charter for-hire boats 

make use of that economic infrastructure as well, but also bring in 

tourism dollars. Finally, commercial fishermen deliver their 

2 

product throughout the Nation, and also contribute to tourism, as 

award-winning chefs use commercially caught fish in culinary 

masterpieces. 

Leaving aside the economic benefits, these are large, beautiful, 

and tasty fish that are prized by fishermen and consumers alike. 

Anyone who has been on the water, or even just witnessed the impressive catches in photographs, can understand the allure of 

catching red snapper. 

This fishery once supported a 180-day recreational season. 

Despite rebuilding success, recreational seasons have been drastically shortened over time. Even after quotas were adjusted upwards to account for a larger-than-expected stock assessment, 

private anglers got only a 10-day season in Federal waters for 

2015. These shortened seasons have real consequences in the 

economies of coastal parishes and counties. 

I understand the ongoing and increasing frustrations of the recreational fishing community. We have held hearings in this 

committee on how NOAA counts fish where they do not live, and 

neglects where they do. We have also looked at some of the state 

data collection programs, like LA Creel, and how they are superior 

to NOAA’s data collection; but NOAA does not incorporate the data 

from their states. 

This is a controversial topic, with the recreational, charter, and 

commercial sectors all competing for a share of a growing, but still 

rebuilding, resource. We will hear from all of those interests today, 

and I am glad to have that dialog. 

I am hopeful that we can continue that dialog to find a solution 

that everyone can live with. It is critical that we ensure plenty of 

fish for future generations, and that we are exercising responsible 

stewardship over the resource. 

H.R. 3094 would transfer management of the red snapper 

fisheries from the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council to 

a newly created Gulf States Red Snapper Management Authority. 

The bill’s sponsor pointed to the Atlantic Striped Bass 

Conservation Act and the Dungeness Crab Management Act as 

precedents, and I look forward to examining the similarities and 

the differences with those management schemes. 

The states have made a lot of progress in shaping this plan since 

the hearing last year. But there are a few outstanding questions: 

how will Federal enforcement work in these newly designated state 

waters for a state-managed plan, how will disputes between the 

states be settled, and how can all of Louisiana’s economic and cultural interests best be protected. 

While we hope to find answers to these questions today and in 

the coming weeks, it is still clear that something has to change to 

allow the recreational community better access to this important 

resource. 

I want to thank all the witnesses for coming to testify and share 

their expertise and passion on this issue. I hope that we can have 

a productive dialog that leads to a solution. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Fleming follows:] 

3 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HON. JOHN FLEMING, CHAIRMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE ON

WATER, POWER AND OCEANS

Good morning. Today, the subcommittee will conduct a hearing on H.R. 3094, the 

‘‘Gulf States Red Snapper Management Authority Act.’’ 

Since our hearing in December of 2014, while there have been several major developments related to the policies governing the fishery, not much has changed in 

terms of outcome. The Gulf of Mexico red snapper fishery is still a mess. The status 

quo is unsustainable, which leads us to the bill before us. 

Let’s start by looking at a bit of context. 

The red snapper fishery is a key economic driver for many Gulf communities. 

Private anglers contribute to a growing support industry that includes everything 

from boat building to tackle shops. The charter-for-hire boats make use of that economic infrastructure as well, but also bring in tourism dollars. Finally, commercial 

fishermen deliver their product throughout the Nation, and also contribute to tourism as award winning chefs use commercially caught fish in culinary masterpieces. 

Leaving aside the economic benefits, these are large, beautiful, and tasty fish that 

are prized by fishermen and consumers alike. Anyone who has been on the water 

or even just witnessed the impressive catches in photographs can understand the 

allure of catching red snapper. 

This fishery once supported a 180-day recreational season. Despite rebuilding success, recreational seasons have been drastically shortened over time. Even after 

quotas were adjusted upwards to account for a larger-than-expected stock assessment, private anglers got only a 10-day season in Federal waters for 2015. These 

shortened seasons have real consequences in the economies of coastal parishes and 

counties. 

I understand the ongoing and increasing frustrations of the recreational fishing 

community. We’ve held hearings in this committee on how NOAA count fish where 

they don’t live and neglect where they do. We’ve also looked at some of the state 

data collection programs, like LA Creel and how they are superior to NOAA’s data 

collection, but NOAA does not incorporate the data from the states. 

This is a controversial topic, with the recreational, charter, and commercial sectors all competing for a share of a growing—but still rebuilding—resource. We will 

hear from all of those interests today, and I’m glad to have that dialog. I’m hopeful 

that we can continue that dialog to find a solution that everyone can live with. 

H.R. 3094 would transfer management of the red snapper fisheries from the Gulf 

of Mexico Fishery Management Council to a newly created Gulf States Red Snapper 

Management Authority. The bill’s sponsor has pointed to the Atlantic Striped Bass 

Conservation Act and the Dungeness Crab Management Act as precedents, and I 

look forward to examining the similarities and differences with those management 

schemes. 

The states have made a lot of progress in shaping this plan since the hearing last 

year. But there are a few outstanding questions, such as how Federal enforcement 

will work in state waters for a state managed plan, how disputes between the states 

will be settled, and how all of Louisiana’s economic and cultural interests can best 

be protected. 

While we hope to find answers to these questions today and in the coming weeks, 

it is still clear that something has to change to allow the recreational community 

better access to this important resource. 

I want to thank all the witnesses for coming to testify and share their expertise 

and passion on this issue. I hope that we can have a productive dialog that leads 

to solutions. 

Dr. FLEMING. The Chairman now recognizes the Ranking 

Member, Mr. Huffman, for his opening statement. 

STATEMENT OF THE HON. JARED HUFFMAN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 

Mr. HUFFMAN. Thank you and good afternoon, Mr. Chairman. 

In terms of complexity, divisiveness, and potentially 

contentiousness, the issue of managing Gulf of Mexico red snapper 

must be second only to California water in terms of tough issues 

that come before this committee. So I understand what 

4 

Congressman Graves is up against, and I applaud him for taking 

on such a politically challenging problem. 

I also appreciate his willingness to come to me before the hearing 

to discuss his legislation and offer to work across the aisle to address concerns that I and many other Democrats on our staff have 

about this bill. 

Based on some of the provisions in the bill, and also a very 

strong opposition that the recreational charter captains, commercial fishermen, seafood processors, and restaurant industry have 

voiced about H.R. 3094, it is clear to me this bill, in its current 

form, is not ready to proceed. 

However, I do think an honest and open dialog makes it more 

likely that we could reach a bill that could be broadly supported 

down the road. I intend to work with Mr. Graves, if he is up for 

that, to see if a more careful, consensus-based approach could 

achieve the Magnuson Act’s goal of fully rebuilding these stocks 

and preventing overfishing, while also addressing Mr. Graves’ concern about providing more flexibility and management authority to 

the Gulf states. 

This may seem like a hyper-regional issue. But, in fact, the red 

snapper debate has implications that reach far beyond the Gulf of 

Mexico to consumers all over the United States: anyone who enjoys 

wild, sustainable Gulf seafood. 

Just as importantly, it raises questions about whether we should 

throw back the effective, scientifically sound, and regionally-based 

system of fisheries management established under the Magnuson 

Act, or keep it, and allow it to continue rebuilding fisheries like the 

red snapper, which have been decimated by overfishing in the past. 

Some have argued that, since we recently passed legislation to 

permanently remove the West Coast Dungeness crab fishery from 

Federal management, that it is only fair to do the same for red 

snapper. I just want to speak directly to that, because the truth is 

red snapper and Dungeness crab are really apples and oranges 

when we talk about these management choices. 

Even when you put aside the significant disparities in the stock 

health between these two species, fishing pressure, user conflict, 

the history of management, it is impossible to ignore the fact that 

the Tri-State Dungeness Crab Management Agreement is the result of years of negotiation that took place with all fishery stakeholders at the table. 

Further, in the case of Dungeness crab, the Pacific Fishery 

Management Council can still step in at any point and establish a 

fishery management plan that would supersede the plan put 

forward by the states, if it elected to do so. So, there are very important distinctions between these two species and the management choices we face, and also between what has been proposed 

with the Tri-State Commission on Dungeness Crab and what is 

being proposed in the current draft of H.R. 3094. 

This is a bill that was not developed with input from all fishing 

sectors that have an interest in red snapper. It is not supported by 

commercial and charter fleets, that account for more than twothirds of red snapper harvests. These fleets, and the other tourism 

and seafood industry businesses that they support, depend on 

healthy stocks and stable, predictable management. Right now, 

5 

they have both; but it is difficult to see how they would have either 

under a state plan that lacks safeguards to prevent overfishing, 

and could allow massive resource reallocation. 

I believe there is a path that would lead to increased state autonomy in managing the recreational side of the red snapper fishery. 

I think that is possible. But the path should not be one that picks 

winners and losers, and stacks the deck against people who make 

their living on the water and who have taken significant steps toward making their fishing operations sustainable and accountable. 

Instead, it ought to incorporate the views of private boat anglers, 

charter boat captains, commercial fishermen, seafood processors, 

the restaurant and tourism industries, and the conservation community. I look forward to hearing from some of those voices today; 

and I view this hearing as the beginning, hopefully, of a discussion 

on how we allow greater access to the red snapper fishery, while 

ensuring that this important, and still overfished, stock continues 

to rebuild. 

I am also aware that the Gulf Council is beginning similar 

discussions, and is considering using its authority under the 

Magnuson Act to develop a regional management plan for red 

snapper. I hope that Mr. Risenhoover can give us an update on the 

status of that process, as well as other Council actions that address 

this issue. I thank you for the time, and yield back, Mr. Chairman. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Huffman follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HON. JARED HUFFMAN, RANKING MEMBER, 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON WATER, POWER AND OCEANS

On the list of topics that most members of this committee are not particularly 

excited to discuss, Gulf of Mexico red snapper has to be near the top—perhaps 

second only to California water. So I understand what Congressman Graves is up 

against, and I applaud him for taking on such a politically challenging problem. 

I also appreciate his willingness to come to me before the hearing to discuss his 

legislation and offer to work across the aisle to address our concerns. The strong 

opposition that recreational charter captains, commercial fishermen, seafood processors, and the restaurant industry have voiced to H.R. 3094 signals to me that this 

bill in its current form is not the solution, but an open and honest dialog makes 

it more likely that we can reach one down the road. 

While this may seem like a hyper-regional issue, the red snapper debate actually 

has implications that reach far beyond the Gulf of Mexico to consumers throughout 

the United States who enjoy wild, sustainable Gulf seafood. Just as importantly, it 

raises questions about whether we should throw back the effective, scientifically 

sound, and regionally-based system of fisheries management established under the 

Magnuson-Stevens Act, or keep it, and allow it to continue rebuilding fisheries like 

red snapper which have been decimated by overfishing in the past. 

Some have argued that since we recently passed legislation to permanently remove the West Coast Dungeness crab fishery from Federal management, it is only 

fair to do the same for red snapper. But red snapper and Dungeness crab are a lot 

like apples and oranges: you can eat both, but they are very different. Even when 

you put aside the significant disparities in stock health, fishing pressure, and user 

conflict, it is impossible to ignore the fact that the Tri-State Dungeness Crab Management Agreement is the result of years of negotiations that took place with all 

fishery stakeholders at the table. Further, in the case of Dungeness crab, the Pacific 

Fishery Management Council can step in at any point and establish a Fishery 

Management Plan that would supersede the plan put forth by the states, if it elects 

to do so. 

The current draft of H.R. 3094, on the other hand, was not developed with input 

from all fishing sectors with an interest in red snapper, and is not supported by 

commercial and charter fleets that account for more than two-thirds of red snapper 

harvest. These fleets, and the other tourism and seafood industry businesses they 

support, depend on healthy stocks and stable, predictable management. Right now 

6 

they have both, but it is difficult to see how they would have either under a state 

plan lacking safeguards to prevent overfishing and massive resource reallocation. 

I believe that a path to increased state autonomy in managing the recreational 

side of the red snapper fishery is possible. But that path should not be one that 

picks winners and losers, and stacks the deck against people who make their living 

on the water and who have taken significant steps toward making their fishing operations sustainable and accountable. Instead, it should incorporate the views of private boat anglers, charter boat captains, commercial fishermen, seafood processors, 

the restaurant and tourism industries, and the conservation community. 

I look forward to hearing from some of those voices today, and I view this hearing 

as the beginning of a discussion on how we allow greater access to the red snapper 

fishery while ensuring that this important—and still overfished—stock continues to 

rebuild. I am also aware that the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council is 

beginning similar discussions, and considering using the authority it already has 

under the Magnuson Act to develop a regional management plan for red snapper. 

I hope Mr. Risenhoover can give us an update on the status of that process, as well 

as on other Council actions to address this issue. 

I yield back. 

Dr. FLEMING. The gentleman yields back. I thank the Ranking 

Member. 

At this time I would like to ask unanimous consent that Mr. 

Scott sit in with us today. 

[No response.] 

Dr. FLEMING. Hearing no objection, so ordered. 

The Chairman now yields to the Vice Chair, Dr. Gosar, for his 

statement. 

STATEMENT OF THE HON. PAUL A. GOSAR, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ARIZONA 

Dr. GOSAR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman; and thank you for holding 

today’s hearing. 

Although Arizona is not known as being the fishing capital of the 

world—— 

[Laughter.] 

Dr. GOSAR [continuing]. We do have world-class fisheries, thanks 

to hatcheries and cold water stored behind our dams. Arizona also 

has an excellent Department of Game and Fish to manage those 

fisheries and wildlife for current and future generations of sportsmen and women. 

State and local expertise is paramount when it comes to understanding how management of our resources impacts those on the 

ground or in the water. Generally, these management entities are 

closer to those affected, understand the resources, and can make 

real-time, informed decisions better than a Federal desk jockey. 

Today’s legislation is based on the premise of state expertise and 

management. The fisheries managers in these five Gulf states have 

a firsthand understanding of the red snapper resource, and are 

asking to take over what is now a Federal responsibility. I generally support this concept, and voted for it earlier this year, as a 

way to move a resolution forward. But there are still some 

questions. 

For example: why should Arizonans continue to pay for a management scheme that would be turned over to the states? In addition, 22 congressional districts line the Gulf Coast, but we need to 

ensure that the remaining 413 other congressional districts who 

7 

rely on Gulf seafood availability are not negatively impacted by 

this bill. 

These are just some of the questions that I hope are answered 

today and in the forthcoming weeks. I look forward to working with 

my colleagues on this well-intentioned proposal, and I yield back 

the balance of my time, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Gosar follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HON. PAUL GOSAR, VICE-CHAIR, SUBCOMMITTEE ON

WATER, POWER AND OCEANS

Thank you for holding today’s hearing. 

Although Arizona is not known as being the fishing capital of the world, we do 

have world class trout fisheries thanks to hatcheries and the cold water stored behind our dams. Arizona also has an excellent Department of Game and Fish to manage these fisheries and wildlife for current and future generations of sportsmen and 

women. State and local expertise is paramount when it comes to understanding how management of our resources impacts those on the ground or in the water. Generally, 

these management entities are closer to those affected, understand the resources 

and can make real-time and informed decisions better than a Federal desk jockey. 

Today’s legislation is based on the premise of state expertise and management. 

The fisheries managers in the five Gulf states have a firsthand understanding of 

the red snapper resource and are asking to take over what is now a Federal 

responsibility. 

I generally support this concept and voted for it earlier this year as a way to move 

a resolution forward, but there are still some questions. For example, why should 

Arizonans continue to pay for a management scheme which would be turned over 

to the states? In addition, 22 congressional districts line the Gulf Coast, but we need 

to ensure that the remaining 413 other congressional districts who rely on Gulf seafood availability are not negatively impacted by this bill. 

These are questions that I hope are answered today and in the forthcoming 

weeks. I look forward to working with my colleagues on this well-intentioned 

proposal and yield back my time. 

Dr. FLEMING. The gentleman yields back. 

The Chair now recognizes the bill’s sponsor, Mr. Graves, for his 

statement. 

STATEMENT OF THE HON. GARRET GRAVES, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF LOUISIANA 

Mr. GRAVES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I really want to get into 

the hearing, but will just briefly say that when I was growing up, 

access to the red snapper fishery was significantly different than 

it is today. I think both of you indicated in your opening statements that you recognize that there are problems with the current 

management regime. 

Again, growing up, you virtually had access, from a recreational 

perspective, to the red snapper fishery year-round; whereas, as I 

think most of you know, last year it was relegated to 9 days; this 

year, relegated to 10 days of access. 

There are fundamental problems with the current management 

regime, access, and the prevention of folks to access the fishery, 

but, importantly, to ensure that the access on both the commercial 

and also on the charter side is based upon proper management. 

Louisiana is known as a sportsman’s paradise. There is no one 

here who, I think, has a desire to have the Gulf of Mexico red snapper, or anything else, be overfished. There have been suggestions 

that the bill is designed to work in the favor of the recreational 

8 

industry to the detriment of the commercial side, or charter, or 

otherwise. It is simply not true. 

As a matter of fact, Mr. Huffman—and I want to thank you for 

your opening comments—I want it to be known that I repeatedly 

reached out to folks on the other side of this and asked for their 

input in the bill, as we were drafting it, and received nothing. 

I also think it is important to make note, and want to be fair, 

that Stan Harris of the Louisiana Restaurant Association has been 

in touch with me, as well as some folks in the recreational industry, within the last few months. There have been, from what I appreciate, to be some constructive dialog; but I think it is important 

to note that we did reach out and tried to find some type of middle 

ground. 

There have been suggestions, again, that the bill is going to work 

to the detriment of the commercial side. I am not sure where that 

is coming from. As a matter of fact, there were safeguards only put 

in on the commercial side. If they are not the right safeguards, 

then perhaps the industry engaging could have provided us and informed us of some ideas that would have been more helpful, as opposed to me sitting in a vacuum, trying to come up with good ideas, 

trying to protect the industry. 

There have been suggestions that the management regime contemplated in the bill would only work to reduce the commercial 

side. I also want to be clear there. There is absolutely nothing in 

the bill that suggests that. Just as the access for any side could potentially be managed down, based upon the informational science, 

it could also go up. 

The problem that we see right now is that the science is far less 

than accurate. As the Chairman noted, the LA Creel study that 

Secretary Barham and his folks have been working on, has much 

better science, as was acknowledged in previous hearings in this 

committee, than any other science that the Feds are putting 

together. 

There was a study that was recently released that indicated that 

82 percent of private boat owners in the Gulf of Mexico support the 

idea of state-based management, and 72 percent of the federallylicensed charter boat captains also support that. I want to be clear 

on that, because there has been a lot of distorted information which 

I cannot wait to set the record straight here today. Seventy-two 

percent of the federally-licensed charter boat captains, according to 

this survey, also support state-based management. 

Last, I will say this. The five Gulf of Mexico states agree upon 

very little. We could not even sit Secretary Wiley and Secretary 

Barham next to each other. 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. GRAVES. But the five Gulf states came together, recognizing 

there was a problem here. They came together and proposed a solution. It has been out there since March. I have not seen—again, 

this has been out there since March. Our bill was first being discussed prior to that. I have not seen any alternative put forth that 

would recommend a better approach, while everyone here recognizes that there are fundamental problems with the management 

structure. 

9 

So, I look forward to setting the record straight, Mr. Chairman, 

on a number of these issues as we go forward, and very much look 

forward to engaging some of the witnesses. 

I need to introduce—I don’t know if I should—can I introduce 

Secretary Barham now, or should I wait? 

Dr. FLEMING. Sure, go ahead. 

Mr. GRAVES. OK. I just want to make note that Secretary 

Barham and I had the chance to work together for a number of 

years. He is a fantastic man, although you will note from his accent 

that he is actually a Yankee from north Louisiana. 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. GRAVES. Mr. Chairman, I would urge that you consider, once 

you hear this man speak—— 

Dr. FLEMING. Coming from north Louisiana, I take issue with 

that. 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. GRAVES. So there are a couple of you all here. Once you hear 

him speak, though, I think that perhaps you should reconsider the 

5-minute rule, and instead allow people to speak based upon the 

number of words they can get out, because Secretary Barham takes 

about three times as long to say things as other people. So, I think 

you might want to consider raising his time to 15 minutes, as 

opposed to the 5. 

But a fantastic man, and looking very forward to all of your 

testimony. Thank you. 

Dr. FLEMING. The gentleman yields back. And at this time the 

Chair would like to introduce our first panel of witnesses. 

Mr. Robert Barham, Secretary, Louisiana Department of Wildlife 

and Fisheries from Baton Rouge; Mr. Alan Risenhoover—did I say 

that correctly?—Director of the Office of Sustainable Fisheries for 

NOAA from Silver Spring, Maryland; Mr. Nick Wiley, Executive 

Director of the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission 

from Tallahassee, Florida. 

Let me remind witnesses that, under our Committee Rules, you 

must limit your statements to 5 minutes. The light system, which 

I think most of you are familiar with, is that you will be under a 

green light for 4 minutes. For the last minute, you will be under 

a yellow light, the caution light. When it hits red, we ask you to 

quickly conclude. I promise you every word in your statement, even 

if it has 10,000 words, will be entered into the record. So we will 

get everything that you have to tell us today. 

The Chair now recognizes Mr. Barham, Secretary, Louisiana 

Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, to testify for 5 minutes, sir. 

Mr. Barham, do you have your microphone on? Is it on? 

Mr. BARHAM. Yes. 

Dr. FLEMING. Be sure it is pulled closer to you. Yes, there you 

go. It is hard to hear you if your mouth is not close to the tip of 

the microphone—— 

Mr. BARHAM. OK. 

Dr. FLEMING. Very good. Much better. 

10 

STATEMENT OF ROBERT BARHAM, SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT 

OF WILDLIFE AND FISHERIES, STATE OF LOUISIANA, BATON 

ROUGE, LOUISIANA 

Mr. BARHAM. Mr. Chairman, it is an honor for me to be here, and 

I will try to talk more rapidly. My colleague, Nick Wiley, from 

Florida, is here, and we are in support of H.R. 3094. Nick is not 

sitting beside me because he is mad at me. He has not gotten over 

the Florida game with LSU last weekend, and he wants to sit as 

far away as he can. 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. BARHAM. Mr. Chairman, we are here because we can do a 

better job. The fisheries management by the Federal Government 

is not a good one, especially as it relates to red snapper in the Gulf. 

It has been stated as to fishing days, we have been cut down now 

to 10 days. That is really, Mr. Chairman, a ridiculous proposal. 

In assessing a resource like the snapper, it is about having the 

correct numbers, and they are just not getting those numbers. They 

do not have a protocol and a system where they are properly assessing the population in the Gulf or the locations of those populations. These are not migratory fish, they are territorial fish. We 

know where they are. 

We put in, as they mentioned, the LA Creel program, where we 

scan the state and pick out all the big docks where recreational 

fishermen come in, and we literally send biologists to every one of 

them during the snapper season to count the fish. 

We also pull the bone behind the brain of a fish, where we can 

age those fish. The Feds are not doing that, so we have information 

not only as to population, but weights, sizes, and numbers. 

We are certainly more responsive to changes in that population, 

and would react quicker than the Federal Government. The Gulf 

Council meets five times a year. Our Commission meets every 

month. And I would have the authority within 72 hours to close a 

fishery, and it would be in our interest. We are not about to damage those fish. 

I would like to make a point in response to the Congressman who 

said that the charter-for-hire folks are against this. That is not so 

in Louisiana. We polled every one of our charter captains and got 

a response from nearly two-thirds of them. Of those that responded, over 70 percent are in favor. They know we will do a better job in Louisiana. 

So, as we look at it, we also are and want to be aware of the opposition. I think the opposition is fearful of any change. It would 

be counterproductive for me to damage one sector of my fisheries 

in Louisiana in favor of another one. Commercial fishing in 

Louisiana is a huge industry, and a very successful one. 

Louisiana is second only to Alaska in the production of commercial fish. Of the 1.4 billion pounds of commercial fish produced in 

the Gulf, Louisiana produces over a billion pounds of that 

1.4 billion. We have over 30,000 jobs of people who depend on the 

commercial industry. If I did something to damage that industry, 

I would be gone very quickly. It is never my intention. I think the 

commercial folks will be better off if I am doing the assessment, because we will do a better job of telling what those stocks are. 

11 

We will move forward with managing the fisheries. We will provide the information. Again, I would say to you that we will do a 

better job. I am available for any questions that you might have 

today. 

I would add one comment to the Congressman from Arizona. I 

appreciate what you say about Arizona being nervous about sending their money to Louisiana. If that turns out to be the stumbling 

block to this bill passing, do not send me a dime. Just give me the 

authority to manage those fisheries. I will do a better job. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Barham follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF ROBERT BARHAM, SECRETARY, LOUISIANA DEPARTMENT OF

WILDLIFE AND FISHERIES

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to speak on behalf of Louisiana’s 

fishing community before the U.S. House of Representatives’ Committee on Natural 

Resources, Subcommittee on Water, Power and Oceans to present information on 

H.R. 3094, the Gulf States Red Snapper Management Authority Act. 

Red snapper is an iconic American fish—it is well-known and appreciated by both 

residents and visitors of Louisiana and the other Gulf states, whether it is on a diner’s plate at one of our fine restaurants or on the end of an angler’s line. Both commercial and recreational fisheries for red snapper are extremely important to our 

economy and way of life. We should take great care in managing these fisheries for 

the benefit of all users. We should strive to have sound data to guide our management decisions and seek out solutions to ensure our fisheries are ecologically and 

economically sustainable. 

As such, we are especially troubled with the current management of Gulf red 

snapper, namely management of the recreational fishery, as it continues to face 

challenges due to inadequate data and an inflexible, unresponsive management 

framework. H.R. 3094 would address these challenges. Along with our colleagues in 

Texas, Mississippi, Alabama, and Florida, the Louisiana Department of Wildlife and 

Fisheries (LDWF) is confident the five Gulf states have the necessary tools to provide the data needed to better manage Gulf red snapper fisheries. We are able to 

be more receptive and responsive to the wants and needs of all of our constituents 

while still addressing Gulf-wide conservation goals. 

There are several misconceptions about the intentions and impacts of H.R. 3094 

that I would like to address. First of all, H.R. 3094 is by no means an attempt to 

change or eliminate the commercial red snapper fishery in the Gulf in favor of the 

recreational fishery. Again, both commercial and recreational fisheries are vital to 

the Gulf’s economy and way of life. Together, the Gulf states’ commercial fisheries 

are the 2nd largest and 2nd most valuable fisheries in the United States after 

Alaska, producing nearly 1.4 billion pounds and $746 million of seafood and supporting more than 75,000 jobs in 2012. Of this, Louisiana accounts for nearly 

1 billion pounds and $300 million of seafood. Our commercial fisheries are the 2nd 

largest and 4th most valuable in the United States and support more than 30,000 

jobs. More than 3 million recreational fishermen fish in the Gulf every year, providing a multi-billion dollar economic impact. In Louisiana alone, close to 900,000 

recreational fishermen fish our waters, with a couple billion dollar economic impact. 

(All data is NOAA Fisheries 2012 data, the most recent year for which both landings and economic data are available.) 

The primary purpose of H.R. 3094 is to fix how the recreational red snapper fishery is managed. The current ‘‘one-size-fits-all’’ management approach works fairly 

well for the commercial fishery but is impractical for the diverse recreational fishery. The goal of H.R. 3094 is to ensure fair and equitable access to the red snapper 

resource and create a management system that is responsive to all stakeholders, 

both commercial and recreational. H.R. 3094 would improve access for the recreational fishery while preserving a viable commercial fishery. In fact, H.R. 3094 

locks in the current commercial management system, leaves the commercial quota 

unchanged for at least 3 years, and requires the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council (Gulf Council) to approve any significant reduction to the commercial 

quota thereafter. 

The state-based management of Federal species proposed by H.R. 3094 is not unprecedented under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management 

Act (MSA). Similar management structures have already been implemented to varying degrees in fisheries from the East Coast to Alaska. H.R. 3094 would require the 

Gulf states’ fishery management plans to be as consistent with the MSA’s standards 

12 

and requirements as possible. In fact, H.R. 3094 has the same goals as Federal 

management, but the means to reach those goals recognize that one size does not 

fit all. There are regional differences both in populations of snapper and in fisheries 

(local tradition, practice, etc.). H.R. 3094 would allow the Gulf states the flexibility 

to manage the fisheries in their waters in different ways, which is impossible under 

the current management system. 

H.R. 3094 would ensure accountability in the recreational red snapper fishery. In 

the past, recreational fishermen have exceeded their fishing quotas despite following 

seasons and other regulations designed to prevent overfishing. Quota overages are 

due to failure of recreational data collection and inflexible fishery management. 

H.R. 3094 would address these issues. Among other things, H.R. 3094 calls for 

more precise and timely recreational data collection, five independent and ongoing 

evaluations of the fishery every year (rather than treating red snapper as one stock, 

fished one way), quotas based on stock assessments, and accountability measures 

to ensure states respond immediately to overfishing (for example, closing the fishery 

in a non-compliant state). 

The Gulf states have already taken action to improve recreational data collection 

and are using better data to inform management, and anglers have supported these 

efforts. In Louisiana, anglers supported a license fee increase to fund a new and improved recreational landings data collection program (LA Creel). Near-real-time 

data from LA Creel has allowed Louisiana to extend the state’s recreational red 

snapper season by hundreds of days and still not exceed fishing quotas, creating a 

win-win situation for all—an accountable fishery, flexible and responsible management of seasons, and increased fishing opportunities. 

Moving management from the Gulf Council’s 17 members to the five state directors would make managers more accessible and management more efficient. 

Through H.R. 3094, fishermen and other stakeholders would have a major role in 

developing specific management strategies through each state’s existing legislative 

and regulatory processes, commission meetings, various committees and task forces, 

public outreach meetings, and surveys. H.R. 3094 would make it easier for the public to participate in the management process through more local and more convenient outlets. In addition, state managers can be more responsive to the needs of the 

resource and the users of the resource. The Gulf Council only meets five times a 

year and must work through an extremely slow Federal management process. In 

Louisiana, our Wildlife and Fisheries Commission meets once a month; the 

Secretary of LDWF is able to enact emergency management measures within 72 

hours. 

States should be allowed to manage the fisheries off their coast in a manner that 

best benefits the fishery and their state’s fishermen, and the Gulf states are fully 

capable of doing so. H.R. 3094 acknowledges the Gulf states’ abilities to responsibly 

manage this important fishery. The Gulf states already are responsible for numerous major commercial and recreational fisheries and have proven themselves effective stewards of both state- and federally-managed species. We cooperatively share 

management for several species with other states and meet regularly through the 

Gulf States Marine Fisheries Commission to discuss issues and standardize data. 

We have a long track record of no overfished stocks and no overfishing, including 

several species such as black drum, catfish, sheepshead, and spotted seatrout which 

all support major commercial and recreational fisheries. 

In closing, we would like Congress to consider our concerns and support this viable alternative to the current management framework, removing red snapper from 

Federal authority and placing responsibility for this valuable species in the capable 

hands of the Gulf states’ marine fisheries authorities. We have mutually agreed 

upon and unanimously support H.R. 3094. 

Dr. FLEMING. Thank you, Mr. Barham. 

The Chair now recognizes Mr. Alan Risenhoover, Director of the 

Office of Sustainable Fisheries at NOAA, to testify. You have 5 

minutes, sir. 

STATEMENT OF ALAN RISENHOOVER, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF 

SUSTAINABLE FISHERIES, NOAA NATIONAL MARINE 

FISHERIES SERVICE, SILVER SPRING, MARYLAND 

Mr. RISENHOOVER. Good afternoon, Chairman Fleming, Ranking 

Member Huffman, and members of the subcommittee. 

13 

Dr. FLEMING. I think we have the same problem with the 

microphone. Make sure—very good. 

Mr. RISENHOOVER. My name is Alan Risenhoover, and I am the 

Director of NOAA Fisheries Office of Sustainable Fisheries. 

The Administration does not have an official position on 

H.R. 3094. I do want to talk about some of the underlying issues, 

potential solutions, and how NOAA Fisheries and the Gulf Councils 

are working with the states to improve red snapper management. 

The health of the Gulf of Mexico red snapper fishery has been 

a concern for decades. The first rebuilding plan, established in 

1990, set a date of ending overfishing by 2010 and rebuilding the 

population by 2032. Assessment results in 2009, 2013, and 2015 

confirmed that we have ended overfishing, but the stock remains 

overfished. 

Many fishermen echoed the assessment findings, saying they are 

seeing more and larger red snapper. Data indicates that catches 

are increasing both closer to shore and along the west coast of 

Florida, and as far south as the Florida Keys. 

As a result of this success, the 2015 quota was set at a historically high level of 14.3 million pounds—over 3 million pounds higher than the 2014 quota. The red snapper biomass is estimated at 

60 million metric tons, more than half of the final rebuilding 

target. 

While these are significant improvements, rebuilding is not yet 

complete. It is critically important that we rebuild the older age 

classes because they produce more eggs and spawn more frequently 

than younger fish. Even though fishermen, state and Federal fishery managers, and scientists all agree that the population is making a remarkable recovery, there is also widespread agreement that 

there are real challenges ensuring that the rebuilding benefits are 

fairly and equitably distributed among all user groups. 

The commercial sector is managed through a successful individual fishing quota program. The average ex-vessel value of those 

fish are 44 percent higher than when that program began. Red 

snapper are now harvested year-round in the Gulf. 

However, higher catch rates, larger fish, and longer state seasons 

are causing the recreational sector to reach its catch limits more 

quickly. As a result, higher quotas have not increased fishing days 

for both private anglers and the for-hire fleet in Federal water. Because of these short seasons, the Gulf Council is considering options to provide the states and the recreational community greater 

flexibility, while still meeting Gulf-wide conservation goals. 

The Council recently approved an amendment which, if implemented, will also increase the portion of the quota allocated to the 

recreational sector from 49 percent upwards to 51.5 percent. All 

Gulf states have expressed support for regional management, but 

they have had some difficulty coming to an agreement on a fair and 

equitable methodology for allocating the recreational quota among 

the states. As a result, the Council has not yet finalized a management strategy. 

Recently, though, the Council did identify a state-specific methodology which divides the quota among the states. The Council is 

currently taking comment on that through a series of nine public 

hearings throughout the Gulf. While NOAA Fisheries has not 

14 

taken a final position on the Council’s proposal, we support 

regional management in concept as a way to resolve current challenges. It would stabilize the recreational sector. 

We believe the best way to develop an effective regional management strategy that withstands the tests of time and is adaptive is 

through the Council process. The Magnuson-Stevens Act established a robust process to ensure fishery management decisions are 

developed from the bottom up, are stakeholder-based, transparent, 

and consistent with all applicable law. 

We must also continue our work with the states to develop data 

collection methods that we all agree are appropriate and produce 

reliable data. Pilot studies are ongoing in several states at this 

time, and our goal remains a standardized approach and one set 

of future catch estimates. 

In conclusion, we have made great progress in rebuilding the 

Gulf of Mexico red snapper population. We must now work to ensure that all aspects of the fishery are able to meet the needs and 

demands of both current and future generations. 

Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. I am available to 

answer any questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Risenhoover follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF ALAN RISENHOOVER, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF SUSTAINABLE

FISHERIES, NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE, NATIONAL OCEANIC AND

ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

INTRODUCTION

Good morning Chairman and members of the subcommittee. I appreciate the 

opportunity to speak with you today about red snapper management in the Gulf of 

Mexico. My name is Alan Risenhoover and I am the director of the Office of Sustainable Fisheries at the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) within the National 

Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) of the U.S. Department of 

Commerce (DOC). From daily weather forecasts, severe storm warnings, and climate 

monitoring to fishery management, coastal restoration, and supporting marine commerce, NOAA’s products and services support economic vitality and affect more than 

one-third of America’s gross domestic product. NOAA’s dedicated scientists use cutting-edge research and high-tech instrumentation to provide citizens, planners, 

emergency managers, and other decisionmakers with reliable information they need 

when they need it. 

Today, I will describe the current status of red snapper in the Gulf of Mexico and 

the benefits fishermen and fishing communities are realizing from rebuilding efforts, 

as well as the ongoing challenges we face in ensuring those benefits are equitably 

distributed between all user groups. Also, I will describe the status of the Gulf of 

Mexico Fishery Management Council’s (Gulf Council) work to develop a regional 

management strategy for the recreational sector and NMFS’ views on the hallmarks 

of a successful regional management strategy. 

HISTORICAL POPULATION TRENDS

Fishermen have harvested red snapper from the Gulf of Mexico since the mid1800s, more than a century before the first Federal fishery management measures 

were established in 1984. Currently, this species is one of the most popular and 

studied in the Gulf of Mexico, and NMFS has conducted 10 population assessments 

since the late 1980s. The first assessment, conducted in 1988, concluded the population was overfished and undergoing overfishing, meaning there were too few fish 

in the water to maximize catches over the long term and fish continued to be removed from the population at too high a rate. Six assessments conducted in the 

1990s confirmed that conclusion, suggesting conservation measures such as 

minimum size limits, commercial trip limits, and daily recreational bag limits implemented to end overfishing and rebuild the population, as required by the MagnusonStevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act; 

P.L. 94–265) were not sufficient. A congressionally-mandated independent peer 

review of the scientific and management basis for red snapper management, 

completed in 1997, also echoed these findings. 

15 

STATUS OF REBUILDING EFFORTS

The Gulf Council implemented the first red snapper rebuilding plan in 1990, but 

has modified the rebuilding schedule and goals several times in response to new scientific information. A rebuilding plan is a strategy used to manage catch levels over 

a specified time period so that an overfished population can increase in size to a 

target level. 

The current red snapper rebuilding plan was designed to phase out overfishing 

between 2009 and 2010 and rebuild the population by 2032. The time frame to rebuild overfished populations varies depending on the status and biology of the overfished species. The red snapper rebuilding schedule is lengthy because red snapper 

is a long-lived species, reaching more than 50 years of age, and was severely 

overfished for many decades. 

Substantial changes to the plan, as implemented in 2007, were informed by a 

2005 population assessment and followed a court ruling on a lawsuit filed by the 

Coastal Conservation Association, Ocean Conservancy, and Gulf Restoration 

Network. The court found previous rebuilding measures to be insufficient to rebuild 

the population on schedule. These changes reduced the combined (commercial and 

recreational) red snapper catch limit by 45 percent from 9.12 million pounds to 

5.0 million pounds; reduced the recreational bag limit from four to two fish to slow 

the rate of catch; reduced the commercial minimum size limit from 15 inches total 

length to 13 inches total length to reduce regulatory discards in that fishery; and 

specified a maximum level for shrimp fishing effort which, if exceeded, would trigger 

area closures to minimize the incidental take of red snapper in shrimp trawls. 

Also in 2007, the commercial red snapper sector moved to an individual fishing 

quota program (IFQ), which allocates participating fishermen a percentage of the 

commercial annual catch limit based on their landings history. The IFQ program 

is intended and has been demonstrated to better align the capacity of the fleet with 

the commercial catch limit, to mitigate short fishing seasons, improve safety at sea 

and increase the profitability of the commercial red snapper sector. Participation in 

the commercial red snapper fishery, measured by the number of accounts holding 

red snapper IFQ shares at the end of 2014, has declined by about 32 percent since 

the program was implemented. However, the average ex-vessel price of red snapper 

in 2014 was 44 percent higher than the price prior to instituting the IFQ (inflation 

adjusted, 2002–2006). Also, IFQ participants are now targeting red snapper year 

round, and the fishery is reportedly safer than it used to be when fishermen were 

required to compete for the catch during very limited season openings. 

There is clear evidence the rebuilding measures implemented in 2007 are paying 

off. The 2009 assessment update, 2013 assessment, and 2015 assessment update all 

confirm we ended overfishing and there are more red snapper in the Gulf of Mexico 

today than in decades. According to the 2015 assessment update, the total biomass 

of the population has more than doubled in the last 5 years. The biomass of the 

Gulf of Mexico red snapper population is estimated to have reached 60 million metric tons in 2014, which is more than half of the rebuilding target (Figure 1). 

Figure 1. Historical and Projected Trends in Gulf of Mexico Red Snapper Biomass 

16 

Many Gulf of Mexico fishermen echo the assessment findings, saying they are seeing more and larger red snapper than they have seen in their lifetime. The 2015 

recreational red snapper quota was set at the highest level in the history of managing the red snapper fishery (30 percent greater than the next highest quota level 

on record). As the population rebuilds, fish are getting larger with each fish weighing more than twice as much as before. Also, fishermen on the west coast of Florida 

now have new opportunities to target this popular species as the population expands 

back to its historic range. After decades of overfishing, the population was concentrated in offshore waters of the northern Gulf of Mexico. Now, catch data indicate red snapper landings are increasing both closer to shore and along the west 

coast of Florida, with some fishermen reporting landings as far south as the Florida 

Keys. 

Despite these remarkable improvements, the current assessment indicates rebuilding is not yet complete because the overall biomass and reproductive potential 

of the red snapper population have not yet reached the rebuilding target. Management measures and strong year-classes of young fish entering the fishery in recent 

years have significantly improved the status of the population. However, because 

red snapper are long-lived, it takes a long time to rebuild the older age classes in 

the population. These older fish are important because they produce more eggs and 

spawn more frequently than younger fish. 

MANAGEMENT CHALLENGES

While fishermen, fishery managers and scientists all agree the red snapper population is making a remarkable recovery, there is also widespread agreement there 

are real challenges in the fishery in terms of ensuring rebuilding benefits are fairly 

and equitably distributed among all user groups. 

NMFS has increased the combined (commercial and recreational) catch limit from 

5 million pounds to 14.3 million pounds since overfishing ended in 2009 and the 

2015 catch limit was set at the highest level ever specified for this fishery. The commercial sector is flourishing at that limit under the IFQ program. Unfortunately, 

the recreational sector is not sharing the same benefits of stock recovery under the 

current management regime. 

Higher catch rates and larger fish, while improving recreational fishing experiences and opportunities, are causing the recreational sector to reach its catch limit 

much more quickly. As a result, higher catch limits have not translated into increased fishing days for recreational fishermen. The recreational red snapper catch 

limit increased by 120 percent from 2008–2014 compared to a 623 percent increase 

in recreational landings per day during that same time period. As a result, the recreational season has been progressively shortened to prevent catch limit overages, 

in compliance with the Magnuson-Stevens Act. 

Recreational fishermen are understandably frustrated by this trend, which has 

been exacerbated by state jurisdictional and regulatory inconsistencies. The Federal 

recreational fishing season length is further reduced when Gulf Coast states implement less restrictive red snapper regulations in state waters because catches from 

both state and Federal waters must be counted against the catch limit. Such state 

actions also create inequities because not all fishermen benefit equally from less restrictive state water regulations. 

In response, the Gulf Council set the 2014 and 2015 recreational red snapper 

catch targets 20 percent below the limit to reduce the likelihood of an overage in 

those years. This action, along with extended state-water fishing seasons and the 

impacts of litigation in 2014 over recreational harvests, effectively reduced the 2014 

and 2015 Federal recreational red snapper fishing seasons for anglers fishing from 

private vessels to 9 days and 10 days, respectively. Recreational catches in 2014 

were below the quota for the first time in many years, and preliminary data indicate 

catches will be below the quota again this year. 

MANAGEMENT OPTIONS

Last year, the Gulf Council approved a new fishery management plan amendment 

which enables them to manage the private and federally-permitted for-hire components of the recreational red snapper sector for different objectives for a 3-year 

period. For-hire fishermen are working with the Gulf Council to explore new tools 

to increase their catch accounting, stabilize their business operations, and improve 

their economic viability. However, developing solutions for the open access, private 

angler component of the recreational sector is more challenging and will require a 

broad shared vision of expectations and needs. 

The Gulf Council is actively working through its state agency representatives, 

fishermen and other stakeholders to identify shared goals and develop management 

17 

options that more equitably distribute rebuilding benefits. The Council recently approved a new fishery management plan amendment which, if implemented, will increase the portion of the red snapper quota allocated to the recreational sector from 

49 percent to 51.5 percent. Also, the Council continues to develop a regional management strategy, which would provide the states greater flexibility to tailor 

recreational red snapper management to local needs and objectives while meeting 

Gulf-wide conservation goals. 

All Gulf Coast states have expressed some form of support for a regional management strategy, but have had some difficulty coming to agreement on a fair and equitable methodology for allocating the recreational red snapper quota among the 

states and on whether and how to incorporate the for-hire sector into a regional 

management program. As a result, the Gulf Council has not yet finalized a specific 

regional management strategy for review and implementation by the Secretary of 

Commerce. However, the Gulf Council has identified a preliminary preferred statespecific allocation methodology, which divides the recreational red snapper quota 

among the states based on landings trends over a long time series and in recent 

years, giving equal weight to each. The Council has scheduled a series of public 

hearings throughout the Gulf of Mexico on the current proposed strategy in October 

and November 2015. NMFS is committed to continuing to support the Gulf Council’s 

efforts to finalize this plan over the next year. 

NMFS supports regional management in concept as a way to resolve the current 

challenges created by inconsistent state jurisdictions and regulations, stabilize the 

recreational sector, and better manage the expectations of for-hire fishermen and 

private anglers. Interstate management challenges are not unique to the Gulf of 

Mexico. In fact, they are present in every region where major fisheries span multiple state jurisdictions. Such challenges have been addressed in different regions 

in different ways; for example, through legislation authorizing the Atlantic States 

Marine Fisheries Commission as a coordinating body on the U.S. East Coast. While 

there are any number of models that may work, each requires the collective involvement and support of the states, and full accountability to comply with agreed upon 

management strategies. 

NMFS believes the hallmarks of a successful regional management strategy for 

red snapper include: 

• Fair and equitable allocations among all of the states and user groups; 

• Measures reasonably calculated to promote conservation; 

• Sound, science-based decisionmaking that accounts for all sources of fishing 

mortality, recognizing that limiting shrimp trawl bycatch of red snapper is a 

critical component of the red snapper rebuilding plan; 

• Coordinated data collection systems, which provide consistent, reliable data; 

and 

• Catch accountability, including mechanisms to prevent and respond to quota 

overages. 

H.R. 3094—GULF STATES RED SNAPPER MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY ACT

H.R. 3094 contains a provision similar to Section 13(f) of H.R. 1335, the 

Strengthening Fishing Communities and Increasing Flexibility in Fisheries Management Act. The Administration, in its Statement of Administration Policy dated May 

19, 2015, objected to Section 13(f)—State Fisheries Management in the Gulf of 

Mexico with respect to red snapper. Section 13(f) would severely undermine the authority of the Gulf Council by extending Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama state 

jurisdiction over the recreational red snapper fishery to 9 miles in the Gulf of 

Mexico. NMFS does not support extending state management out to 9 miles. 

Extending the jurisdictions of those states would increase the proportion of the total 

recreational red snapper catch taken under state management and could substantially reduce or even eliminate the Federal recreational red snapper season in those 

years when states implemented less restrictive regulations in state waters. Such action could lead to overfishing, compromising the industry’s hard earned conservation 

achievements, and potentially require NMFS to reduce the commercial quota to ensure the long-term sustainability of this Gulf-wide resource. 

NMFS supports regional management as a way to resolve the current challenges 

faced by the Gulf states and the red snapper fishery. But we continue to believe 

the best way to develop an effective regional management strategy that withstands 

the test of time is through the Council process. The Magnuson-Stevens Act established that process to ensure fishery management decisions are developed from the 

bottom up, stakeholder-based, transparent, and consistent with all applicable law. 

18 

We believe it is a good process for working through the types of difficult decisions 

that regional management requires. 

CONCLUSION

We have made great progress toward rebuilding the Gulf of Mexico red snapper 

population. But this progress has not come easily, nor will it be sustained without 

continued attention. This is a critical time in the history of red snapper management, and we must ensure the fishery is able to meet the needs of both current and 

future generations. We must continue the achievements we have gained in the commercial fishery while improving stability, accountability, and predictability in the 

recreational fishery. 

We must not lose sight of the fact that the current management challenges are 

a function of success. The red snapper population is rebuilding and that is a good 

thing. Now we need to make some reasoned, thoughtful decisions about how to best 

distribute the hard-earned benefits provided by this growing population. 

Gulf of Mexico fishermen and fishing communities sacrificed a great deal to get 

us here. It is critical that all involved remain engaged and work together to find 

a way forward in the cooperative spirit that the regional fishery management 

council process promotes. 

Thank you again for the opportunity to discuss Gulf of Mexico red snapper 

management. I am available to answer any questions you may have. 

Dr. FLEMING. Thank you, Mr. Risenhoover. 

Next the Chair recognizes Mr. Nick Wiley, Executive Director of 

the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission for 

5 minutes. Be sure that you are close to the microphone. 

STATEMENT OF NICK WILEY, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, FLORIDA 

FISH AND WILDLIFE CONSERVATION COMMISSION, 

TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA 

Mr. WILEY. Yes, sir. Thank you, Chairman Fleming, Ranking 

Member Huffman, and members of this subcommittee. I appreciate 

the invitation to testify, and we do support this legislation. 

Red snapper is an iconic fishery in the Gulf of Mexico. However, 

red snapper management has been increasingly fraught with uncertainty and controversy. Seasons have gotten shorter, despite 

continued rebuilding success and higher quotas. In 2007, the recreational season was open for 194 days. This year the Federal 

recreational harvest season was open only 10 days for private anglers, and 44 days for federally-permitted for-hire vessels. 

This is a highly divisive and unacceptable situation that shortchanges private anglers in Federal waters and for-hire vessels in 

state waters. It forces states to provide longer seasons in state waters to compensate. It is clear our red snapper management system 

needs major changes to better balance management flexibility with 

strong conservation measures. 

The Gulf Red Snapper Act would do precisely this by transferring management authority to the Gulf states and providing a robust framework for continuing the rebuilding of red snapper stocks, 

while providing more acceptable access to red snapper fishing. 

The Gulf states are well qualified to manage red snapper because 

they have a track record of successful conservation and management of state fisheries. In Florida, nearly all stocks managed by my 

agency, FWC, are meeting or exceeding management goals. Fisheries, like spotted sea trout, red drum, and snook, have been rebuilt under state management and are thriving. Most of Florida’s 

most valuable commercial fisheries, like spiny lobster, stone crab, 

19 

and blue crab, are managed exclusively by the state, or with the 

state in a leading role. 

FWC has an excellent track record for providing scienceinformed, sustainable access to a wide diversity of fishing opportunities. Our Fish and Wildlife Research Institute conducts fisheries 

research, stock assessments for state- and federally-managed species, and is considered a national leader in marine fishery science. 

FWC also effectively enforces fishery regulations in state and 

Federal waters, and would continue to do so for red snapper under 

state management. 

The Gulf Red Snapper Act offers major improvements over the 

current management process. 

First, it provides a way to tailor red snapper regulations to local 

needs. Management that works for fishermen in Florida does not 

always work for other states. Even within Florida, the needs of anglers in Naples differs from the needs of anglers in Pensacola. The 

Gulf Red Snapper Act would provide much-needed flexibility for 

states to meet varying stakeholder interests within each state, 

while continuing to improve the fishery. 

The Gulf Red Snapper Act also increases opportunities for stakeholders to engage in the fishery management process. Sometimes 

the Council meeting can be 1,000 miles away from Florida. With 

this program, states will be taking the lead, and the people can 

come and testify at local meetings, directly to their state commissions. FWC’s rulemaking process also is nimble enough to respond 

quickly to the needs of fishermen and resource changes. This approach could continue under this Act. In contrast, the current 

Federal process can take years to make necessary changes that balance rebuilding with fishing access. 

The Gulf Red Snapper Act would provide oversight to ensure 

that each state is accountable, adequately monitoring their landings, and achieving conservation. All five Gulf states now have programs to collect more accurate and timely data from anglers who 

fish for red snapper. 

Florida’s program is called the Gulf Reef Fish Survey, and was 

developed largely at the request of fishermen who understand that 

more precise and timely science allows for better management decisions and optimization of fishing access. These state-run programs 

have great promise for improving recreational red snapper data collection and management under this Act. 

FWC is committed to ensuring fair access to red snapper for all 

fishermen. Commercial red snapper management through the IFQ 

program is highly accountable and successful. FWC is willing to 

provide strong assurances that this program will continue, and we 

will work closely with our commercial fishing industry, so they can 

continue to provide a generous supply of fresh Florida red snapper 

to our residents and visitors. 

Similarly, FWC will continue to support Florida’s for-hire 

industry, and recognizes their critical contribution to Florida’s 

coastal communities, culture, and tourism economy. 

In conclusion, I am confident the Gulf red snapper can be successfully managed through this legislation. It provides flexibility 

the states need to create solutions that work for anglers, commercial fishermen, for-hire businesses, and local communities. 

20 

Mr. Chairman, committee members, this concludes my testimony, and I really appreciate this opportunity to provide FWC’s 

perspective. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Wiley follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF NICK WILEY, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, FLORIDA FISH AND

WILDLIFE CONSERVATION COMMISSION (FWC) 

Chairman Bishop, Ranking Member Grijalva, Chairman Fleming, Ranking 

Member Huffman, and members of the Subcommittee on Water, Power and Oceans 

of the Committee on Natural Resources of the U.S. House of Representatives, my 

name is Nick Wiley, and I am the Executive Director of the Florida Fish and 

Wildlife Conservation Commission. Thank you for the invitation to provide testimony at this important oversight hearing examining H.R. 3094, the ‘‘Gulf States 

Red Snapper Management Authority Act (Gulf Red Snapper Act).’’ 

The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (Commission) is responsible for managing fish and wildlife resources for the state of Florida. The Florida 

Constitution authorizes the Commission to enact regulations regarding the state’s 

fish and wildlife resources. This is done by seven Commissioners who are appointed 

by the Governor and confirmed by the Florida Senate. The agency’s mission is managing fish and wildlife resources for their long-term well-being and the benefit of 

people. On behalf of the Commission, I am pleased to support H.R. 3094. The 

Commission believes the Gulf Red Snapper Act is a step in the right direction for 

red snapper management. 

Red snapper is an iconic species in the Gulf of Mexico. It is a prized catch for 

recreational anglers and enjoyed at dinner tables around the Nation thanks to commercial fishermen. Although red snapper is considered to be overfished, recent stock 

assessments have shown the species to be rebuilding ahead of schedule. This year’s 

quota is higher than ever at 14.3 million pounds. 

Despite this rebuilding success, management of red snapper has been increasingly 

fraught with uncertainty and controversy, particularly for private recreational anglers. Anglers have faced shorter and shorter seasons despite increases in the overall quota. In 2007, the recreational season was open for 194 days. This year, the 

Federal recreational harvest season was 10 days for private anglers and 44 days for 

federally-permitted for-hire vessels. The decrease in season days is due in large part 

to the success of the rebuilding plan for red snapper: as the fishery has improved, 

red snapper have become larger, more abundant, and easier to catch, which has 

caused the recreational quota to be caught faster and seasons to grow shorter. In 

2015, sector separation was enacted in the Gulf of Mexico red snapper fishery, dividing the recreational quota into a federally-permitted for-hire component and a private angler component. While sector separation has more than quadrupled the 

number of fishing days available to federally-permitted for-hire vessels and their 

customers, private anglers fishing in Federal waters have seemingly been left behind. In 2014 and 2015, all five Gulf states held longer recreational red snapper seasons in their state waters to provide harvest opportunities for private anglers. While 

this inconsistency in regulations by the states resulted in the Federal season being 

shorter by 2–5 days in 2015, the economic and social benefits these seasons provided 

anglers and local communities is undeniable. Despite the inconsistency between 

state and Federal seasons over the last 2 years, the recreational sector has kept harvest within their annual catch limit. 

It is clear that big changes are needed to red snapper management that provide 

flexibility while continuing conservation. The Gulf Red Snapper Act provides the 

Gulf states with the opportunity to transform management of Gulf red snapper for 

the benefit of all who enjoy this treasured resource. This bill proposes to allow the 

Gulf states to manage the red snapper fishery off their coasts through a collaborative body known as the Gulf States Red Snapper Management Authority (Gulf 

States Management Authority). The Commission believes this will benefit Gulf 

coastal communities and the red snapper stock as a whole. 

WHY STATE MANAGEMENT CAN WORK FOR RED SNAPPER

In short, the Gulf states are well-positioned and qualified to manage red snapper 

because they have a track record of successful conservation and management of 

state fisheries. In Florida, nearly all stocks that are managed by the Commission 

are meeting or exceeding management goals. State management in Florida rebuilt 

fisheries like spotted sea trout, red drum, and snook. Successful management of 

these fisheries continues today and is enjoyed by residents and anglers who come 

from around the globe to visit the Fishing Capital of the World. Many also enjoy 

21 

the success of state-managed fisheries through ready access to fresh Florida seafood 

in restaurants and markets around the state and Nation. Most of Florida’s most valuable commercial fisheries like spiny lobster, stone crab, and blue crab are managed 

exclusively by the state, or with the state taking the leading role in management. 

The other Gulf states have enjoyed similar successes with their state-managed 

fisheries. 

The Commission strives to maintain access and fishing opportunities while setting 

regulations to ensure sustainability of our marine fisheries resources. The Commission uses science-informed management and values collaboration with our stakeholders. This allows for management that balances the needs of the resource with 

the needs of Florida’s fishermen, coastal communities, and all who enjoy Florida’s 

rich marine resources. 

The Commission’s Fish and Wildlife Research Institute (FWRI) conducts fisheries 

research and stock assessments and is considered a national leader in marine fisheries science. FWRI not only regularly assesses state-managed species, but also conducts stock assessments for Florida-centric species that are both state- and federally-managed, like yellowtail snapper, mutton snapper, and black grouper. Our scientists, like many from the other Gulf states, also serve as experts on Science and 

Statistical Committees that provide valuable scientific advice to the Gulf of Mexico 

and South Atlantic Fishery Management Councils. 

From a law enforcement perspective, state management of the red snapper fishery 

would not change anything. The Commission’s Division of Law Enforcement already 

enforces regulations in both state and Federal waters and would continue to do this 

for red snapper and other state- and federally-managed species. 

THE GULF RED SNAPPER ACT PROVIDES A UNIQUE OPPORTUNITY FOR IMPROVEMENT

The Gulf Red Snapper Act provides several improvements over the current management process. First, it provides a means to tailor red snapper regulations to the 

needs of the states and local communities. In many fisheries, particularly with red 

snapper, management that works for fishermen in Florida does not always work for 

fishermen in other states. This is due to a multitude of reasons including varying 

habitats, water depth, weather conditions, and tourist seasons. The Gulf Red 

Snapper Act would provide states the flexibility to set regulations that work for 

their anglers, commercial fishermen, for-hire vessels, and tourists. Even within 

Florida, the desires and needs of Gulf coastal communities vary. In many cases, 

what works for Panhandle communities like Pensacola is not ideal for areas of 

southwest Florida, like Naples. This legislation would provide Florida and the other 

Gulf states the opportunity to manage their state, or sub-regions within their state, 

to meet varying stakeholder needs while continuing to improve the red snapper fishery. Commission staff have heard from fishermen all along the Florida Gulf coast 

who feel that more local control of red snapper regulations is needed. 

Management through the Gulf Red Snapper Act also provides stakeholders with 

more opportunities to provide input to fishery managers. This helps promote stakeholder buy-in for red snapper fishery management decisions. In the current process, 

management decisions that affect Tampa-area fishermen may be made in a Gulf of 

Mexico Fishery Management Council (Council) meeting 1,000 miles away in 

Galveston. Council meetings are typically 4 to 5 days long, with public input and 

management decisions typically being made on different days. The time and cost associated with these meetings makes attendance difficult for many fishermen. With 

states taking the lead on managing the red snapper fishery, important management 

decisions would be made at local meetings in the states and communities that are 

affected by them. In Florida, stakeholders could attend a Commission meeting in 

their area and speak directly to Commissioners about management and what they 

see happening on the water. Commissioners listen to public testimony on issues as 

they are deliberating and formulating decisions. This allows stakeholders to easily 

observe the Commission’s public rulemaking process and can help stakeholders provide direct feedback on Commission discussions as they occur. 

Additionally, the Commission’s rulemaking process is nimble enough to respond 

to the needs of fishermen and the resource quickly. In the current Federal process, 

it can take years to make necessary changes that balance rebuilding with fishing 

access. In Florida, such changes could be accomplished in a fraction of the time, 

with several opportunities for public input. Under the Gulf Red Snapper Act, once 

states have decided on their plans for managing red snapper, the five Gulf state directors would come together to review each state’s plan to ensure they promote the 

long-term health and sustainability of the red snapper fishery and are consistent 

with section 303(a) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and 

Management Act. Plans would be reviewed for approval within 60 days. This 

22 

timeline is relatively fast compared to the Council process and even the Council’s 

proposal for regional management (Amendment 39). 

In turn, the Gulf Red Snapper Act would provide oversight to ensure that each 

state is accountable, adequately monitoring their landings, and promoting conservation. The states recognize that the current recreational data collection through the 

Marine Recreational Information Program (MRIP) does not track landings in a timely or precise enough manner to inform Gulf red snapper management decisions. As 

such, all five Gulf states have implemented data collection programs to collect more 

accurate and timely data from anglers who fish for red snapper and reef fish. These 

state-run data collection programs have great promise for improving recreational 

fisheries data collection and management under the Gulf Red Snapper Act. Florida’s 

program is called the Gulf Reef Fish Survey and was developed largely at the request of Florida fishermen who understand that more precise and timely science allows for better management decisions and optimization of fishing access. The Gulf 

Reef Fish Survey improves upon the current MRIP program by: (1) defining the universe of anglers who fish for red snapper and other reef fish in the Gulf of Mexico 

off Florida; and (2) targeting these anglers for surveys about their fishing activity. 

In designing the Gulf Reef Fish Survey, Commission scientists consulted with 

NOAA Fisheries MRIP staff and other Gulf states to learn what is working in other 

states, and to ensure that data from the Gulf Reef Fish Survey: (1) is compatible 

with MRIP; (2) may eventually be used in stock assessments; and (3) is recognized 

by NOAA Fisheries as a valid tool for tracking recreational reef fish harvest. Of 

course, we will also continue to work with NOAA Fisheries on MRIP improvements 

and managing harvest data for recreational fishing as a whole in Florida. 

If a state fails to rebuild the red snapper fishery or otherwise fails to manage 

their red snapper fishery according to the requirements outlined in the Gulf Red 

Snapper Act and agreed upon by the states, then the Gulf States Management 

Authority can recommend that the Secretary of Commerce intervene and close 

Federal waters adjacent to that state. This provides a huge incentive to manage the 

red snapper fishery responsibly and use the best scientific information available so 

the fishery continues to rebuild, fisherman can still fish, and Gulf red snapper can 

be enjoyed on dinner tables. 

The Gulf States Red Snapper Act proposes to transfer management of the red 

snapper fishery as a whole to the Gulf states. Because of this, many commercial red 

snapper fishermen have expressed concerns about this bill and have questioned how 

transfer of management would affect the commercial fishery and the red snapper 

individual fishing quota (IFQ) program in the Gulf of Mexico. Over the first 3 years 

of management through this legislation, the states would work with the commercial 

fishery to ensure a seamless transition from Federal to state management. The 

Commission recognizes the importance of our state’s commercial fisheries to 

Florida’s cultural values, economy, and consumers. The Commission believes that 

the commercial red snapper IFQ program is a management success and has no intention of making any significant changes that would disrupt the commercial fishery 

or diminish the success of the IFQ program. Having access to fresh, Florida seafood 

like red snapper is important to the Commission, Floridians, and our visitors alike. 

Some federally-permitted for-hire fishermen have also expressed concerns about 

the Gulf Red Snapper Act, arguing that state management would jeopardize the 

non-boat owning public’s access to red snapper. The Commission has steadfastly 

supported Florida’s for-hire industry and recognizes their important contribution to 

Florida’s coastal communities, culture, and economy. The strong for-hire fishing 

fleets in communities like Destin and Panama City provide so much public access 

to outstanding fishing and plays a big part in Florida’s standing as the Fishing 

Capital of the World. The Commission is committed to ensuring fair access to red 

snapper for all fishermen. 

CONCLUSION

I am confident that the Gulf red snapper fishery can be successfully managed by 

the Gulf states through the Gulf Red Snapper Act. The state of Florida looks forward to working with our stakeholders and the other four Gulf states on improving 

this fishery for the benefit of all. I am confident the states can use the flexibility 

in this legislation to find solutions that work for their anglers, commercial fishermen, for-hire businesses, and local communities. 

Chairman Bishop, Ranking Member Grijalva, Chairman Fleming, Ranking 

Member Huffman, and members of the Subcommittee on Water, Power and Oceans, 

this concludes my testimony. Thank you again for this opportunity to provide 

Florida’s perspective. I would be happy to answer any questions. 

23 

Dr. FLEMING. Thank you, Mr. Wiley. That completes the opening 

statements of our witnesses. We have a pretty good number on the 

dais today, and I think we will have very interesting questions. 

Therefore, I yield 5 minutes to myself for the first set of questions. 

Mr. Risenhoover, solve a paradox for me. I am having difficulty 

understanding this. I think I may know at least part of the reason 

for this. In the period where the fish stock has recovered—we are 

talking red snapper—the sizes are getting bigger, the numbers are 

getting bigger, the poundage allowed is getting larger, but yet we 

have seen a substantial reduction in the number of days for recreational fishermen. What has changed to make that occur? 

Mr. RISENHOOVER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. A couple of things, 

or a couple comments on that. 

You are absolutely right. The stock is recovering. Fish are getting larger. The geographic area the fish are caught in is getting 

larger, as well. As you have heavier, more numerous fish in more 

areas, the access by fishermen to them is increasing. So again, 

catching larger fish increases the amount of fish that are counted 

against the tag. 

Additionally, state seasons affect what happens in Federal 

waters. Since the stock is managed on a Gulf-wide basis—— 

Dr. FLEMING. Limited in time. I would love to hear more, I really 

would, I just do not have time. 

Basically, what you are saying is more people are fishing. Is that 

accurate to say? 

Mr. RISENHOOVER. I think there are more people fishing, there 

are more fish, and the fish are more geographically dispersed. 

Dr. FLEMING. OK. That all makes sense. Are you seeing any increase in one industry versus another? That is, commercial versus 

charter versus recreational? 

Mr. RISENHOOVER. Again, the quotas are set for each of those 

groups, so they fish toward that quota. The commercial quota is set 

separately. Through the IFQ Program, as some have mentioned, we 

have good statistics and good catch data on that. 

The charter fishery—chartering for-hire, managed separately, 

they have a slightly longer season in Federal waters, because there 

are fewer—— 

Dr. FLEMING. Well, again, I only have limited time. I would love 

to hear it all. 

So, where we see a sharp reduction is in the recreational side, 

would that suggest that we have had a sharp increase in recreational fishermen versus the other two sectors? 

Mr. RISENHOOVER. It does not indicate that there is a sharp increase, it is just that those larger fish, the same number caught, 

account for more. And with the state seasons being longer, that reduces the Federal water season, as well. 

Dr. FLEMING. Sure, OK. It sounds like—it is partly more fishing, 

more accessible fishing, and also bigger fish. Obviously, if the fish 

are twice as big, that is going to cut in half the poundage that is 

allowed under the same limit. So I get that. OK. 

Also, back to you, Mr. Risenhoover, can you describe to me how 

NOAA currently estimates the number of fish caught by the 

recreational community? 

24 

Mr. RISENHOOVER. Yes. We have a program called the Marine 

Recreational Information Program, MRIP—we have all heard of 

that—that does sample around the Gulf to get an estimate of the 

number of fish. Obviously, we cannot be at every dock. We are at 

most public docks at some periods of times, based on some statistical sampling, but not so much at private docks. 

Currently, we are trying to work very closely with the states and 

their programs, the LA Creel survey, the surveys that are conducted in Florida, as well as Alabama and Mississippi, to improve 

that information. 

Dr. FLEMING. OK. So you are open to using other technologies 

that are being developed. But it is still kind of an indirect—you do 

not count every fish like you can with commercial, but you use 

some sort of indirect methodology, maybe sampling. You have people at docks, I suppose. And I think also—well, I will not get into 

that, because, again, my time is limited. 

How would the states counter-estimate the recreational catch 

under the state plan? Oh, I am sorry. Let me ask our state 

witnesses. 

Mr. Barham, under the state plan how would that be 

accomplished, as opposed to what NOAA does? 

Mr. BARHAM. Our monitoring through LA Creel, that is the program that we have put in place to monitor the fish, and we would 

continue that program. That program is so successful in Louisiana. 

We do a much better job. I think the Feds even recognize that. We 

are providing them the data, and they see that our program works 

so much better than their assessment, even in Louisiana. 

And, I would comment that the Feds have a cookie-cutter 

approach in that they are managing the Gulf, as a whole. The Gulf 

is not a whole. The fish off Louisiana are not going to show up off 

Florida tomorrow. These are geographically limited populations 

that need to be managed by the people that are there that should 

be managing them. 

Also, I did not mention that we have a document from all our 

directors, all of my comparables in Texas, Mississippi, Alabama, 

and Florida that support this program. They clearly recognize we 

can monitor the fish better than the Federal system. 

Dr. FLEMING. I think all sides agree that we need better 

technology on tracking what the catches are. 

My time is up. I recognize the Ranking Member. 

Mr. HUFFMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Risenhoover, the statement we just heard that Louisiana fish are not related to populations in fishing rules that you might need to establish in Florida 

and other Gulfs states, is that true? Is that based on science? Do 

they really stay in Louisiana their whole lives? 

Mr. RISENHOOVER. Representative Huffman, I am not a scientist, 

so I cannot comment specifically on that. I do know that our 

science center and our scientists currently do manage on a Gulfwide basis. 

Mr. HUFFMAN. It has been suggested that NOAA Fisheries do not 

consider state science, including some of the science we have just 

heard about. Is that correct? 

Mr. RISENHOOVER. We consider science from all sectors—states, 

academia, as well as the industry. And, as I mentioned earlier, we 

25 

are trying to work very closely with our state partners through 

MRIP and their individual state programs to calibrate those programs to each other so, as everybody I think agrees, we can get 

better, more timely, more accurate data. 

Mr. HUFFMAN. Would you speak a little more to what your agency is doing to access more and better state-of-the-art science so you 

can create the best possible decisions? 

Mr. RISENHOOVER. Through the MRIP Program we have begun, 

and we have several pilot programs going with each of the states 

to look at their data collection methods and, again, to calibrate 

those against our MRIP one. We have provided funding to the 

states to help them develop these pilot programs, as well as we 

have invested in additional sampling around the Gulf to, again, increase and get better data. 

Mr. HUFFMAN. OK. Secretary Barham, you referenced a survey 

of charter boat fishermen in Louisiana. I just want to clarify. The 

question asked in that survey was only about the Federal 

Government transferring management for the recreational red 

snapper fishery. Correct? 

Mr. BARHAM. That is correct. 

Mr. HUFFMAN. You did not ask whether the management of all 

sectors of the fishery would be appropriate under state authority. 

Right? 

Mr. BARHAM. No, I think you are correct. 

Mr. HUFFMAN. OK. And again, that was only for Louisiana 

charter boat—— 

Mr. BARHAM. Yes, sir. 

Mr. HUFFMAN [continuing]. Folks that you asked that question. 

So I think that is an important point. 

Secretary Barham, there has been discussion about the West 

Coast Dungeness crab as a possible analog to what is being talked 

about here with Gulf red snapper. In that case, we had negotiations with all of the stakeholders that culminated in consensus. 

There were no remaining conflicts, everybody was on the same 

page. It took a long time to get there, and there had to be a 

demonstrated track record of successful Tri-State Commission management before Congress eventually allowed the permanent 

management under that approach. 

Would you be open to committing to a process that included everybody, all the stakeholders from all the states, to try to reach 

that same type of consensus, as opposed to this approach? 

Mr. BARHAM. Of course, I am open to that. It is successful when 

everybody is involved, and we want them involved. Our commercial 

industry, as I told you, is so important to our state. I want them 

to trust that we will do the best for them, absolutely. 

Mr. HUFFMAN. OK. I want to just ask you and Mr. Wiley, as well, 

a question. After the last hearing we had on this issue, we asked 

each state to submit for the record an answer to a simple question: 

What is the fair percentage of the recreational red snapper quota 

that you would want for your state under a regional management 

scheme? We did not hear back from most of them. We heard back 

from one state, but we did not hear back from Louisiana or Florida. 

26 

So, I just want to ask you here and now, since you are asking 

for state authority. What should the quota be for your state’s 

recreational—— 

Mr. BARHAM. Well, we took the quota that the Feds used to establish our state season, if you will, to be sure that we use their 

numbers, and we set our goal to match—— 

Mr. HUFFMAN. OK. But what is your answer to the question? 

What is a fair percentage for the recreational harvest in your 

state? 

Mr. BARHAM. I would not hazard a guess at this point. 

Mr. HUFFMAN. Mr. Wiley, do you have an answer? 

Mr. WILEY. Yes, sir. We have been working closely with our colleagues, and we certainly have not come to agreement on what that 

good answer is. But right now, our preference would be to have a 

quota somewhere around what we have been harvesting the last 5 

years on an annual basis, and that is somewhere between 50 and 

60 percent. 

Mr. HUFFMAN. So you would not change much from where it 

currently is? 

Mr. WILEY. We are willing to talk about it and work on 

compromise. I am not saying we would not change. 

Mr. HUFFMAN. All right. 

Mr. WILEY. You asked me for a number. 

Mr. HUFFMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Dr. FLEMING. The gentleman yields back. Mr. LaMalfa is 

recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. LAMALFA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Risenhoover, just one basic question here. We heard a lot of 

talk about using the science involved. Basically what I am wondering is why, if the states have better data on fish counts, fish 

harvest—it does not seem that scientific, it seems like they have 

the stats, from my understanding, available to them that have 

pretty accurate counts, much more within range than what we are 

hearing from what NOAA’s numbers are. 

So, why wouldn’t we move more toward using that more accurate 

information, and basing harvests off of that and the other policies? 

Mr. RISENHOOVER. I think the answer there is we are always 

looking for better data. 

Mr. LAMALFA. But actually using it, though, for the—— 

Mr. RISENHOOVER. We are working with the states to calibrate 

their data to our survey, so that we can compare those and make 

sure that we do have a good estimate of what the catches are in 

the future. 

Mr. LAMALFA. But, sir, if yours are maybe as much as 70 percent 

different from the states, with their more accurate system of actually tracking at the docks what the harvest is, how can you calibrate together something that is that far off? 

Mr. RISENHOOVER. Right. Since we have the same goal in mind 

of an estimate of the number of fish caught, there is a reason for 

that 70 percent difference. And, we need to look at both surveys 

again and find out why there is that difference, and then improve 

both surveys to get the better number in the end. 

Mr. LAMALFA. But, indeed, if the methodology for the state-based 

survey is already an improved, accurate one versus the NOAA one 

27 

that is not, I do not know why they have to recalibrate the statelevel ones. 

Mr. RISENHOOVER. Right. We have been working for a number of 

years, based on a National Research Council Report to improve our 

data and our survey system. We are working to make sure that our 

survey system is as accurate as possible, and then comparing that 

and trying to improve our system and the state’s system, as well. 

Mr. LAMALFA. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, would you mind if I 

yield the remainder of my time to Mr. Graves? 

Dr. FLEMING. Yes, fine. 

Mr. LAMALFA. OK, all right. Thank you, I yield back. 

Mr. GRAVES. Thank you very much. Mr. Risenhoover, thank you 

very much for being here. I am struggling with this thing a little 

bit. Right now you have the East Coast, the Atlantic states, that 

manage the striped bass fishery. Correct? 

Mr. RISENHOOVER. Correct. 

Mr. GRAVES. You have the West Coast states, the Pacific, that 

manage the Dungeness crab. You have the state of Alaska that 

manages the salmon fishery. 

Why would there be discrimination against the Gulf states in regard to you not supporting efforts for the states to manage the 

snapper fisheries since these other states do? Is there some profound problem with these other states? Is there some profound 

problem with the Gulf states that you have mistrust? 

Mr. RISENHOOVER. Congressman, I do not think it is mistrust. 

These other programs have been around a long time. 

Mr. GRAVES. But they started at some point. 

Mr. RISENHOOVER. They did start at some point. 

Mr. GRAVES. I wanted to double-check that. 

Mr. RISENHOOVER. Again, when it comes to regional management, we support it in concept. We believe that giving the states 

more autonomy to manage their recreational stocks to meet their 

objectives is a worthy goal. We believe that currently the way to 

do that is through the Council process that has the large public—— 

Mr. GRAVES. If I can reclaim my time, I would like to read a part 

of the transcript from a hearing we had in this committee. I believe 

it was with Ms. Sullivan in here from NOAA. 

I said, ‘‘I just want to make note that the five state agencies sent 

a letter effectively not agreeing with what the Council did, not 

agreeing with the direction that this has had, and asking for regional management. I strongly support that.’’ And I said, ‘‘I suspect 

if the other Gulf members do, as well, that there would be strong 

efforts on our parts to urge you, NOAA, to defer to them and allow 

the states to manage the fishery.’’ 

In response, Ms. Sullivan said, ‘‘We have been monitoring that 

effort for them to come together and propose that closely, and we 

would be supportive of that.’’ 

Now, my takeaway—because I was very appreciative of her, and 

gave her all sorts of accolades after—my takeaway was that 

Ms. Sullivan was actually saying she supported those efforts of the 

five Gulf states to come together, supported their letter that had 

been issued prior to that meeting, laying out their management 

strategy for the Gulf. 

28 

Again, this is not a precedent, is it? Would this be a precedent 

to have the five Gulf states manage the snapper fishery? 

Mr. RISENHOOVER. It would be a precedent for the red snapper 

fishery, but—— 

Mr. GRAVES. But would it be a precedent to have the states 

manage fisheries in Federal waters? 

Mr. RISENHOOVER. No. As you mentioned—— 

Mr. GRAVES. OK, thank you. 

Mr. RISENHOOVER [continuing]. There are other—— 

Mr. GRAVES. So let me just go back. In regard to Ms. Sullivan’s 

comments, are you going back on those comments? Are you not 

agreeing with what she said? 

Mr. RISENHOOVER. I do not believe I am disagreeing with 

Dr. Sullivan. 

Mr. GRAVES. OK. 

Mr. RISENHOOVER. I believe that the states can come together 

through the Council process as well. 

Mr. GRAVES. Thank you. And, Mr. Chairman, I guess—can I roll 

in—oh, no. I guess you are going over there. OK, I will stop. Thank 

you. 

Dr. FLEMING. Yes. OK, the gentleman yields back. Mr. LaMalfa 

yields back. The Chair now recognizes the gentlelady from Guam. 

Ms. BORDALLO. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I am an 

advocate for the Council management of our Nation’s fisheries that 

take into account flexibility for local fisheries and local conditions. 

I am from the Pacific area. And with that part of the ocean bordering so many other nations, we have the continued threat of our 

fisheries being overfished. But we must also weigh the concerns of 

particularly my community, the Guam fishing community. 

Regarding this bill, I do support the spirit of the bill, but I do 

have concerns. 

Mr. Risenhoover, I am going to ask you this question. I understand the Council has recently set up an advisory panel on recreational red snapper to help private boat anglers. How can the 

Council be more helpful to private anglers, so they can move 

forward? 

Mr. RISENHOOVER. Thank you, Congresswoman. I believe the 

Council’s effort to hear directly from the private-boat anglers 

through this committee is one way to do that. Also, continued involvement in the process. And also, I think regional management, 

as initially proposed by the Council, holds great promise for that, 

as well. 

Ms. BORDALLO. All right. Then I have another question. 

The states have argued that the red snapper stock is rebuilt 

based on evidence of higher recreational catches. But the recent 

stock assessment shows that the spawning stock of red snapper is 

only about half the size it is projected to be at the end of the rebuilding plan in 2032. 

Mr. RISENHOOVER. That is correct, Congresswoman. We have 

made great progress since the rebuilding plan started in the 1990s. 

We still have some ways to go. 

We have—and it is very notable—ended overfishing on this stock, 

a condition that existed for a number of years. So, the good news 

is we have ended overfishing. We have a healthy biomass that 

29 

continues to grow. We need to continue our conservation measures 

to make sure it rebuilds fully. 

Ms. BORDALLO. All right. Can you give me—the Gulf red snapper 

stock is still overfished, but by how much? 

Mr. RISENHOOVER. It is at about half of its biomass target. So, 

it still needs to continue to grow. 

Ms. BORDALLO. I see. About half. 

Mr. RISENHOOVER. At about half, and we still project by about 

2032 it would reach that level, which would provide additional opportunities for fishermen, commercial and recreational. 

Ms. BORDALLO. Another question. Will continued rebuilding of 

the stock under the Magnuson-Stevens Act lead to larger and more 

consistent catches in the future? 

Mr. RISENHOOVER. That is our hope. 

Ms. BORDALLO. That is your hope. All right. Let me see here. 

NOAA does incorporate state data into red snapper science and 

management. Is that a true statement? 

Mr. RISENHOOVER. That is correct. 

Ms. BORDALLO. What are some of the challenges, and what can 

be done to help improve the current situation? 

Mr. RISENHOOVER. Thank you, Congresswoman. I think cooperation is the key with the states. Through our MRIP Program, our 

survey, we are working directly with those states actively. We have 

had calls with the states this week about some of the differences 

we hear in the data, to try and resolve what those issues are, to 

get the best data in the future. 

Again, we are increasingly and continually working with the 

states on information to include in our stock assessments, as well. 

Ms. BORDALLO. All right. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Chairman, if I could, I would like to give my extra minute 

to my colleague here, Mr. Lowenthal. He needs extra money—— 

Dr. FLEMING. Without—— 

Ms. BORDALLO. I mean extra time. 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. HUFFMAN. He needs that, too. 

Ms. BORDALLO. Extra time. 

Dr. FLEMING. That is between you two on that. 

Ms. BORDALLO. It has been a long day. 

Dr. FLEMING. Yes, exactly. Without objection, Mr. Lowenthal. 

Ms. BORDALLO. Thank you. 

Dr. LOWENTHAL. Thank you. First, I applaud Congressman 

Graves for taking on this issue. There are problems with the fishery. I am just really using this to learn more about it, what the 

issues really are. I do not consider myself an expert on this. I’d like 

to work on this. I do have some concerns—— 

Dr. FLEMING. Mr. Lowenthal, can you get that microphone a 

little closer, please, sir? 

Dr. LOWENTHAL. Yes, let me come over here. It is on. 

I do have concerns—not that I am opposed to the states managing the fisheries. I think we have demonstrated that that does 

work well in other places. But we need to make sure that—and I 

need to understand more myself—that we protect all the fishing 

interests, not just the recreational, that we protect commercial 

30 

interests, charter interests, and not just cut out the commercial 

and charter, who have worked so hard. 

So, my first question is, what are the major concerns that some 

of those that oppose this, such as the commercial, why are they 

concerned about this bill? 

Mr. RISENHOOVER. Well, I think, if I may answer, 

Congressman—— 

Dr. LOWENTHAL. I am not saying they are real concerns, but it 

is important for me to understand what the issues are and what 

people are frightened of? 

Mr. RISENHOOVER. I do not think that they see what the future 

would hold, specifically. Under the Gulf Council plan, those details 

are laid out much more clearly than in the subject legislation. 

I think the second panel would be able to help you very much 

with that question. 

Dr. LOWENTHAL. All right. I will wait until the second panel. 

Dr. FLEMING. The gentlelady’s time is up; but we will come back 

to you soon, Mr. Lowenthal. The Chair recognizes Mr. Graves for 

5 minutes. 

Mr. GRAVES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ms. Bordallo, I want to 

thank you very much for co-sponsoring the bill. I certainly appreciate your insightful questions, and am looking forward to continuing to work through some of those issues with you. 

Mr. Risenhoover, I would like to follow up on a question that was 

posed to you in regard to the health of the stock in the Gulf fishery. 

You made a comment about the biomass of the snapper fishery 

in the Gulf of Mexico as a whole. Could you further drill that down 

and explain the biomass differences in terms of the health of the 

stock in the eastern Gulf versus the western Gulf? 

Mr. RISENHOOVER. Congressman, there is a table chart in my 

presentation that shows that for the entire Gulf. I cannot personally draw that down for you, but I would be more than happy to 

get that information. 

Mr. GRAVES. That would be very helpful to the committee. I actually know the answer, which is usually the safest way to ask questions. The western Gulf stock is actually rebuilt at this point, and 

the eastern Gulf stock is not. That is what the more accurate state 

science is showing at this point. I think that is an important distinction, showing once again how tailored management strategies 

among the five Gulf states may actually be a better approach than 

trying to do a one-size-fits-all for the Gulf of Mexico. 

Let me ask you something. The Coastal Zone Management is 

under your agency’s jurisdiction, correct, the Coastal Zone 

Management Act? 

Mr. RISENHOOVER. It is under NOAA’s jurisdiction, yes. 

Mr. GRAVES. Thank you. Are you aware that there is more habitat loss in coastal Louisiana in regard to the wetlands than anywhere else? I believe it is 90 percent of the coastal wetlands lost 

in the continental United States. Are you aware of that? 

Mr. RISENHOOVER. I have heard—— 

Mr. GRAVES. The area that is—by U.S. fish standards, I believe, 

they indicated it is one of the most productive habitats in the 

North American continent. 

31 

Whenever the state of Louisiana has gone to you with Secretary 

Barham’s support and other folks from the state of Louisiana and 

asked that, through the Coastal Zone Management Act, NOAA actually prevent the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers from continuing 

to allow the degradation of our coast through Federal actions that 

they are doing, do you know what NOAA said back to us? 

Mr. RISENHOOVER. I do not. 

Mr. GRAVES. ‘‘We are not engaging.’’ Do you know that when I 

was the lead trustee for the state of Louisiana, and I asked NOAA 

to help us force BP to clean up the oil because of the adverse impact on our habitat, on fish, and everything else down there, do you 

know what I was told? 

Mr. RISENHOOVER. I—— 

Mr. GRAVES. I was told no. I was told no. So I have to be honest. 

I am having a little bit of trouble believing that NOAA is out there 

to be good stewards of the natural resources, to be our friend, and 

to make sure that this habitat is being managed properly. That is 

a very big concern of mine. 

Could you provide the committee with landings records in the 

five Gulf states of where the red snapper on the commercial side— 

where they are actually landed, and where they are actually 

caught? Would you mind? I know you do not have it with you, but 

would you mind providing that to the committee? 

Mr. RISENHOOVER. I believe we can provide that—— 

Mr. GRAVES. Great, great, thank you. 

Secretary Barham and Secretary Wiley, could you both answer a 

question for me? Can you just very quickly explain how you would 

manage the fisheries? And I see all these shirts behind you, and 

I am really glad that all of you are here. 

I want to reiterate something I said earlier. I said earlier that 

I repeatedly tried to engage industry, commercial industry, restaurants, and others, and got nothing back. So, those people that 

bought you plane tickets and told you to come here, maybe you 

could go ask them why nothing came back to us. 

I also want—one other comment, real quick—those of you sitting 

in the audience who are concerned about this—I am going to guess 

that most of you recognize Secretary Barham and Secretary Wiley. 

And, Mr. Risenhoover, I appreciate you being here, but I am going 

to guess that none of you recognize the gentleman in the middle, 

which means whenever things come up and you need to engage the 

person that is actually managing your fisheries, I think it would 

be much easier to get in touch with one of these guys that you actually recognize, you know where he lives, you know how to get 

there, you know how to get in touch with him, rather than—and, 

again, no offense to you, you have 50 states to deal with—but 

rather than this gentleman here. 

Secretary Barham and Secretary Wiley, could you give a brief explanation of how you would actually manage the fisheries in the 

Gulf? 

Mr. BARHAM. Well, as far as Louisiana, in this bill we want to 

protect what the commercials have today. We do not want to undermine their production. That is the initial premise. We want to 

be sure they get the amount of fish they are getting today into the 

future. 

32 

Beyond that, we believe that our assessment of the stock, and 

the viability and the vibrancy of that resource offshore, will indicate that they can have increases in the future. That is our belief. 

So, we will manage using our LA Creel and any other tools that 

we develop that we believe—— 

Mr. GRAVES. Thank you. If I could just get the last few seconds 

here for Secretary Wiley. 

Secretary Wiley, could you please quickly also include in your 

answer—the Federal Government currently manages the South 

Atlantic Red Snapper Fishery. Could you please explain the condition of the current red snapper fishery management for the commercial sector? 

Mr. WILEY. Yes. In the Atlantic it is much worse, much further 

behind. The season is essentially closed, non-existent. Our approach would first begin with a series of workshops with all of our 

stakeholders—commercial, charter-for-hire, recreational, everyone—and bring them together and say, ‘‘You help us design 

Florida’s program.’’ 

Dr. FLEMING. All right. Mr. Lowenthal is now recognized for 

5 minutes. 

Dr. LOWENTHAL. I appreciate this hearing. It is giving me a 

chance to learn more about what the critical issues are. 

So now, as I understand—and I think Mr. Risenhoover—because 

we do not have a really accurate way of accountability or measurement of the recreational fishing, they are managed with broad buffers. We manage them and set quotas based upon kind of a buffer 

system of what we think is available. And you then state, ‘‘Well, 

we want you to only be able to take a certain percentage of that.’’ 

Is that not correct? 

Mr. RISENHOOVER. That is correct. There is a management budget buffer in the recreational fishery that helps us ensure that that 

recreational fishery does not go over its quota. 

Dr. LOWENTHAL. Got it. 

Mr. RISENHOOVER. It has gone over in the past, and a court 

case—— 

Dr. LOWENTHAL. They have gone over in the past? 

Mr. RISENHOOVER. Yes, helped require us to have such a buffer. 

Dr. LOWENTHAL. I believe the states—and I believe what I am 

hearing, again, learning about is that those managing are wanting 

to have the state fisheries, or the state, have much more control 

over—believe that their measurement of it is better than—and so 

that they do not need these buffers. 

Is that not true, Mr. Barham? If you had control, or responsibility in the EEZ of, say, recreational fishing, you might not need 

these buffers because you have better data? 

Mr. BARHAM. Absolutely. Their protocols are woefully inadequate. He mentioned a court case. I will cite to you that 2, 3 years 

ago, Texas and Louisiana joined together and sued them about the 

allocation for Louisiana. 

In the Federal court in Brownsville, Texas we saw the difference 

between our data and their data. They extrapolated what they estimated our population off Louisiana—they extrapolated from their 

sampling from less than 30 fish to say what the total population 

of the fish was off Louisiana. And we comparably had, literally, 

33 

thousands of samples—weights, ages, health of the biomass. The 

Federal—— 

Dr. LOWENTHAL. Are there other ways, and I am going to ask 

both of you, of right now requiring, for example, recreational anglers to report all red snapper landings; would requiring that be 

helpful, as we move forward? 

Mr. BARHAM. Well, we, in essence, do that in Louisiana. We have 

what is called an offshore landing permit. We can individually contact those fishermen who have that offshore landing permit. 

In addition to that, as I said earlier—I don’t know if you were 

here—we selected all the larger docks in Louisiana, both private 

and public, and we send biologists to literally check the catch of the 

anglers coming to those docks. So, we get the vast majority not 

only of the counts, but the scientific data from the fish. We are 

keeping a real-time, whole population sample in Louisiana in LA 

Creel. 

Dr. LOWENTHAL. Mr. Risenhoover, what about other things? 

What about a system requiring the purchase of a red snapper fishery endorsement, or a stamp coupled with required self-reporting 

in the form of fish tags or some other mechanism? Would that increase funding for necessary red snapper research? Could we do 

that? Would it give us a better understanding? 

Are there other ways—if part of this is really the lack of trust 

or belief in what is out there, are there other ways in which we 

could be collecting data? 

Mr. RISENHOOVER. Yes, sir. Permits or a tag-type system is one 

way to get this additional detailed information from fishermen. It 

is a large number of fishermen, and we would need to manage that. 

As far as the funding goes, we have some legislative hurdles. For 

example, we could not collect the money from the tags and use it 

for that. We would need to look at that very closely. 

But yes, again, better data is always better. 

Dr. LOWENTHAL. Is that really the critical issue that we are talking about, the lack of or the belief that the Federal—NOAA—it is 

really the counting and what is going on, and that returning it to 

the state would give the states more ability to control, and to use 

their data, and so they would not need this kind of buffer thing? 

Does that lead, then—and I am going to ask in the next panel 

to people who are also concerned—that that would impact, for example, potentially, the commercial fishing? They would say, ‘‘Oh, 

my goodness. You are now kind of getting rid of that buffer. They 

are going to—at some point we are going to lose our number.’’ I will 

ask that question later on to the others on the commercial side. 

Dr. FLEMING. OK. The gentleman’s time is up. The Chair now 

recognizes the Chairman of the Full Committee, Mr. Bishop. 

Mr. BISHOP. Thank you. And we are just in panel one? OK. I appreciate you being here. I am sorry I was late, I was on the Floor 

before coming in here. 

As I understand it, the bill’s premise is that the states can do 

a better job than the Federal Government in managing our fishery 

resources, which is, admittedly, a low bar. But having said that, I 

am also looking in here with the idea that we are not in the business of putting people out of business. I want to make sure that 

34 

we have safeguards in there for commercial, charter fisheries. And 

I believe all three of you would say that is the same goal. 

But also, the status quo of having 10 days for recreational fisheries in Federal waters for red snapper is simply unacceptable. The 

status quo must change in some way. But let me, therefore, ask a 

couple of questions. 

First, to our friends from Louisiana and Florida, in your written 

testimonies—which I had a chance to read—as well as the fivestate plan, you indicate that the states are better equipped to manage the fishery. If that is the case, I guess the question is why 

should American taxpayers continue to pay for management of the 

snapper, when it would no longer be Federal Government managing the fishery? Could you respond to that one? 

Mr. BARHAM. Mr. Chairman, earlier in the committee hearing I 

spoke to one of the Members who expressed that same feeling. 

Mr. BISHOP. I apologize for being late, then. 

Mr. BARHAM. No, I told him that if that turned out to be the 

stumbling block, do not send me the money. Give me the authority 

to manage the fish; we will do a better job. 

Mr. BISHOP. Thank you. Mr. Wiley, I am assuming you would say 

something very similar to that? 

Mr. WILEY. Yes, sir. Thank you. 

Mr. BISHOP. OK. 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. BISHOP. It is refreshing to hear that, thank you. And I apologize if I am plowing ground that has already been seeded and 

planted. 

Let me do another one, once again, to Mr. Barham and Mr. 

Wiley. Are you two open to additional assurances that may be 

added to this bill that would address concerns of the commercial 

fishing industry about preserving their access? 

Mr. BARHAM. Absolutely. 

Mr. WILEY. Yes, sir. 

Mr. BISHOP. All right. Then let me throw another one out. And 

I am not advocating this, the question just needs to be asked about 

bifurcating the management of the states, whereas the states 

would manage the recreational side, the Federal would manage the 

commercial side. Is that something to which you would also be willing to discuss, or open? 

Mr. BARHAM. My personal opinion is I do not know exactly how 

it would work. That would be a real challenge, to have a bifurcated 

system. Of course, I am certainly willing to discuss any proposal, 

absolutely. 

Mr. BISHOP. OK. 

Mr. WILEY. Yes, sir. That is the same way we feel. It is a little 

tricky, pulling them apart, because they are very much closely 

aligned. 

Mr. BISHOP. All right. Like I say, I am just brainstorming here. 

I am not advocating that position, but it is an option that should 

be on the table. 

I look forward to working with you all as we continue, as this 

bill goes wherever this bill goes. I continue to work with you to 

make sure that we can come up with some good solutions. 

35 

I am very proud, because this is unusual for me. I have, like, 

2 minutes left. I am going to yield it back to you, Mr. Chairman. 

Dr. FLEMING. Very good. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And last in 

the first round we have Mr. Scott. You are recognized for 

5 minutes. 

Mr. SCOTT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate you allowing 

me to participate in this. I have fished the Gulf of Mexico since my 

granddad took me to fish off the Steinhatchee Bridge. And, as I 

was telling war stories with the good captain before, I think we 

have probably fished against each other in the Bay Point Billfish 

Tournament. The gentleman that ran our boat was a commercial 

fisherman. Certainly, I have no intent whatsoever to take anything 

from the commercial industry, or hurt them in any way, shape, or 

form. 

As someone who spent a lot of days on the Gulf, though, I do feel 

like the Council has taken something that was a right that 

Americans had—from them, the American fishermen. When we 

originally started making the changes to the fishery, I want you to 

know I actually supported a reduction in the number of days. I 

called, spoke to Roy Crabtree, as a matter of fact, told him I felt 

like our bycatch—that we were killing too many fish. 

One of the things that does not get talked about much is the fact 

that bringing the fish home does not kill the fish any deader than 

catching it and then throwing it back in the water. It does not 

make any difference to the population if I catch the fish in state 

waters, in the front of the boat, or if I catch it in Federal waters, 

in the back of the boat. The fish is still dead. In some cases I can 

bring him to shore, and in some cases I cannot, if I am across this 

line that the fish do not know about. 

But Mr. Crabtree testified—with due respect, Mr. Risenhoover— 

that the population of snapper was larger than it had been in the 

last 30 to 40 years. This was just a couple of weeks ago on—— 

Mr. RISENHOOVER. And that is correct, it is larger. 

Mr. SCOTT. So we, as the recreational fishermen—and again, I 

was one who supported the reduction in the number of days, based 

on the promise that we would get our season back when the fishery 

was restored—it is restored well beyond where it was when this 

started. 

So, for my colleagues, I will tell you they took us from 194 days 

with a 4-fish limit—as a dad who wants to take his kid fishing— 

194 with 4, to now 10 with 2. And, if I happen to be standing in 

the right place at the right time, and if I had gotten one of the 

right licenses, I could go out and catch 100 a day. But those permits were not auctioned off. And what is happening in many cases 

is, people who have a charter boat license and a commercial license 

are effectively selling their catch share as a charter trip. That is 

something that I think we need to address. 

The other thing I would suggest, that catch shares are—to collect 

revenue, and if it were oil, we would be auctioning it off to the general public and using the money to restore habitat. 

With that said, I want to go to you, Mr. Wiley, simply because 

I fish in your waters, and if I get stopped by the marine patrol 

down there I want to be able to tell them I know you. 

[Laughter.] 

36 

Mr. SCOTT. How do you propose to work together on the assessments and the data gathering? I know what I see when we are out 

there fishing. If you would just talk through that a little bit, and 

if you could talk to the issue of the bycatch a little bit. 

Mr. WILEY. Yes, sir. First, as far as working together, we have 

a great relationship with our partner states across the Gulf. We 

have been in the trenches together for years, and we collaborate on 

many things. The unfortunate Gulf oil spill brought us even closer 

together, and I have no doubt we can bring these things together. 

Part of this Act would require that we come together in a planning process, work with our stakeholders back home, and bring 

each flavor from each state together and work it out together. I 

have great confidence we can do that. 

Mr. SCOTT. Does NOAA currently contract with the states for the 

enforcement of any of the laws? 

Mr. WILEY. Yes, sir. We do a good bit of enforcement in Federal 

waters through funding that comes through NOAA. Yes, sir. 

Mr. SCOTT. Absolutely. So there is already a trust relationship 

between NOAA and the states with regard to allowing you to handle the law enforcement-related issues with regard to the very fisheries laws that we are talking about. 

Mr. WILEY. Yes, sir. That is a very good relationship. 

Mr. SCOTT. Mr. Chairman, again, I want to thank you for allowing me to be here. And to those of you from the commercial industry, look, all I want is my fishing season back. Taking a dad down 

to 10 days, I have not been able to go fishing since they did that. 

And that is just flat-out un-American. 

Dr. FLEMING. OK. The gentleman yields back. To the first panel, 

we thank you. Great job. We may have more questions for you that 

we may provide to you later in writing. We would appreciate a response within 10 days. You are now excused, and we ask the 

second panel to step forward. 

While the second panel is coming forward, I will go ahead and 

begin introducing them in the interest of time. 

First is Mr. Christopher Horton, Fisheries Program Director of 

the Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation from Bismarck, 

Arkansas; Captain Gary Jarvis, Owner of Back Down 2 Charters 

from Destin, Florida; Mr. Bob Zales, President of the National 

Association of Charterboat Operators from Hurley, Mississippi; Mr. 

Jason DeLaCruz, President and COO of Wild Seafood Company 

from East Madeira Beach, Florida; Ms. Haley Bittermann, 

Corporate Executive Chef and Director of Operations for Ralph 

Brennan Restaurant Group, New Orleans, Louisiana; and Mr. 

David Cresson, Executive Director and CEO of the Coastal 

Conservation Association from Baton Rouge, Louisiana. 

If everything goes right, everybody is sitting in the correct order. 

I cannot see all the names. OK, we are good. 

OK. Our panel of witnesses, we thank you for joining us today. 

Let me remind you about our Committee Rules. You must limit 

your oral statements to 5 minutes, but the entire statement will 

appear in the hearing record. 

I will also explain about the lights. You will be under a green 

light for 4 minutes, then a yellow light for the last minute. The 

light turns red quickly—conclude your statement. 

37 

We will probably be called for votes in about 15 minutes. We will 

try to get through the entire panel, if at all possible. Then we will 

recess and come back afterwards for questions. 

The Chair now recognizes Mr. Christopher Horton, Fisheries 

Program Director at the Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation to 

testify. 

STATEMENT OF CHRISTOPHER M. HORTON, FISHERIES 

PROGRAM DIRECTOR, CONGRESSIONAL SPORTSMEN’S 

FOUNDATION, BISMARCK, ARKANSAS 

Mr. HORTON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Congressman Huffman, 

and members of the committee. My name is Chris Horton, I am the 

Fisheries Program Director for the Congressional Sportsmen’s 

Foundation. 

I began my career as a fisheries management biologist for a state 

natural resource agency, and then as the Conservation Director for 

BASS before joining CSF in 2010. I currently serve on the 

Recreational Fisheries Working Group of the Marine Fisheries 

Advisory Committee, and I have served previous terms on the 

Sport Fish Partnership Council, as well as the National Fish 

Habitat Board. 

However, I am also a private recreational angler that goes to the 

Gulf of Mexico at least twice a year to fish both inshore and offshore. I am thankful for the opportunity to be back before your 

committee to discuss the issue of Federal management of our recreational fisheries, and specifically in the context of H.R. 3094. 

In my 2013 testimony regarding the Marine Recreational 

Information Program, or MRIP, I tried to convey how this program, 

though a significant improvement over the old MRF system, would 

never be able to provide the necessary information for in-season 

quota monitoring and closures that the Federal system management requires, especially for red snapper. Two years later, we are 

still in that same boat. Because of both an inadequate data collection system and an inappropriate model for the recreational sector, 

we continue to be penalized for a rebuilding fishery. 

Based on my previous experience of managing a fishery for a 

state agency, I know the states can do better. The problem is not 

with MRIP itself, which is actually a pretty good program for what 

it was designed to do, and that is to be a broad, general survey to 

measure angler effort and catch across multiple species around our 

Nation’s coasts. It was never intended to collect precise data for a 

specific fishery that lasts only a few days. 

Red snapper harvest estimates are not available until at least a 

month after the season has ended, so it is impossible to determine 

if NOAA’s best guess at the season length resulted in supposedly 

too many fish being caught, or the fact that we could have actually 

fished a few more days. 

Frustrated with managing the fishery based on guesswork, the 

states have developed their own angler data collection programs. 

As Secretary Barham has mentioned, Louisiana started LA Creel 

in 2013, which was funded by an increase in license fees, fully supported by their anglers because they trusted that their state agency 

could do a better job. During its first year alone, LA Creel was able 

38 

to survey around 50 times more anglers and intercept around 23 

times more harvested fish than the MRIP survey in the state. 

But to truly manage a fishery, you need to know more than just 

what the anglers are harvesting. You need to understand what the 

population looks like and how it responds to your management actions in real time. Relying heavily, as the Federal model does, on 

getting a picture of the population primarily by what has landed 

on the docks is an inherently biased way to approach it. That is 

why, generally, states assess populations based largely on fisheryindependent data, like catch-per-unit effort, as a foundation. Not 

only does catch-per-unit give you better estimates of population 

abundance, but this type of fishery-independent sampling allows an 

opportunity to collect reliable information on size and age structure, relative health of fish within the fishery, et cetera. 

This level of understanding of what is going on with the actual 

population and the capacity to respond in real time is what makes 

state management more effective than Federal management. One 

need only look at the state-managed fisheries to see the resounding 

success of their management approach, both in fresh water and 

salt water fisheries. 

State fisheries managers use the same model, whether managing 

primarily catch-and-release trophy fisheries, like some large-mouth 

bass, trout, and snook, or catching grease fisheries, as we would 

call it in the South, popular harvestable fish like crappie, spotted 

sea trout, or walleye, because it works, regardless of management. 

That is why you practically never hear of fisheries managed 

under the state model as being overfished or collapsing. Despite 

what some may lead you to believe, this is not commercial fishermen versus charter-for-hire fishermen versus individual anglers. 

While the current model is supported by a handful of commercial 

fishermen fortunate enough to be handed a share of the public resource, it is not appropriate for the recreational sector—either 

private anglers or the charter-for-hire industry. 

The Gulf red snapper population is a public trust resource, and 

the American public deserves an accountable management system 

that optimizes access to that resource. H.R. 3094 will provide that 

accountability, preserve the current commercial fishery as is, and 

ensure continued sustainability of the red snapper fishery, promote 

access for all anglers, whether they pay a charter captain to take 

them to their fish or have the means to catch them themselves. 

For this reason, I urge you to support H.R. 3094, and ensure the 

appropriate management of this important species for the benefit 

of all Americans. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Horton follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CHRIS HORTON, FISHERIES PROGRAM DIRECTOR, 

CONGRESSIONAL SPORTSMEN’S FOUNDATION

Thank you Mr. Chairman, Congressman Huffman and members of the committee. 

My name is Chris Horton, and I’m the Fisheries Program Director for the 

Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation (CSF). Established in 1989, CSF works with 

Congress, governors, and state legislatures to protect and advance hunting, angling, 

recreational shooting and trapping. 

An avid angler myself, I began my career as a fisheries research biologist for a 

state natural resource agency. Prior to joining CSF in 2010, I held the position of 

conservation director for B.A.S.S., the largest angling organization in the world. I 

currently serve on the Recreational Fisheries Working Group of the Marine 

39 

Fisheries Advisory Committee, and I have previously served on the Sport Fishing 

and Boating Partnership Council for the Secretary of Interior and the board of the 

National Fish Habitat Partnership. Though perhaps most importantly relative to 

this hearing today, I’m a private recreational angler who travels to the Gulf of 

Mexico at least a couple of times each year to fish, both inshore and offshore. 

I’m thankful for the opportunity to be back before your subcommittee to discuss 

the issue of Federal management of our recreational fisheries, and specifically in the 

context of H.R. 3094. In my 2013 testimony regarding the Marine Recreational 

Information Program, or MRIP, I tried to convey how this program, though a significant improvement over the previous Federal survey known as MRFSS, would never 

be able to provide the necessary information for in-season quota monitoring and closures that the Federal system of management requires—especially for Gulf of 

Mexico red snapper. Two years later, that analysis continues to hold true. As a result of this reliance on inaccurate data and an inappropriate management model for 

the recreational sector in which to apply that data, anglers in the Gulf have gone 

from a total of 42 days of Federal red snapper season in 2013, to just 10 days in 

2015, despite the healthiest population of red snapper on record. While the current 

system of management under the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and 

the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council (Council) seems to work for the 

commercial sector, it ultimately penalizes recreational anglers for a rebuilding, and 

possibly even rebuilt, fishery. The states can simply do better. 

MRIP was developed to be a general survey of recreational angling effort and 

catch across multiple species around the Nation’s coasts. It was never designed to 

have a level of precision to accurately measure angler harvest for in-season closures 

during relatively short fishing seasons, like Gulf red snapper, which NMFS is specifically required to do under 407(d) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act (MSA). Red snapper harvest estimates are not available until months after the season has ended, 

so it’s impossible to determine if NMFS’s best guess at how long to set the season 

hit its mark, if anglers supposedly exceeded their quota, or if they could have had 

more days to fish, until well after the season is closed. 

A good example of MRIP’s inefficiency with measuring harvest of red snapper was 

in Mississippi this year. Through June 2015, MRIP indicated that Mississippi’s recreational anglers landed zero red snapper, while their charter/for-hire fleet landed 

only 3,500 pounds. Conversely, right next door in Alabama, MRIP estimated the recreational sector landed 2.1 million pounds. It should be noted that this inaccurate 

data feeds into the Federal stock assessments which determine season lengths for 

the following year. Thus, the problem continues to perpetuate itself. 

Frustrated with managing a fishery based on guesswork, the states have developed their own fishery-dependent data collection programs for their private recreational anglers. As Secretary Barham has mentioned, Louisiana started LA Creel 

in 2013. Louisiana’s anglers even supported increasing their own license fees to 

cover the cost of the program because they trusted that their state agency could do 

a better job. Their confidence was justified. During its first year alone, LA Creel was 

able to survey around 50 times more anglers and intercept 23 times more harvested 

fish than MRIP surveys in the state. In addition, Louisiana often collects biological 

information from the fish they count, such as tissue samples and otoliths for ageing, 

which gives them a better picture of the actual red snapper population—something 

MRIP never does. The other Gulf states have begun similar programs that are 

proving to be equally as effective in gathering much more accurate information. 

In addition to the significantly more precise fishery-dependent data from the recreational sector, the states have historically and successfully relied on fisheryindependent data for a more accurate assessment of fish population condition, as 

well as a snapshot of how the population is responding to current management actions, in real time. By sampling the actual population, and not what is landing on 

the docks, you get a clearer picture of population characteristics. Most importantly 

is estimates of abundance, but also age structure, relative health of fish within the 

fishery, etc. Their ability to conduct more frequent and accurate population assessments, and the capacity to respond in near real time, is what makes state management more effective than Federal management. 

Unlike tuna, wahoo, mahi or other migratory species, red snapper have high siteaffinity, meaning they tend to stay in a relatively small area and in localized populations. Since they do not regularly migrate between jurisdictions, it makes sense, 

biologically, for the states to manage their red snapper fishery off their shoreline 

independently, rather than as one Gulf wide population as is done under the current 

Federal management framework. The red snapper population off the coast of Texas 

can be very different than the red snapper population off the coast of Florida. Likewise, what works best for Texas anglers might not work as well for Florida’s anglers. A great example of how the states manage their own fisheries according to 

40 

stock health, abundance and angler preference can be found with seatrout. Florida 

has two different zones of management, one of which allows anglers to harvest four 

trout, while the other zone allows up to five to be harvested. Conversely, because 

the habitat and conditions are different, Louisiana’s anglers can harvest 25 trout 

along most of the coast, and only 15 in a few waterways where habitat is more limited. States manage according to the capacity of individual stocks. 

One need only look at state-managed fisheries to see the resounding success of 

their management approach, both in fresh and saltwater fisheries. State fisheries 

managers use the same model, whether managing primarily catch-and-release 

trophy fisheries (like some largemouth bass, trout, snook and tarpon fisheries) or 

harvest intensive fisheries (crappie, catfish, red drum, sheepshead, spotted seatrout, 

walleye and yellow perch), because it works well regardless of management goals. 

At the same time, you almost never hear of these fisheries being ‘‘overfished’’ or 

undergoing ‘‘overfishing’’ as defined in the Magnuson-Steven’s Act. In contrast, however, virtually every fishery where there are problems with sustainability and overfishing is occurring, Federal management is in place. 

I think the frequent inability of Federal fisheries managers to effectively manage 

recreational fisheries is a product of how they are required to approach fisheries 

management. States have a responsibility and mission to manage a fishery for maximum health so that they can provide ample opportunities for the public to enjoy 

their resource. To do this, they rely on actual, timely population data in addition 

to estimates of angler harvest. State management success is measured on both a 

robust fishery and a satisfied public, with no incentive to do otherwise. Unlike the 

states, Federal managers are required by law to manage a fishery, in part, on the 

concept of maximum sustained yield (MSY), which by its very definition causes 

managers to decrease the abundance of a population and squeeze the most pounds 

out of a fishery while trying not to collapse it. Because of the inherent variability 

in their assessments that rely heavily on harvest estimates, they must include conservative buffers to keep from exceeding the overfishing limit. The fewer the fishermen in the fishery, the easier it is to achieve this goal. Essentially, the National 

Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) has built their management model around the 

commercial management model of managing or constraining the fishermen to attempt to keep a fishery from failing. But the states’ model manages for a healthy 

population and a robust fishery in order to optimize access for fishermen, both 

commercial and recreational. From a species conservation, harvest sustainability, 

and overall public satisfaction perspective, the state approach is simply a better 

methodology. 

Despite what some may lead you to believe, this isn’t about commercial fishermen 

versus charter/for-hire fishermen versus individual anglers. While the current model 

is supported by a handful of commercial fishermen fortunate enough to be given a 

share of this public resource, it is not appropriate for the recreational sector, either 

private anglers or the charter/for-hire industry. The Gulf red snapper population is 

a public trust resource, and the American public deserves an accountable management system that maximizes access to their resource. 

H.R. 3094 will provide that accountability, preserve the current commercial fishery, ensure continued sustainability of the red snapper fishery as a whole and promote access for all anglers, whether they pay a charter captain to take them to their 

fish or have the means to catch them themselves. For these reasons, I urge you to 

support H.R. 3094, and in so doing, ensure that one of the Nation’s most important 

marine species is successfully and appropriately managed for the benefit of all 

Americans. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD BY THE HON. GARRET GRAVES TO MR. 

CHRISTOPHER M. HORTON, FISHERIES PROGRAM DIRECTOR, CONGRESSIONAL

SPORTSMEN’S FOUNDATION

Question 1. We often hear that red snapper management in the Gulf of Mexico 

is broken because the season in Federal waters is so short—only 10 days this year. 

1a. But can’t anglers legally fish for red snapper in Federal waters 365 days a 

year, and that only the possession of red snapper is limited? 

Answer. While it is not illegal to catch red snapper anytime in any jurisdiction, 

the requirement to release the fish outside the very narrow 10-day window essentially denies the recreational angler an opportunity to choose whether or not to harvest the fish. That choice is fundamentally the definition of access to a public trust 

fisheries resource. When populations are depleted, drastic reductions in effort are 

understandable, and in fact, are advocated for by recreational anglers. However, 

41 

when populations are at record abundance and size, as in the case of Gulf red snapper, this extremely limited access to the fishery is illogical and is the reason for the 

lack of trust in the ability of Federal managers to fairly and effectively manage the 

red snapper. 

1b. Are recreational anglers unaccountable to quotas and responsible 

management? 

Answer. Recreational anglers are the primary supporters of fisheries conservation. 

Anglers who fish for red snapper abide by the laws regarding season and bag limits, 

report their catch as required, and purchase the appropriate fishing licenses annually. Essentially, they abide by the rules and regulations they are given and advocate for additional regulations when necessary to protect or enhance the stock. 

Furthermore, they gladly pay an excise tax on their fishing tackle and equipment, 

marine electronics and motorboat fuels, all of which goes back to the states to fund 

fisheries conservation. For these reasons, it is difficult to comprehend how recreational anglers could ever be labeled ‘‘unaccountable.’’ Rather, it would be more 

accurate to say the current, wholly inappropriate system of Federal management is 

unaccountable to recreational anglers. 

1c. What other factors contribute to a shortened Federal season? 

Answer. The short recreational season in Federal waters is not a result of the 

potential for recreational anglers to negatively impact the resource, but rather the 

product of forcing recreational anglers into a system of management designed for 

commercial fisheries. Commercial fisheries are managed for yield. They are pursued 

by relatively few fishers, all with (understandably) the same goal—to harvest as 

many fish as possible as efficiently as possible in order to maximize profit from the 

sale of whatever species they pursue. Commercial landings can usually be counted 

or weighed in real time, thus quotas can be enforced in real time. This allows managers to close a fishery before the allowable catch is exceeded. In short, a commercial fishery’s catch can be managed in real time and based on verified landings. 

Managing commercial fisheries based on biomass or yield makes sense. 

Managing the recreational component of marine fisheries with similar yield-based 

parameters, on the other hand, does not. The Gulf of Mexico red snapper fishery 

is a prime example of where managing a recreational fishery based on total yield, 

rather than in relation to the health of the fishery, is having a devastating and unnecessary impact on recreational anglers and coastal economies. Even though 

methodologies to estimate recreational harvest have improved since the last Magnuson-Stevens reauthorization, recreational anglers continue to be penalized as stock 

biomass increases. The red snapper fishery is as healthy as it’s been in decades, 

with more and bigger fish in the fishery. Because the average weight and abundance of red snapper has increased, seasonal opportunities to access the healthy 

stock are further reduced each year in order to keep the estimated recreational harvest in pounds under a best guess at an appropriate ACL. Ultimately, the healthier 

the Gulf of Mexico red snapper population gets, the less anglers can fish. It is absurd to manage fisheries in this way. The current management system simply 

doesn’t work and is an injustice for recreational anglers. 

Question 2. H.R. 3094 states that Gulf Coast state fishery management plans 

should be consistent with the Magnuson-Stevens Act ‘‘to the extent practicable,’’ but 

does not require them to meet Magnuson standards. 

2a. How can we be assured that the states will act in the best interests of the 

resource? 

Answer. Within the mission and/or statutory responsibility of every state natural 

resource agency is a clear directive to manage the natural resources for sustainability and enjoyment of their people, now and in the future. The mission of the 

Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, for instance, is, ‘‘To manage and conserve the 

natural and cultural resources of Texas and to provide hunting, fishing and outdoor 

recreation opportunities for the use and enjoyment of present and future generations.’’ Likewise, the Mississippi Department of Marine Resources was created to, 

‘‘. . . enhance, protect and conserve marine interests of the state. We manage all 

marine life, public trust wetlands, adjacent uplands and waterfront areas, and provide for the balanced commercial, recreational, educational and economic uses of 

these resources consistent with environmental concerns and social changes.’’ All five 

Gulf states have similar goals and missions. Conservation and sustainability for current and future generations are the core tenants of why these agencies exist, and 

they can’t do that without managing for a healthy, sustainable resource first and 

foremost. 

42 

As I stated in my testimony, I think the inability of Federal fisheries managers 

to effectively manage recreational fisheries, while states seem to succeed easily, is 

a product of how they are required to approach fisheries management. States have 

a responsibility and mission to manage a fishery for maximum health so that they 

can provide ample opportunities for the public to enjoy their resource. They have 

no incentive to do otherwise. Unlike the states, Federal managers are required by 

law to manage a fishery, in part, on the concept of maximum sustained yield (MSY), 

which by its very definition causes managers to decrease the abundance of a population and squeeze the most pounds out of a fishery while trying not to collapse it. 

The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) has built their management model 

around the commercial management model of constraining the fishermen to attempt 

to keep a fishery from failing. Essentially, states manage for the resource first— 

anglers second, while NMFS just manages fishermen so the inherent uncertainty in 

their management model doesn’t ultimately collapse the fishery. State management 

is simply more effective for both the resource and the public. 

However, perhaps the most compelling evidence that the states will act in the best 

interest of the resource, despite the lack of specific, inflexible standards of MSA included in the bill, is the fact that the states have successfully managed thousands 

of fish populations and their associated fisheries, both commercially and 

recreationally, with few, if any, MSA type guidelines in their own state statutes. For 

decades they’ve proven their mission, their responsibility to the resource and the expectation of their citizens are all the guidance they need to be successful. 

Question 3. We have heard about the failures of NOAA’s recreational fishery data 

collection systems: the Marine Recreational Fisheries Statistics Survey (MRFSS) 

and the Marine Recreational Information Program (MRIP). 

3a. Can you describe the purposes for which these systems were originally established? And the purposes for which they have ultimately been used? What have 

been the assessments from the scientific accountability community? 

Answer. Basically, MRFSS and MRIP are programs used to ultimately estimate 

angler harvest. MRFSS, the first system employed back in 1979, used randomized 

calls to coastal households, whether they were anglers or not, in the hopes if contacting enough anglers to get a statistically acceptable sample size for harvest estimates. In addition to modifying the survey methodologies, MRIP targets known 

coastal anglers, so the ability to contact actual anglers, enhanced response rate and 

the larger sample size is a significant improvement over the old MRFSS system. 

However, MRIP was developed to be a general survey of recreational angling 

effort and catch across multiple species around the Nation’s coasts. It was never designed to have a level of precision to accurately measure angler harvest for inseason closures during relatively short fishing seasons, like Gulf red snapper, which 

NMFS is specifically required to do under 407(d) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act 

(MSA). Red snapper harvest estimates are not available until months after the season has ended, so it’s impossible to determine if NMFS’s best guess at how long to 

set the season hit its mark, if anglers supposedly exceeded their quota, or if they 

could have had more days to fish, until well after the season is closed. 

3b. How do you assess that opportunity today? Can consumers access domestic red 

snapper at markets and in restaurants? 

Answer. Yes, and nothing in this bill will impact that availability. The Gulf states 

successfully manage other commercial fisheries in their waters and will continue to 

manage for a healthy, viable commercial red snapper fishery if given full management authority. 

3c. Should the opportunity to purchase red snapper be at the expense of America’s 

sportsmen and women to access this plentiful public resource? 

Answer. No, and I believe you can manage this fishery to balance access for both 

America’s anglers and members of the public who do not fish, but who enjoy eating 

Gulf-caught red snapper. Under the current management model, only commercial 

fishermen benefit. State-based management under H.R. 3094 would ensure that 

each sector, both commercial and recreational (and thereby the general public at 

large), have the appropriate access to the resource. 

Dr. FLEMING. Thank you, Mr. Horton. 

The Chair now recognizes Mr. Jarvis for 5 minutes. 

43 

STATEMENT OF GARY JARVIS, OWNER, BACK DOWN 2 

CHARTER FISHING, DESTIN, FLORIDA 

Mr. JARVIS. Chairman Fleming, Ranking Member Huffman, and 

distinguished committee members, thank you for giving me this opportunity to share my concerns and thoughts that represent those 

of thousands of businessmen in northwest Florida and the Gulf of 

Mexico who are tied to the professional fishing and tourism 

industry. 

For the past 39 years, I have fished for red snapper and other 

species recreationally and commercially, and have run a highly successful charter-for-hire operation. I am now an investing partner 

and owner with my two sons in three waterfront seafood restaurants in Destin. I represent my own small business and over 80 

charter operators as the president of the Destin Charter Boat 

Association, the largest federally-permitted for-hire fleet in the 

Gulf of Mexico. I am also a board member of the Northwest Florida 

Chapter of the Florida Restaurant and Lodging Association, which 

has more than a million members in the state. 

I want to make clear that this legislation is very controversial 

among Gulf fishermen, restaurant owners, and others involved in 

the seafood industry throughout the United States. Many of us 

strongly believe that if Congress passes this bill, it will harm small 

coastal businesses, tourism, and the red snapper fishery itself. 

I question the need for H.R. 3094 when existing provisions in 

the Magnuson-Stevens Act are capable of addressing every issue 

this bill claims to fix. In fact, the rebuilding progress due to MSA 

has been so effective that this year the annual catch limit for red 

snapper increased by 30 percent, bringing landings from 11 million 

pounds to over 14. That is more than two times the entire annual 

catch limit of 5.1 million pounds in 2005. This increase is a result 

of uniform Gulf-wide management, and it happens even with the 

states actively working against Federal management by opening 

longer seasons in their state waters. 

The MSA has been the gold standard of resource management 

for 40 years. This bill would take a single species of fish out of the 

MSA under the guise that somehow individual coastal states can 

manage it better. This proposal would give five state wildlife 

directors total control over a valuable fishery, and create a system 

with less oversight, fewer checks and balances, fewer resources, 

fewer science protocols, and little to no stakeholder input. A threemember voting body could dictate winners and losers in the red 

snapper fishery. And, for our fleet, that is worrisome. 

There are no specifics in this bill to show how the states will pay 

to duplicate stock assessment resources for one species. This plan 

is a monetary black hole and creates inefficiencies and bureaucracies that do not make good sense. There has been no proof that 

this would actually result in better management. In my opinion, 

H.R. 3094 will open the door for special interests, political malfeasance by taking red snapper management out from under the oversight of congressional stewardship and Federal law. 

Proponents of this bill do not offer any road map for how 

H.R. 3094 is to address failures in the Federal management of red 

snapper by the Gulf Council and the five Gulf states. They already 

44 

have significant influence in management decisions through the 

Gulf Council. 

This legislation stems from the so-called problem that was created, in part, by the states themselves. The states continue to extend red snapper season in their waters, despite the majority of the 

red snapper biomass existing in Federal waters. These state policies have only hurt the private angling fishing experience. And 

now, much of the yearly recreational allocation is caught in state 

waters, while Federal waters are closed, blocking our charter customers’ access to the fishery. 

The federally-permitted commercial and charter-for-hire sectors 

have worked tirelessly through the Regional Council process and 

under Federal law to develop fishery management plans that will 

work to increase public access to the red snapper fishery, to promote tourism, commerce, and successful fishing businesses Gulfwide. It is only the private boat lobby and their state agencies who 

want to circumvent Federal law to suit their own needs, without 

coming up with any concrete solutions. The recreational angler organizations have the same opportunities and the same capabilities 

as we do to work through the Council process. 

H.R. 3094 is a private boat lobby’s attempt to take a public resource from the majority of our Nation’s citizens to create an elite, 

private angler fishery. Most Americans cannot afford blue water 

fishing boats that cost $75,000 to $300,000 to access red snapper. 

That is another reason why we object to this legislation. We feel 

all Americans should have a form of affordable access to wildcaught Gulf seafood, whether on a plate or at the end of a pole 

aboard an affordable charter trip. 

Remember, our businesses are the access portal of federallymanaged species for the majority of the U.S. population and your 

constituents. The entire allocation for charter-for-hire and commercial fishing companies are caught or consumed by the U.S. public. 

For these reasons we want no part of H.R. 3094 or the attempt by 

the private boat lobby to rob our for-hire customers and seafood 

consumers of their historical access to this Nation’s fishery 

resource. 

On behalf of the Destin Charter Boat Association, and in my individual capacity as a northwest Florida businessman and community representative, I respectfully ask the subcommittee members 

to end this attempt to circumvent the MSA and to keep the Gulf 

red snapper fishery under Federal management. Thank you. 

[Applause.] 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Jarvis follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CAPTAIN GARY JARVIS, OWNER, BACK DOWN 2 CHARTER

FISHING INC., DESTIN, FLORIDA

Chairman Fleming, Ranking Member Huffman, and members of the subcommittee: I would like to thank you for the opportunity to express my professional 

perspective on H.R. 3094, the Gulf States Red Snapper Management Authority Act. 

I approach this legislation with multi-faceted experience, a lifetime of participation 

in Gulf of Mexico fisheries, and a commitment to the proper management of Gulf 

of Mexico reef fish and red snapper fisheries. 

Every aspect of my life has revolved around healthy and robust Gulf fisheries. For 

the past 39 years I have plied my trade and provided for my family by spending 

a large portion of my life at sea in the Gulf of Mexico. During the course of my fishing career I have worn many hats, including that of a recreational fisherman 

45 

operating a successful charter for-hire business during the summer and that of a 

high lining commercial fisherman in the winter. As my career is slowly coming to 

a close, I have further integrated my life in these fisheries by wearing the hat of 

investing partner and owner with my sons in three waterfront seafood restaurants 

located on Destin Harbor and Choctawhatchee Bay. 

I come before this committee as a representative of my own small mom and pop 

fishing company, and as president of the Destin Charter Boat Association whose 

members make up the largest federally-permitted charter-for-hire fleet in the Gulf 

of Mexico. I am also actively involved in promoting the entire Destin and Northwest 

Florida tourism community as a board member for the northwest Florida chapter 

of the Florida Restaurant and Lodging Association, the largest professional association in the state with over a million members. My comments will address my concerns with this proposed legislation, as well as the concerns of stakeholders in the 

red snapper fishery that I represent in northwest Florida and throughout the Gulf 

of Mexico. 

First, I want to make clear that this legislation is very controversial among fishermen. Many of us strongly believe that if Congress passes it, it would be harmful 

to the fishery, and in short order, small coastal businesses and coastal tourism. I 

question the need for H.R. 3094 when there are existing provisions within the effective Magnuson-Stevens Act that address every issue that this Bill claims it can fix. 

Although the law isn’t perfect, most everyone in this room can acknowledge that 

the Magnuson-Stevens Act has done and continues to do its job. It has been so effective, in fact, that it exceeded even the authors of the legislation expectations. This 

legacy law has been the gold standard of resource management for decades. The 

original authors had assured that this historical law would remain relevant through 

the decades because they saw fit to add provisions that would allow future legislators to periodically improve the law and address any modern issue that has arisen 

over its 40 year existence. 

Even though the MSA has served our Nation well and provides the flexibility to 

make needed improvements, some want to circumvent this existing fair and open 

public Federal fishery management process to get what they want. This Bill will 

take a single species of reef fish out of the MSA under the guise that somehow the 

individual coastal states can do a better job. But it is far from clear that this would 

actually manage the resource better, particularly when the bill would set up another 

bureaucratic entity with no written plans, no written state laws or state constitutional language that lay out resource management frameworks. In my professional 

opinion, H.R. 3094 will open the door for special interest political fishery management malfeasance by taking red snapper management away from established 

Federal law and the oversight of congressional stewardship. 

The rebuilding progress due to MSA provisions has been so effective that this year 

the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council was able to approve a 30 percent 

increase in the annual catch limit for red snapper, bringing landings from 11 million 

pounds to over 14 million pounds. That is more than two times the entire annual 

catch limit of 5.1 million pounds in 2005. This increase is the result of uniform, gulfwide management and happened despite that each of the five Gulf states had red 

snapper seasons inconsistent with the Federal season in 2015. Even with the states 

actively working against Federal management, provisions within the MSA are rebuilding the stock and ultimately expand long term access to red snapper for all 

Americans. 

Charter-for-hire captains throughout the Gulf, and many commercial fishermen, 

chefs, and others involved in the seafood industry, are deeply concerned that this 

legislation will lead to an eventual, exclusive recreational fishery for Gulf of Mexico 

red snapper. My greatest concern is that this proposed legislation will give five state 

wildlife management directors total control of an individual iconic fishery in a system that has less oversight, fewer checks and balances, fewer financial and staff resources, less mandated science protocol, and less stakeholder input. It will create 

the reality that a three-member voting block out of five state directors can dictate 

who wins or loses in red snapper access issues. How can this system more effectively manage red snapper and not fall prey to local state-against-state politics, special interest policies, or unsavory influences that may harm other stakeholders in 

the fishery, and the fishery itself? 

What is left out of this proposed shift in management responsibility is the concern 

for the resource. Where will be the focus when the state next door has a longer season than yours does? Will protecting the resource still be the focus? Proponents of 

H.R. 3094 made it clear that the new Gulf states management agency is modeled 

on the striped bass plan put into place by the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries 

Commission and tout it as a state management success. But that plan as well as 

this one does not require the ending of overfishing or rebuilding overfished stocks. 

46 

It also did not require the same biological benchmarks and best available science 

mandated in MSA. And today that success story has now become a failure as striped 

bass stocks are in steady decline and soon will be required to be declared overfished. 

Proponents of this bill do not offer any roadmap for how H.R. 3094 is to address 

supposed failures in the Federal management of red snapper by the Gulf Council 

and NMFS. The five Gulf states already have significant influence in red snapper 

management decisions through the make-up of the Gulf Council. Under the guidelines of the MSA, 17 members vote on the Gulf Council, and only one is a Federal 

employee who addresses the position of NMFS and gives guidance to the rule of law 

and the process. Five voting members are paid state employees who express and address the specific policy of each state commission. In fact, the state directors themselves can all sit on this Council and express their views and vote on issues before 

the Council. The remaining 11 voting members are all appointed by each state 

governor and approved by the Secretary of Commerce. 

Sixteen out of 17 voting members have direct ties to all five coastal states and 

their governors and state commissions. So the same state directors who already 

have the capability to manage and address their state’s needs are asserting that the 

present system has failed. That seems hypocritical considering that those state 

agencies are also responsible for recreational data collection and establishing comanagement policies with NMFS for the entire red snapper fishery. So now they 

say trust us, we can manage this Federal resource better without your congressional 

oversight and Federal guidelines while they are asserting that they failed at it. I 

say this tongue in cheek, but something smells fishy! 

Leaders of the private recreational groups that are pressing for this bill have 

taken a ‘‘let them eat tilapia’’ attitude to the majority of American consumers and 

public saltwater anglers who access Gulf Federal fisheries via federally-permitted 

commercial and charter for-hire vessels and businesses. Although these two sectors 

of the red snapper fisheries have tried to find compromise with the private boat 

lobby, it has now become apparent that their end game is not to share the resource 

in a fair and equitable manner but to end the commercial fishery, the seafood consumer’s access nationwide and any other entity that would compete for their members’ access, including the federally-permitted charter for-hire fleet. 

Gulf states have already shown a desire to squeeze out those who want to fish 

in Federal waters on charter-for-hire vessels by extending red snapper recreational 

seasons in the state waters they manage. This state water loophole has squeezed 

out our clients for more than 6 years, and this legislation opens the door for Gulf 

states to do more of the same.This scorched-earth policy has allowed the yearly recreational red snapper allocation to be caught by private boat anglers in state waters 

while the Federal EEZ is closed, preventing our customers their historical access to 

the fishery. Through the Council process and by following the mandates of the MSA, 

Sector Separation (Amendment 40) will prevent us from being handicapped by the 

harmful actions of the states and their commissions. And after working for 8 years 

to become good stewards of this resource, we come to Washington to fight this latest 

attempt to put us back under the yoke of those same scorched-earth policies promoted by the states. The federally-permitted commercial and charter for-hire sectors 

have worked tirelessly through the Council process and under Federal law to develop fishery management plans that work for increased public access to the rebuilding red snapper fishery, promote tourism, commerce and successful fishing 

businesses Gulf-wide. It is only the private boat lobby and their state agencies who 

want to circumvent Federal law to suit their own greed without coming up with solutions. 

H.R. 3094 would exempt red snapper from successful management standards but 

still leave the Federal Government with the bill. Management would be turned over 

to the states with little oversight and virtually no standards or accountability and 

there is no plan in the bill that would determine how the states will pay for this 

new responsibility. Fiscally, this plan is a black hole and creates inefficiencies in 

bureaucracy that do not make good sense in our current budgetary climate. The 

states have the same capability as do we to work through the MSA-mandated 

Council process to transfer management of those portions of the fishery that desire 

it to the states. But our fleet has the ability to effectively manage the portion of 

allocation set aside for the non-boat owning saltwater angler and want no part of 

state management because we have no confidence in their ability to treat our customers and industry in a fair manner. 

On behalf of the Destin Charter Boat Association and in my individual capacity 

as a northwest Florida businessman and community representative, I respectfully 

ask the subcommittee members to end this attempt to circumvent the MSA and 

keep the red snapper fishery under Federal management. Amendment 40 has given 

the charter for-hire sector the ability to effectively manage the portion set aside for 

47 

the non-boat-owning saltwater angler, and we have faith that the successes realized 

under the MSA will continue. For these reasons, we want no part of H.R. 3094 as 

well as the veiled attempt by the private boat lobby to rob our customers and 

seafood consumers of their historical access to this Nation’s fish resources. 

Dr. FLEMING. Thank you, Mr. Jarvis. The Chair now recognizes 

Mr. Zales, President of the National Association of Charterboat 

Operators. 

STATEMENT OF ROBERT F. ZALES, PRESIDENT, NATIONAL 

ASSOCIATION OF CHARTERBOAT OPERATORS, HURLEY, 

MISSISSIPPI 

Mr. ZALES. Chairman Fleming, Ranking Member Huffman, and 

members of the subcommittee, my name is Robert F. Zales, II. I am 

appearing today on behalf of the National Association of 

Charterboat Operators. Thank you for your invitation to present 

testimony on H.R. 3094, that will add desperately needed and long 

overdue flexibility to the management of Gulf of Mexico red snapper by allowing the five Gulf states the ability to take over 

management. 

NACO represents charterboat owners and operators across the 

United States, including the Great Lakes, with a substantial membership from the Gulf of Mexico. My family and I have been in the 

charter and commercial fishing sectors for 50 years. Until this 

May, I was actively involved in fishery management for over 26 

years, providing advice, testimony, publications, and helping to design charter fishing data collection programs on Federal, state, and 

local levels. Due to my mother’s recent medical issues that began 

this past April, I have resigned from all the voluntary advisory positions I have held to take care of her, but still stay abreast of all 

issues that affect my industry. 

The majority of the members in the Gulf have no confidence in 

the continued management of red snapper by the NMFS. Stakeholders have made multiple requests to state marine source agencies to take over data collection and provide more local control over 

red snapper, resulting in all five Gulf states developing new and 

improved data collection methods and an improved effort in 

Congress to advance H.R. 3094. 

We have worked with Congress to make positive changes to the 

MSA on collection of recreational fishery data and other management issues. Current requirements of the MSA are overly restrictive, require arbitrary rebuilding timelines based on no science, 

and do not allow any flexibility in management. Flexibility in management must be allowed, which is why we fully support and encourage the passage of H.R. 3094. 

Problems with the NMFS management of red snapper are many, 

and apparently cannot be fixed under Federal management. In the 

Gulf of Mexico, when you put a baited hook in the water, odds are 

you will catch a red snapper. While the red snapper biomass continues to increase, the number of days available to the recreational 

sector has steadily declined since 1996, and has been drastically reduced since 2007. 

When you view the biomass growth of red snapper over time, you 

see a steady upper trend with no decline in any year, regardless 

48 

of any quota over-runs. The NMFS has consistently punished the 

recreational sector by reducing allowed days of fishing for red snapper due to over-runs which have never adversely affected the 

growth of the fishery or restricted any efforts to reach the rebuilding target. 

In 2009, in retaliation to the state of Florida and a charter-forhire fleet for their action to keep state waters open to recreational 

red snapper fishing when the NMFS closed the EEZ, Dr. Crabtree 

had the Gulf Council pass a regulatory amendment, typically 

known as 30B, that restricted all federally-permitted charter-forhire vessels to compliance with Federal regulations, regardless of 

where they fish. This single act created more disruption and division among the recreational sector than any other action I have 

witnessed, and caused a significant rift in the recreational angling 

community. 

The 30B rule has denied access and the opportunity to catch red 

snapper to thousands of recreational anglers. Charter vessel owners and operators do not harvest recreational fish, the recreational 

angler on board does. Charter vessels are simply the platforms providing anglers the opportunity to fish recreationally. 

The Environmental Defense Fund was successful, scheming with 

the NMFS and a small group of red snapper commercial fishermen, 

in instituting IFQs in 2007. The majority of the commercial red 

snapper quota is owned by a small group of individuals, who the 

NMFS has enriched—really made millionaires by giving them the 

public fishery resource. Over 15 percent of the red snapper commercial quota is owned by people who do not even own a vessel, 

as they do not fish the IFQs. Rather, they lease their shares to 

other commercial fishermen, much like old-time plantation owners 

who allowed sharecroppers to farm the land. 

The well-funded effort by EDF through their shill, puppet organizations such as the Charter Fishermen’s Association, Shareholder 

Alliance, and Gulf Seafood Institute, over the past several years 

has resulted in the recently NMFS-approved amendment 40, 

severing the recreational charter-for-hire sector from the recreational sector. This amendment was approved by a 9–7 Council 

vote over thousands of objections and public testimony provided by 

stakeholders. The majority of permitted charter-for-hire vessel 

owners do not support this segregation. 

The pseudonym for EDF in the Gulf is Charter Fishermen’s 

Association. Despite CFA assertions, the majority of the charterfor-hire fleet opposes the status quo and supports H.R. 3094. 

Recreational fisheries are not commercial fisheries and cannot be 

managed the same way. Red snapper management is not a onesize-fits-all scheme. Every area between Key West and Brownsville 

has different fishing seasons, tourist seasons, and needs. States 

provide improved and more accurate recreational data, as has recently been proven in Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi, and with 

new efforts in Florida. Each state has proved to be a successful 

steward of both state- and federally-managed species. 

Regional management makes it easier for the public to participate through more local and more convenient outlets. States will 

have the ability to use a superior management program, as 

done—— 

49 

Dr. FLEMING. Sorry, Mr. Zales. Your time is up and we do want 

to get the other witnesses in before we recess. 

Mr. ZALES. Thank you for your time, I will answer any questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Zales follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CAPT. ROBERT F. ZALES, II, PRESIDENT, NATIONAL

ASSOCIATION OF CHARTERBOAT OPERATORS

Chairman Fleming, Ranking Member Huffman, and members of the 

subcommittee, my name is Robert F. Zales, II and I am appearing today on behalf 

of the National Association of Charterboat Operators (NACO). I wish to thank you 

for your kind invitation to present testimony on H.R. 3094 that will add desperately 

needed and long overdue flexibility to the management of Gulf of Mexico red snapper by allowing the five Gulf states the ability to take over management of this 

species. 

NACO is a 501(c)(6) non-profit trade association representing charter boat owners 

and operators across the United States including the Great Lakes with a substantial 

membership from the Gulf of Mexico. My family and I have been in the charter and 

commercial fishing sectors for 50 years with concentration of charter fishing over 

the last 10 years. Until this past May I have been actively involved in the fishery 

management process for over 26 years providing advice, testimony, publications, and 

helping to design charter fishing data collection programs on Federal, state, and 

local levels. Due to my mother’s recent medical issues that began this past April 

I have resigned from all of the voluntary advisory positions I have held for over 26 

years to take care of her but still stay abreast of all issues that affect my industry. 

Let me start by stating the vast majority of our members in the Gulf have absolutely no confidence in the continued management of red snapper by the National 

Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). Over the past several years stakeholders have 

made request after request to the State Marine Resource agencies to take over data 

collection and provide more local control over red snapper management. These efforts have resulted in all five Gulf states to developing new and improved data collection methods and an important effort in Congress to advance H.R. 3094 that will 

provide state control of red snapper. Once the State Marine Resource agencies are 

provided the authority to manage red snapper you will see more support and more 

involvement in helping the states develop local management plans that will benefit 

all recreational anglers. 

For many years we have worked to institute change in the traditional management system of the NMFS by attempting to work with the agency. We have worked 

with Congress to make positive changes to the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery and 

Conservation Management Act (MSA) on collection of recreational fishery data and 

other management issues. While our efforts to work with the NMFS and Congress 

have helped improve some management measures, unfortunately, they have not 

been near enough. Sadly, we are acutely aware of the devastating impacts of the 

last reauthorization of the MSA as amended through January 12, 2007 to fishermen, their families, supporting businesses, and fishing communities by the increasing loss of JOBS. The current requirements of the MSA are overly restrictive and 

require arbitrary rebuilding timelines based on no science. The rigid requirements 

of the MSA prevent the management Councils from having any flexibility in recommending management measures that will rebuild our resources while allowing fishermen to fish. Both can and should be allowed which is why we fully support and 

encourage the passage of H.R. 3094. 

Our problems with the NMFS management of red snapper are many and apparently cannot be fixed under Federal management. While the scientific modeling of 

the red snapper stock is now showing improvement, it is far behind what we experience in the real world. In the Gulf of Mexico when you put a baited hook in the 

water odds are you will catch a red snapper. Red snapper has been managed in the 

Gulf since the early 1980s when we could hardly find a red snapper to where they 

are almost all we catch, yet the number of days available to the recreational sector 

has steadily declined since 1996 and have been drastically reduced since 2007. 

While the NMFS has failed to provide timely and accurate red snapper stock assessments during this period the five Gulf states have been able to manage their own 

stocks of red drum, speckled trout, and other state regulated species. Florida has 

also properly managed snook. While Federal management has consistently reduced 

access and opportunity to recreational anglers the states have steadily increased 

access and opportunity. 

Red snapper is not the only fishery where the NMFS has failed in management. 

I started in the fishery management process over 26 years ago working with king 

50 

mackerel when the quota had been reduced to 2 million pounds, the lowest ever. 

Over the last 26 years, every mackerel stock assessment has shown some increase 

in biomass except for the last few years where it has been static. Every Science and 

Statistical Committee recommendation during this period was to only allow fishing 

to the 50 percent level of available biomass and they consistently told the Council 

if their recommendation was exceeded the fishery would never grow and could collapse. Until the 2007 Reauthorization of the MSA in most years the Council set the 

Total Allowable Catch at the edge of the overfishing level exceeding the 

SSC recommendation. Since 2007 the Council has set the TAC at the SSC recommendation. From 1988 to 2005 the harvest of king mackerel not only met the 

TAC but in most years exceeded the TAC. In all years the stock increased in biomass contrary to the SSC recommendations as can be seen in every graph developed. The current king mackerel stock assessment indicates the stock is heavily 

weighted by older fish yet we catch all sizes. The red snapper fishery has responded 

in a similar fashion as regardless of any perceived over run of the TAC over the 

rebuilding period, the stock has steadily increased in biomass. The latest trigger fish 

stock assessment indicates the stock is declining yet we see a steady increase in 

abundance and size of trigger fish. The NMFS has bragged about their success and 

use as their shining example of expert fishery management the complete rebuilding 

of the Gulf gag grouper fishery, yet gag grouper are rarely caught in both the recreational and commercial fisheries. In fact the recreational fishery has only 

harvested a little more than 50 percent of the quota the past 2 years and the commercial quota, also managed under an IFQ program, has only harvested 70 percent 

in 2014 and only 45 percent to date for 2015. When you view the biomass growth 

graphs of red snapper and king mackerel over time you see a steady upward pattern, with no decline in any year, regardless of any quota over runs. The NMFS has 

consistently punished the recreational sector by reducing allowed days of fishing for 

red snapper due to over runs which clearly have never adversely affected the growth 

of the fishery or restricted any efforts to reach the rebuilding target. You can clearly 

understand why we feel the NMFS is not capable of and/or unwilling to manage recreational fisheries. 

In 2009, in retaliation to the state of Florida and the charter for-hire fleet for 

their action to keep state waters open to recreational red snapper fishing when the 

NMFS closed the EEZ, Dr. Crabtree, (Regional Administrator NMFS SERO) had the 

Gulf Council pass a regulatory amendment (typically known as 30B) that restricted 

all federally-permitted charter for-hire vessels to compliance with Federal regulations. Regardless of what states might allow in their own state waters federally-permitted charter for-hire vessels must comply with the strictest Federal regulations 

for red snapper in Federal and state waters. This single act has created more disruption and division among the recreational sector than any other action I have witnessed in over 26 years. It has turned angler against angler, charter vessel owner 

against charter vessel owner, and caused a significant rift in the recreational angling community. 

In Florida, as of June 30, 2015, there were 1,747 vessels, including Captains, 

licensed by Florida to charter for-hire vessel owners that carry up to six or more 

passengers. These numbers are state-wide as there is no way to distinguish between 

the east and west coast. Of these 734 are federally-permitted Gulf charter for-hire 

vessels. This means that when the state of Florida decides, in the best interest of 

the state and their anglers, to keep red snapper open in state waters 734 charter 

for-hire vessels cannot provide access to red snapper for the recreational anglers 

who hire us to provide a platform giving them the opportunity to fish recreationally. 

The single act of Dr. Crabtree creating the 30B rule has denied access to and the 

opportunity to catch red snapper to thousands of recreational anglers. Charter vessel owners and operators do not harvest recreational fish, the recreational angler 

on board does. Charter vessels are simply the platforms providing anglers the opportunity to fish recreationally. 

For many years environmental organizations such as the Environmental Defense 

Fund (EDF) have pushed for vessel fleet reduction by pushing for Individual Fishing 

Quotas (IFQs), also called Catch Shares. EDF was successful scheming with the 

NMFS and a small group of red snapper commercial fishermen in instituting IFQs 

and since 2007 the commercial red snapper fishery has been managed by IFQs. By 

design the size of the commercial fishing fleet has steadily declined since 2007 (25 

percent reduction from 2007 to 2011) under the consolidation of the fleet by the 

NMFS providing individual ownership of the red snapper resource to select individuals. The vast majority of the commercial red snapper quota is owned by a small 

group of individuals who the NMFS has enriched—really, made millionaires by giving them the public fishery resource. Today over 15 percent of the red snapper commercial quota is owned by people who do not even own a vessel as they do not fish 

51 

the IFQs, rather they lease their shares out to other commercial fishermen, much 

like the old time plantation owner who allowed share croppers to farm the land. 

Ownership of red snapper quota with the ability to harvest and sell the fish or lease 

to others provides more financial return than any stock available on the stock 

market. 

Because of the 30B rule for federally-permitted charter for-hire vessels and the 

constant reduction of fishing days for red snapper by the NMFS there has been an 

active push by the NMFS and EDF funded and supported puppet fishing associations and a small group of federally-permitted charter for-hire vessel owners to 

segregate the permitted for-hire vessels from the total recreational sector and to institute Catch Shares for red snapper on the fleet. The well-funded effort by EDF 

through their shill, puppet associations, such as the Charter Fishermen’s 

Association, Shareholder Alliance, and Gulf Seafood Institute, over the past several 

years has resulted in the recently NMFS-approved amendment 40 severing the recreational charter for-hire sector from the rest of the recreational sector. This amendment was approved by a 9–7 Council vote over the thousands of objections and 

public testimony provided by stakeholders. The vast majority of permitted charter 

for-hire vessel owners do not support this segregation. By instituting Catch Shares 

(IFQs) in the for-hire fleet the Federal Government will cause a reduction of vessels 

available to the public thus reducing access and availability to the fishery. This 

effort is the NMFS answer to their failure to properly manage the recreational red 

snapper fishery. NACO fully supports H.R. 3094 which would move the management of Gulf red 

snapper to the five Gulf states. I submit that the vast majority of charter for-hire 

vessels owners, including federally-permitted vessels owners, are fed up with the 

failure of the NMFS management as has been demonstrated at countless Council 

meetings and communications from constituents. The pseudonym for EDF in the 

Gulf is the ‘‘Charter Fishermen’s Association.’’ Despite the CFA assertions, the majority of charter for-hire fleet opposes the status quo, and we support Representative 

Graves’ legislation, H.R. 3094. 

Recreational fisheries are not commercial fisheries and cannot be managed in the 

same way. Recreational fishing is more popular than golf in the United States and 

recreational anglers want access to public fishery resources where they have an opportunity to catch. State Marine Resource Agencies have a better understanding of 

the importance of recreational fishing and provide more access to public participation in their management efforts which has shown to provide a more efficient and 

better management system. All you have to do is look at the successes of state managed marine resources. State Agencies can act faster than the NMFS on all issues 

of management from allowing more access to abundant resources to reacting to 

natural or manmade disasters. 

In particular, red snapper management is not and should not be a one-size-fitsall scheme. There are 866 miles of coastline from Key West, Florida to Brownsville, 

Texas and every area in between has different fishing seasons, different tourist seasons, and different needs. Each of the five Gulf states knows far better of their 

needs and have proven their ability to properly manage their marine resources. 

States can provide improved and more accurate recreational fishery data as has 

been recently proven in Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi, and with new efforts in 

Florida. State Marine Resource managers provide more timely stock assessments 

and better understand the social and economic impacts of recreational fishing. 

H.R. 3094 requires the states to provide a management plan that will provide how 

to conduct assessments, data collection, and annual management measures and 

timelines. New data collection programs are already in place or are being designed. 

State enforcement agencies are better equipped to handle enforcement and address 

any enforcement issues. State management of fisheries in Federal waters is currently allowed; an example in the Gulf is red drum where the states must meet Gulf 

wide conservation goals but are allowed the flexibility to meet those goals. The Gulf 

states are already responsible for managing commercial and recreational fisheries 

in state waters and share management for several species with other states. Each 

state has proven to be a successful steward of both state- and federally-managed 

species. Funding is already provided by the NMFS to the states for data collection 

and enforcement. NOAA funds the data analysis so that funding will simply need 

to be reallocated from the NMFS to the states to conduct the analysis. 

At this time stakeholders have not had an active part in developing the framework created by the State Marine Resource Directors. Because this is a framework 

for action no state has provided any true concept of how the new management system will work. Because State Marine Resource Commissions routinely act based on 

much stakeholder input we can expect any proposed management plan to include 

a major role from all stakeholders in the development of a plan. In fact, the regional 

52 

management proposal offers stakeholders more opportunities to participate in the 

management process through the states’ existing legislative and regulatory processes, commission meetings, various committees and task forces, public outreach 

meetings and surveys. Regional management makes it easier for the public to participate through more local and more convenient outlets. 

Regional management provides the individual states the flexibility to review all 

approaches for assessing and managing the fishery and to select strategies that fit 

best. With respect to assessment, the individual states will look for strategies that 

provide the most accurate picture of the stock and fishery status, including models 

based on fishing mortality estimates and spawning potential ratios (similar to what 

is currently used); simpler analyses based on relative abundance trends, size of fish, 

and geographic distribution; or models based on numbers of fish removed as opposed 

to fishing mortality estimates. Regardless of the method used, assessment strategies 

will go through a thorough scientific review from the states and must show that 

harvest levels are sustainable. The states must routinely assess the health of the 

fishery in their waters, and periodically, cooperatively assess the health of the stock 

Gulf-wide. 

The states will have the ability to use a management strategy that best fits the 

fishery as it is accessed by their state’s anglers. Each state must assess the efficacy 

of their actions on an annual and ongoing basis and make adjustments (in-season 

if necessary) in response to the latest information about the stock and fishery to 

maximize fishing opportunity. 

This approach recognizes there are regional differences in the fishery based on 

how the fishery developed, the needs of the state regarding the fishery, and local 

tradition and practice. This is a superior approach to the current management system, which treats red snapper as one stock, fished one way across the entirety of 

the Gulf. In Florida such an approach could help develop a Florida Management 

Plan that could allow red snapper fishing in the fall and winter south of Tampa and 

spring and summer north of Tampa. Federally-permitted charter for-hire vessels 

would not be restricted by the 30B rule. 

Each Gulf state would formally agree to comply fully with management measures 

developed through the Plan under a memorandum of agreement. The GSRSMA plan 

allows states to request additional accountability options through the U.S. Secretary 

of Commerce if a state or states adopt measures deemed to be inconsistent with the 

plan. 

As pointed out above the current NMFS management system has failed to properly manage red snapper, especially the users. Stock assessments every 4 years or 

more are inadequate. A recreational data collection and analysis system that was 

never developed to track quotas or conduct in season adjustments is only slightly 

better today than 26 years ago, even under the 2007 Congressional mandate to develop a more accurate improved system. Currently and over the past 3 years the 

Gulf Council and NMFS are working to develop and implement an electronic data 

collection system for the charter for-hire fleet. This system is still years away from 

implementation all the while the states of Louisiana, Alabama, and Mississippi have 

considered, developed, and implemented new data collection systems in less than a 

year. Constant efforts by the NMFS to create disruption among the commercial and 

recreational sectors and now between the recreational charter for-hire and private 

recreational sectors only proves the NMFS has failed to properly manage this 

fishery. 

Just in my small coastal community of Panama City, Florida, according to the 

local Tourist Development Council, 15 percent of Tourism Dollars comes from saltwater recreational fishing. The complete failure by the NMFS to properly manage 

red snapper has cost my community and others countless revenue and adversely affected small family businesses. Efforts by the Gulf states to keep their waters open 

after the NMFS has closed the fishery have helped to enhance the social and economic conditions of the coastal communities while the additional harvest of red 

snapper has not harmed the resource as it continues to grow every year. It is clear 

the states can better manage the fishery as they have proven in their management 

of their own resources. Stakeholder involvement is more effective on the state level 

as the state resource agencies respond much faster to that concern. We view state 

management as our only savior in being able to have access to the resource so we 

have an opportunity enjoy it. 

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. Again, I truly appreciate the invitation and opportunity to provide you and the committee with this information. I will 

be pleased to respond to any questions. 

53 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD BY THE HON. GARRET GRAVES TO CAPTAIN

BOB ZALES, PRESIDENT, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF CHARTERBOAT OPERATORS

Question 1. Does the charter/for-hire (CFH) fleet support status quo management 

of Gulf red snapper? 

Answer. The answer is NO. The NMFS has failed to provide proper management 

of this fishery for the recreational sector, which includes CFH vessels. Their failure 

to provide an adequate data collection system, even with the few modifications over 

the years, continues to constrain access to an ever growing resource. I know of no 

one who fishes who supports the current Federal management system. 

Question 2. How would H.R. 3094 impact my business? 

Answer. H.R. 3094 would allow the five Gulf states to manage their state fishery 

as best fits their stakeholders to provide the conservation and economic and social 

benefits of the resource off their respective state. Each State Marine Resource 

Agency could design management on their need. An example in Florida is that the 

FWC could establish different seasons, bag limits for the northwest coast and southwest coast of the state providing access to all stakeholders where current Federal 

management does not allow access to southwest Florida due to the current established season beginning June 1 and ending in a few days each year. The southwest 

Florida season for most fisheries is in the fall and winter. Under H.R. 3094 each 

state could also set a different season for CFH vessel owners versus private recreational anglers such as maybe a set number of continuous days for the CFH vessels and weekends only for private recreational. The State Marine Resource 

Agencies routine can react to management change within a year so that is a plan 

is implemented but is not working as expected the plan can be modified quickly. 

The Federal system takes 3 to 5 years or longer to make such adjustments. 

Question 3. There were several fold more commercial red snapper fishermen prior 

to the IFQ system in 2007, yet are less than 400 now. Even fewer actually fish their 

shares. 

3a. Do you have concerns that the CFH sector will follow the same path, 

ultimately getting to a point where only a few charter captains have the ability to 

take customers fishing for snapper? 

Answer. Yes, There is currently serious discussion on the Gulf Council, being 

pushed by a few CFH vessel owners who have both Federal charter fishing and commercial fishing permits attached to their vessel. These same owners own some red 

snapper commercial quota which they would like to be able to convert to recreational fish. The whole sector separation issue which is currently approved under 

the Council amendment 40 is geared to be able to establish catch shares (IFQs) in 

the CFH sector. The commercial sector fully supports this concept as they intend 

to be able to lease their commercial IFQs to the CFH sector so that they not only 

profit from selling some red snapper to consumers but also will greatly profit from 

the ability to lease their IFQs to the CFH sector. In my written testimony I reference the concept of ‘‘sharecroppers.’’ The commercial IFQ red snapper owners will 

become even more powerful ‘‘fish lords’’ by owning and then profiting more by including CFH vessel owners in their sharecropper community. As with every fishery 

that has instituted catch shares (IFQs) in the United States you see dramatic fleet 

reduction. The whole purpose of catch shares (IFQs) is to reduce capacity thus fleet 

reduction and elimination of fishermen. If an IFQ system is created for the CFH 

sector you will see such dramatic fleet reduction which will reduce access to anglers 

seeking the CFH service. The anglers (consumers) will see less access to the fishery 

and dramatic increases the cost of a charter. The economies of local fishing communities will suffer as result and the CFH sector as we know it today will be forever 

changed. 

Question 4. The Gulf Council is currently moving forward with an IFQ program 

for the charter/for-hire sector. 

4a. As a federally-permitted charter captain, I stand to personally gain from an 

IFQ, yet I am opposed. Why? 

Answer. As I stated above if the CFH sector goes to an IFQ system local fishing 

communities will suffer. While I will profit greatly and frankly if such a system is 

pushed on the CFH sector I will consider becoming a ‘‘fish lord’’ and lease all my 

quota, my community, my fellow CFH vessel owners, and the fishery itself will suffer. Many fellow CFH vessel owners will go out of business. Access to the fishery 

will be reduced to anglers. CFH vessels fishing for red snapper may be reduced in 

areas which could change access points for the fishery. Areas where anglers now go 

to hire a CFH vessel could disappear. The whole fishery will change and be placed 

54 

in the hands of a few. Public access to the public resource will be limited. In 

America I was raised and educated to believe that everyone has a right to pursue 

their dreams. While other CFH vessel owners may have a more successful business 

than mine and I may have one more successful than others, free competition in 

business is the way to success. Privatizing a public resource eliminates free enterprise and fair competition. Government should not dictate if I win or lose, my efforts 

to create a successful business should be allowed for what I do, not what is gifted 

to me. We all should an opportunity to compete on a fair field. Basically, it is just 

not right. 

Dr. FLEMING. OK, Mr. Zales, thank you for your testimony. Mr. 

DeLaCruz, you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF JASON DELACRUZ, PRESIDENT AND COO, 

WILD SEAFOOD COMPANY, EAST MADEIRA BEACH, FLORIDA 

Mr. DELACRUZ. Thank you, Chairman Fleming, Ranking 

Member Huffman and members of this subcommittee. Thank you 

for the opportunity to address you to promote the proposed Gulf 

States Red Snapper Management Authority Act. My name is Jason 

DeLaCruz, I am a commercial spear fisherman and a fish house 

owner in Madeira Beach, Florida. 

Let me start by saying that I cannot support this proposal, and 

neither can the commercial fishermen and seafood suppliers in 

Florida and Texas that I speak for today. H.R. 3094 will undermine the commercial fishing businesses and our ability to provide 

the American people with sustainably-harvested red snapper. My 

message here today is consistent to what we have heard from the 

commercial industry from day one. I cannot support state management of the commercial red snapper fishery in the Gulf of Mexico. 

Our fish house, Wild Seafood Company, handles more than 

three-quarters of a million pounds of fish. My business is made up 

of 15 boats, 50 captains and crew, and 15 staff. I also sell bait, 

tackle, and ice to the recreational public at my marina. 

When I am not at the dock or in the water, I am improving the 

way fisheries management is handled in our Gulf. I am a member 

on the Fishery Advisory Panel for the Gulf Council and am part of 

the Fishery Advisory Committee for Congressman Jolly in my local 

county. I am also the Vice President of the Gulf of Mexico Reef 

Fish Shareholders’ Alliance, and the Executive Director of Gulf 

Wild, two industries working hard to improve fishery management 

and also seafood traceability in the Gulf. 

Sometimes I wish for simpler days, when I just got to go 

spearfishing and do what I love. But being a fisherman today is not 

just about catching fish any more, it is about finding solutions to 

preserve the long-term health of our fisheries and our business. To 

that end, I would like to address three points. 

My first point is that commercial fishing is a success under the 

Magnuson-Stevens Act and should not be turned over to the Gulf 

states. Magnuson-Stevens is the bipartisan backbone of the management system and the reason that we have a rebounding red 

snapper fishery today. Strict rebuilding requirements, mandatory 

accountability measures, and a common core of conservation have 

tripled the commercial quota in the last 10 years, as a testament 

to its effectiveness as a Federal fisheries law. 

55 

The new commercial program, that was put in place in 2007, has 

kept us remaining within our quota and our science-based quotas, 

and fishing year-round. Fishing businesses are profitable, the flow 

of fish in the marketplace is stable and growing, and the fishing 

and shoreside jobs are being promoted. Don’t undermine this by 

turning this fishery over to the Gulf states. 

The second point is that this bill threatens the commercial fishery and the seafood supply chain. H.R. 3094 opens up loopholes 

that will erode the commercial fishery. It will allow three individuals to eliminate 10 percent of the red snapper fishery every year 

without discussing it with the Gulf Council, a stakeholder group 

that, as we know, is accessible by all stakeholders. All five states 

already voted to take red snapper away from the commercial fishermen and the consumers earlier this year, so why would we think 

that anything would be any different under the state management? 

H.R. 3094 leaves too much to chance. It does not define what is 

meant by a satisfactory enforcement plan, nor does it define what 

necessary measures it would use to rebuild the fishery. It only explains that public participation will be adequate. Commercial fishermen are not willing to gamble our businesses on the weakened 

enforcement, diminished rebuilding measures, and restricted public 

access to the system. 

The third point is that H.R. 3094 sets a dangerous, controversial 

precedent. The conversation is not just about red snapper, it is 

about setting a precedent where states can eliminate the commercial fishery. Over 40 commercial fishing organizations on the east 

and west coasts of the United States and Alaska have come out 

against state takeover. These organizations represent thousands of 

commercial fishermen and tens of millions of pounds of commercially-important seafood. These fishermen all oppose this plan. 

In conclusion, we want to remain under the Federal fishery 

management protections and conservation requirements of the 

Magnuson-Stevens Act. H.R. 3094 threatens our business and sets 

a controversial precedent to impact fishermen and seafood consumers everywhere. Every fisherman from regions known to this— 

know this is a bad idea. We cannot support H.R. 3094. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. DeLaCruz follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF JASON DELACRUZ, OWNER, WILD SEAFOOD CO., 

JOHN’S PASS, FLORIDA

Chairman Fleming, Ranking Member Huffman, and members of the 

subcommittee: thank you for the opportunity to address you today regarding the 

proposed Gulf States Red Snapper Management Authority Act (H.R. 3094). 

My name is Jason DeLaCruz and I’m a commercial spear fisherman and fish 

house owner in John’s Pass, Florida. Let me start by saying that I cannot support 

this proposal and neither can the commercial fishermen and fish house owners from 

Florida to Texas that I speak for today. H.R. 3094 creates loopholes that will undermine our commercial fishing businesses and our ability to provide the American 

people with a stable source of domestic, sustainably harvested red snapper. My message here today is consistent with what you have heard from the commercial industry since this idea was first developed—we cannot support state management of the 

commercial red snapper fishery in the Gulf of Mexico. 

I started my fish house business—Wild Seafood Co.—with my wife Vicki in 2012 

and in just 3 years my business now handles three-quarters of a million pounds of 

reef fish that makes its way to seafood consumers in the Gulf and throughout the 

Nation. My business is made up of 15 fishing boats that employ around 50 captains 

and crew, as well as 15 fish house staff. I also sell bait, tackle, and ice to private 

recreational fishermen and charter captains in my area. 

56 

When I’m not at the dock or in the water, I’m working to improve the way we 

manage our fisheries. My boats are currently testing ways to report their catch data 

electronically rather than through an antiquated paper-and-pencil system. I’m also 

working with scientists to test how video cameras can improve data collection on 

commercial fishing boats. I am on a number of fishery Advisory Panels for the Gulf 

of Mexico Fishery Management Council and I’m part of a fisheries advisory committee commissioned by Congressman David Jolly. I’m the Vice President of the 

Gulf of Mexico Reef Fish Shareholders’ Alliance—a strategic non-profit organization 

that is working to protect the Gulf’s fish and fishermen for today and for future generations. Everything the Shareholders’ Alliance does is founded in our belief that 

conservation and stewardship protect fish populations and fishermen’s businesses. 

I also helped start, and am now the Executive Director of Gulf Wild—a comprehensive seafood traceability program that is built upon a series of conservation covenants and utilizes unique tags to track fish from the boat to the plate. Gulf Wild 

engages fishermen to improve their fishing practices, delivers better fishery data, 

returns a higher ex-value price to fishermen, and produces a seafood product that 

consumers can track back to the very captain, vessel, and area in which that their 

fish was caught. 

Sometimes I wish for simpler days when I was just a spear fisherman, but I now 

understand the need to stay active and involved in my fishery and directly work 

to improve the way it’s managed. Being a fisherman today isn’t just about catching 

fish anymore—it’s about finding solutions that preserve the long-term health of our 

fishery and our businesses. 

I’d like to address three points regarding the Gulf States Red Snapper 

Management Authority Act. 

1. The commercial fishery is a success under Magnuson and it should not be 

turned over to the Gulf states. 

2. The Gulf states are not in the position to manage a Federal commercial 

fishery. 

3. H.R. 3094 is a threat to the commercial fishery and seafood supply chain. 

1. The commercial fishery is a success under Magnuson and it should not 

be turned over to the Gulf states. 

Our Federal fishery law—the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and 

Management Act—is the bi-partisan backbone of our management plan and is the 

reason that we have a rebounding red snapper fishery today. Strict rebuilding requirements, mandatory accountability measures, and a common core of conservation 

have helped increase red snapper quotas to some of the highest levels on record. 

In fact, the commercial red snapper quota has nearly tripled in less than 10 years— 

a testament to the effectiveness of our Federal fishery laws. The commercial individual quota program was put in place in 2007, and we have remained within our 

science-based quotas every year. Fishing businesses are profitable again; we have 

all but eliminated wasteful discarding; the flow of fish into the marketplace has stabilized and grown; and fishing and shoreside jobs are being promoted. Magnuson is 

working for the fish and for commercial fishermen, and transferring the commercial 

red snapper fishery to the Gulf states threatens to undermine everything we have 

done to bring this fishery back from the brink of disaster. 

We simply have no assurances that the Gulf states will uphold Magnuson, and 

we have every reason to believe they won’t. We have no assurances that the Gulf 

states will protect our small businesses that we’ve built under the security of 

Federal fisheries law. And we have no assurances that the Gulf states will identify 

and enact conservation as a keystone issue. Therefore we cannot and will not support H.R. 3094. 

2. The Gulf states are not in the position to manage a Federal commercial 

fishery. 

The commercial red snapper fishery mostly occurs in Federal waters and our 

boats are federally-permitted. Furthermore, we manage our quota through a Federal 

database, we report our landings through a Federal trip ticket system, and we pay 

Federal cost recovery fees. When we’re fishing for red snapper, we’re also catching 

red grouper, gag grouper, tilefish, and various species of deep water and shallow 

water groupers—all of which are managed under the Federal system. State management just does not make sense for one species in a federally-managed multispecies 

commercial fishery. 

Time and time again in the Gulf of Mexico, we have seen the Gulf states deliberately set fishing seasons in their state waters to conflict with and undermine 

Federal regulations. In 2014, all five Gulf states allowed additional fishing days for 

57 

red snapper in state waters (Texas had a 365-day season) and half of the entire 

recreational quota (2 million pounds of the 4.3 million pound catch target) was 

caught in state waters under these non-compliant regulations. We want nothing to 

do with being managed by the states that constantly thumb their noses at the policies that have helped rebuild this fishery and stabilize fishing businesses. 

3. H.R. 3094 is a threat to the commercial fishery and seafood supply chain. 

H.R. 3094 opens up loopholes that will undermine and erode the commercial fishery. If passed, it will allow three individuals to eliminate almost 10 percent of the 

commercial fishery every year without discussing it with the Gulf of Mexico Fishery 

Management Council—a stakeholder group that was approved by Congress to manage the Federal commercial fishery. All five Gulf states already voted to take allocation away from commercial fishermen this year, so why would we think that they’d 

do anything different under state management? 

H.R. 3094 leaves too much to chance—it doesn’t define what it means to have a 

‘‘satisfactory’’ enforcement plan, nor does it define what ‘‘necessary measures’’ it 

would use to rebuild a fishery. It falls short of identifying what standards will be 

used to evaluate state management plans, and only explains that public participation will be ‘‘adequate.’’ Commercial fishermen are not willing to gamble our businesses on things like weakened enforcement, diminished rebuilding measures, 

diluted standards, and restricted public access. 

It’s very important to understand that this conversation is about more than just 

red snapper in the Gulf of Mexico—it’s about setting a precedent where states can 

sidestep Federal fishery laws and conservation requirements, take control of a commercial fishery, and destabilize it to the point where it can be eliminated in less 

than a decade. 

Through the Shareholders’ Alliance, we reached out to commercial fishing organizations on the east coast, west coast, and Alaska, and over 40 of them signed onto 

a letter opposing this state takeover. These commercial fishing organizations, some 

of which come from states represented on this subcommittee, represent thousands 

of commercial fishermen and tens of millions of pounds of commercially important 

seafood. They oppose this state takeover because the implications of such a plan are 

far-reaching and set a dangerous precedent for our Nation’s coastal regions—something like over 97 percent of the more than 300 million Americans get their access 

to fish and shellfish by purchasing it in restaurants, grocery stores, and fish markets that we supply. What’s being proposed here today doesn’t just harm commercial 

fishermen, it also impacts American seafood consumers. Our commercial fishing 

friends throughout the country cannot support this state plan in the Gulf because 

they would not support it at home. 

In conclusion, the Gulf states have demonstrated that they do not have the best 

interests of commercial fishermen and seafood suppliers at heart. Their track record 

of destabilizing our businesses and undermining conservation is clear and troubling. 

The Gulf states are not in a position to effectively manage a stable and growing 

commercial fishery that by many accounts is a wild success under Federal 

management. 

Commercial fishermen do not want to be managed by the Gulf states—we want 

to remain under Federal management with the protections and conservation 

requirements of the Magnuson Act. Therefore, I respectfully ask this Congress not 

to force a regulatory regime on our small businesses that we adamantly oppose. 

Thank you, and I’m happy to answer any questions you have. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD BY THE HON. JARED HUFFMAN TO JASON

DELACRUZ, PRESIDENT AND COO OF WILD SEAFOOD CO. 

Question 1. Will you please elaborate on the difficulty of separating red snapper 

out for regional management when your Federal permit covers a number of reef 

fish? 

Answer. The Gulf of Mexico reef fish complex include over 30 species of snappers, 

groupers, jacks, tilefish, triggerfish, and wrasses. The Federal commercial reef fish 

individual fishing quota programs manage allocations of 14 different species, or 

groups thereof. On any given commercial fishing trip, we catch over a dozen different species of reef fish. Pulling out one species (red snapper) in this mix and handling it under an entirely different management regime is overly complicated and 

unnecessary. It will create confusion on the water and on land, which may lead to 

problems with reporting and could increase the uncertainty in red snapper data 

58 

collection. Red snapper should be left under Federal management with the 

successful individual fishing quota program that has been in place since 2007. 

Question 2. Do consumers on the Gulf Coast and across the country deserve the 

chance to buy fresh, sustainable red snapper—a national resource that belongs to 

all of us—at the store or in a restaurant? Are there provisions in this bill that would 

limit this opportunity? Which ones? 

Answer. American red snapper are a public resource, and a vast majority (some 

say 97 percent) of the American public can only access domestic, sustainably harvested red snapper from the Gulf of Mexico by ordering it at a restaurant or buying 

it at a fish market. Commercial fishermen, along with the seafood supply chain, provide this access to those who can’t afford to go catch it themselves. Any restrictions 

on commercial fishermen and reduction of commercial allocation directly impacts 

the public consumption of seafood. Allowing the Gulf states to eliminate up to 10 

percent of the commercial red snapper fishery each year will take red snapper off 

the plate of American seafood consumers. 

Fundamental to our Federal fishery law is the recognition that fishery resources 

contribute to the ‘‘food supply . . . of the Nation’’ (16 U.S.C. § 1801(a)(1)). Taking 

access to this fishery from up to 97 percent of the American public and giving it 

to the remaining 3 percent flies in the face of fairness and equity. One recreational 

fisherman’s access in Federal waters (2 red snapper at an average of approximately 

7 pounds apiece) is the equivalent of 18 six-ounce serving portions for consumers. 

Taking access from 18 American seafood consumers and giving it to 1 recreational 

angler is not fair or equitable. 

There was a time when the public could only access domestic red snapper harvested from the Gulf of Mexico a few weeks a year. This occurred prior to 2007 

when the commercial fishery was poorly managed and took place as a rapid-fire, 

derby-style fishery that promoted wasteful discarding and unsafe fishing conditions. 

Since the implementation of the individual fishing quota system in 2007, the fishery 

has stabilized and American seafood consumers have the opportunity to access red 

snapper year round. H.R. 3094 threatens that access and will impose harm on commercial fishermen and American seafood consumers alike. 

Question 3. H.R. 3094 would allow the states to take over management of not just 

the recreational red snapper fishery, but also the commercial fishery. After 3 years, 

the bill would allow the states to reallocate up to 10 percent of the commercial quota 

to the recreational sector—potentially every year—without approval from the Gulf 

Council. 

3a. How would H.R. 3094 impact your business? 

Answer. H.R. 3094 would allow three individuals to eliminate 10 percent of my 

business annually. My profits would drop and my expenses would surge until a 

point 10 years (or, more likely, in less time) where my commercial fishing business 

and my family owned fish house would be out of business. I then wouldn’t be able 

to maintain my ability to sell bait, tackle, and ice to private recreational fishermen 

and charter captains in my area due to the high cost of rent where we are located 

at Don’s Dock in John’s Pass. An extremely likely outcome of this scenario is that 

my property would be bought by a developer, and this working waterfront would be 

turned into condos or some other development. 

Being forced out of business by this legislation would not only hurt me and my 

wife, but it would also hurt the 50 captains, crew, and fish house staff that I employ. Approximately 50 families directly depend on the success of my business, and 

H.R. 3094 would ripple through their lives. 

The harm imposed on my business would also resonate with the wholesalers that 

I work with, and my direct fish sales to the public that walk Don’s Dock in John’s 

Pass and want to buy a red snapper fresh from the boat that just landed it. The 

stability that we’ve seen in the commercial red snapper fishery has cultivated a 

community of individuals and businesses that depend on sustainable access to red 

snapper. H.R. 3094 threatens that community. 

3b. H.R. 3094 states that ‘‘nothing in this Act shall be construed to change the 

individual quota shares currently in place in the commercial sector of the Gulf of 

Mexico red snapper fishery.’’ Proponents of this bill say that this offers you the protection you’re looking for. Are they right? 

Answer. No, this language does nothing to protect my business. Individual quota 

shares are a percentage of the larger commercial quota. For example, if my red 

snapper share is 1 percent, then I can harvest 1 percent of the commercial quota 

annually—if the commercial quota increases, then the poundage associated with my 

1 percent increases; if the commercial quota decreases, then the poundage 

59 

associated with my 1 percent decreases. H.R. 3094 could reduce the commercial 

quota by 10 percent every year, which means that my 1 percent share gets cut by 

10 percent every year. Under H.R. 3094, in 10 years, I would still have a 1 percent 

share but the commercial allocation would be zero. And 1 percent of zero is zero. 

We hear time and time again that the proponents of H.R. 3094 ‘‘don’t want to 

take anything from commercial fishermen’’ and that they ‘‘support the commercial 

fishery.’’ I don’t know how they can say this with a straight face when H.R. 3094 

can literally eliminate 10 percent of my business every year. 

If the proponents of this H.R. 3094 really wanted to protect the commercial fishery like they claim they do, they would leave us out of the legislation completely. 

There’s no good reason to include the commercial fishery in H.R. 3094. 

Question 4. With 5 of the 17 voting members and the ability to handpick nominees 

for 11 of the 12 other seats, the Gulf states already have enormous influence on the 

Gulf Council. Why then do they need H.R. 3094? 

Answer. The Gulf states have direct control over who sits in 16 of the 17 voting 

seats at the Gulf Council. The five Gulf state representatives on the Gulf Council 

do not have term limits, so they never have to run for re-election. The remaining 

12 voting Members are chosen by the governors of each Gulf state every 3 years, 

and can run for three consecutive 3-year terms before having to take a year off. 

That represents nearly 95 percent of the voting power of the Gulf Council. 

The Gulf state representatives who publically support H.R. 3094 claim that their 

states can manage the Federal commercial red snapper fishery better than the Gulf 

Council can. But we have seen no proposal for this, nor have we seen any evidence 

that this is true. We have seen no standards by which these Gulf states will make 

their fishery decisions, nor any business plan for how this new and redundant management organization would operate. Furthermore, H.R. 3094 proposes to make 

these major decisions in an environment that is much less transparent than the current Gulf Council process. 

What H.R. 3094 would allow the Gulf states to do is to consolidate power to manage the entire Gulf of Mexico red snapper fishery into the hands of three individuals 

who are exempting themselves from our Federal fishery law (the Magnuson-Stevens 

Fishery Conservation and Management Act) and its fishery rebuilding and conservation requirements. We—fishermen, wholesalers, retailers, and the American seafood 

consumers—can’t afford to let that happen. 

Question 5. Has rebuilding the Gulf red snapper stock benefited Florida? What 

would happen to the red snapper fishery in your state if H.R. 3094 led to a decline 

in the stock? 

Answer. Strict rebuilding requirements, mandatory accountability measures, and 

a common core of conservation have helped increase red snapper quotas to some of 

the highest levels on record. In fact, commercial fishermen in Florida and throughout the Gulf have seen their quota nearly triple in less than 10 years, and commercial fishermen in Florida are reporting seeing more (and larger) red snapper now 

than in years. 

According to the Southeast Fisheries Science Center, two of the top four commercial red snapper fishing communities in the Gulf of Mexico are in Florida (Destin 

and Panama City). And according to the Gulf Council, Florida is home to 73 of the 

92 fish dealers in the Gulf of Mexico (∼80 percent) that purchased red snapper in 

2012—more than 12 times the number of reef fish dealers than in any other Gulf 

state. 

Thanks to a rebuilding red snapper stock, fishing businesses are profitable again; 

we have all but eliminated wasteful discarding; the flow of fish into the marketplace 

has stabilized and grown; and fishing and shoreside jobs are being promoted in our 

coastal communities. A decline in red snapper would undermine all of the progress 

we’ve made in this fishery since 2007. It would risk stranding investments that we 

made in vessels and shoreside infrastructure based upon the rebuilding red snapper 

stock and the prospect for constant or increased future catches. It would impose 

costs throughout the seafood supply chain and would take red snapper off the plates 

of American seafood consumers, increasing the likelihood that the market fills that 

gap with unsustainably harvested red snapper imports from Mexico. 

Stock declines impose economic, social, and conservation harms on the complex 

seafood community that we have developed, and hurt individual businessmen and 

consumers. H.R. 3094 could easily initiate that process given the consistent positions of the Gulf states to ignore red snapper science and deliberately set limits in 

excess of what’s considered sustainable. We cannot afford to gamble the future of 

60 

our fishery on this shortsighted plan that is being forced down the throats of the 

commercial fishing industry and the American seafood consumer. 

Dr. FLEMING. Thank you, Mr. DeLaCruz. 

Ms. Bittermann, you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF HALEY BITTERMANN, CORPORATE 

EXECUTIVE CHEF AND DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS, RALPH 

BRENNAN RESTAURANT GROUP, NEW ORLEANS, LOUISIANA 

Ms. BITTERMANN. Chairman Fleming, Ranking Member 

Huffman, and members of the subcommittee, my name is Haley 

Bittermann, and I am the Executive Chef and Director of 

Operations for the Ralph Brennan Restaurant Group in 

New Orleans, Louisiana. I welcome the opportunity to speak with 

you today about red snapper management in the Gulf, as well as 

H.R. 3094, the Gulf States Red Snapper Management Authority 

Act. 

The Ralph Brennan Restaurant Group employs approximately 

700 employees in nine restaurants in both Louisiana and 

California. Our restaurants are known worldwide, and serve approximately 1 million guests every year. Louisiana’s restaurants 

currently account for 203,000 jobs, which equates to 10 percent of 

the private-sector employment, making restaurants the largest private employer in the state. Our restaurants are projected to register 7.3 billion in sales in 2015 alone, so preserving access to the 

resources that keep this economic engine running is critical to our 

state’s bottom line. 

I am also here representing the restaurant industry and the 

National Restaurant Association, which is the leading business association for the industry, comprising 1 million restaurant and food 

service outlets. The industry employs 14 million people, about 10 

percent of the U.S. workforce, and is the Nation’s second-largest 

private-sector employer. 

Millions of tourists visit the Gulf Coast every year, seeking our 

local sustainable Gulf seafood. In fact, National Restaurant 

Association research indicates that, of the top 10 culinary trends in 

2015, locally-sourced seafood ranked first, and sustainable seafood 

ranked eighth. 

Unfortunately, in the Gulf, we have watched a huge number of 

our popular seafood items become import-only or recreational-only 

fish. Red snapper used to be rarely available as a fresh fish before 

the commercial fishery improved its management and began the individual fishing quota program in 2007. Now, I can vouch for the 

fish being sustainable and wild caught and, in some instances, it 

can even be traceable back to the fisherman who caught it. 

Gulf red snapper is currently being managed under a rebuilding 

plan, and commercial fishermen are no longer exceeding catch limits. Under this program, restaurants like ours can now depend on 

a steady stream of snapper to fulfill our orders during times of 

peak demand. However, under this legislation the successes we are 

experiencing as a result of this Federal program may be completely 

undone. 

61 

The fishermen I work with are diametrically opposed to shifting 

management authority to the states. This bill could allow the 

reallocation of almost 10 percent per year of red snapper away 

from the commercial sector to the recreational sector. History 

shows us that this is a very real possibility. 

Sustainability of the fishery is another concern I have with this 

legislation, as there is no guarantee that Federal sustainability 

standards will be preserved. This legislation relies heavily on a 

state management regime to solve the problems facing private anglers, and experience has shown us that this is not always a wise 

decision. 

For example, red drum, once an important commercial fishery, is 

now almost wholly restricted to recreational anglers. In response to 

concerns regarding overharvesting in the late 1980s, the Gulf 

states designated it as a game fish only, thus eliminating it as a 

menu item for restaurants. 

Now, after nearly 30 years as a game fish in almost all Gulf 

states, the stock has rebounded and recreational catch is at an alltime high. Yet commercial fishers remain shut out. The Gulf states 

have shifted the catch to recreational and refuse to consider opening it back up. In fact, because of this, the only red fish we serve 

at Red Fish Grill in New Orleans is farm-raised. 

At the state level, it appears that the needs of the private anglers outweigh those of consumers, restaurants, and the seafood 

community. The current system provides Federal oversight to allocation decisions. In addition, the Gulf Council represents a crosssection of stakeholders, and Council decisions are transparent. We 

already have a system that works—that is why the restaurant community opposes shifting the management to the states only. 

Gulf red snapper is an American treasure that should be accessible to all, not just those who can afford to fish for it themselves. 

As a recreational fisherman myself, I want to be sure it is available 

for generations to come. I believe that if we take a balanced approach to fixing what is broken, which is the recreational management, that Louisiana can be both a sportsman’s paradise and the 

restaurant capital of the United States. We should not have to pick 

winners and losers. 

Thank you for the opportunity to testify, and I look forward to 

answering any questions you may have. 

[Applause.] 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Bittermann follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HALEY BITTERMANN, CORPORATE EXECUTIVE CHEF AND

DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS, RALPH BRENNAN RESTAURANT GROUP

INTRODUCTION

Chairman Fleming, Ranking Member Huffman, and members of the 

subcommittee, my name is Haley Bittermann and I am Executive Chef and Director 

of Operations for the Ralph Brennan Restaurant Group based in New Orleans, 

Louisiana. I welcome the opportunity to speak with you today on behalf of my company and the National Restaurant Association on the issue of red snapper management in the Gulf of Mexico, as well as on H.R. 3094, The Gulf States Red Snapper 

Management Authority Act. 

62 

RESTAURANTS AND RED SNAPPER: ECONOMIC POWERHOUSES IN THE GULF

The Ralph Brennan Restaurant Group employs approximately 700 employees in 

9 restaurants in both Louisiana and California. Our restaurants are known worldwide and have become a top destination serving approximately 1 million guests 

every year. Like so many restaurants across our region, Ralph Brennan’s family of 

restaurants results in tens of millions of dollars in positive economic impact every 

year. 

On the whole, Louisiana’s restaurant industry generates tremendous tax revenues 

and we provide jobs and build careers for thousands of Louisianans. According to 

the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the U.S. Census Bureau, Louisiana’s restaurants 

currently account for 203,100 jobs in Louisiana which equals 10 percent of the private sector employment, making restaurants the largest private employer in the 

state. Our restaurants are projected to register $7.3 billion in sales in 2015 which 

is particularly impactful when considering that every $1 million spent in Louisiana’s 

restaurants generates an additional 24.6 jobs in the state. Clearly, preserving access 

to the resources that keep this economic engine running is critical to our state’s bottom line and red snapper is a big part of that. 

I’m also here today to represent the restaurant industry as a whole and the 

National Restaurant Association. Founded in 1919, the National Restaurant 

Association is the leading business association for the foodservice industry, comprising 1 million restaurant and foodservice outlets. The industry employs 

14 million people—about 10 percent of the U.S. workforce and is the Nation’s 

second-largest private-sector employer. 

Specifically, as I’m sure you’re aware diners today are more and more aware of 

the importance of eating fresh, sustainable, locally caught seafood. In fact, National 

Restaurant Association research indicates that of the top 10 culinary trends in 2015, 

locally sourced seafood ranked first, environmental sustainability ranked third and 

sustainable seafood ranked eighth. Gulf red snapper is a key component of many 

restaurants’ menus nationwide. Gulf red snapper is an American treasure that 

should be accessible to all, not just those who can afford to fish for it themselves. 

Unfortunately in the Gulf we have watched a huge number of our popular seafood 

items become import-only or recreational-only fish. Red snapper, on the other hand, 

used to be rarely available as a fresh fish before the commercial fishery improved 

its management and began the individual fishing quota program in 2007. Now I 

have the opportunity as a chef and a business person to not only vouch for the fish 

being sustainable and wild-caught, but in some instances the fish is actually traceable back to the fisherman who caught it. As you know, the millions of tourists visiting New Orleans and our Gulf Coast every year are seeking our delicious local, 

Gulf seafood. We must find a way to protect our commercial harvest of this valuable 

resource. 

FEDERAL MANAGEMENT OF COMMERCIAL RED SNAPPER IS WORKING

Restaurants and retailers nationwide can feel good about offering Gulf red snapper on their menus. Gulf red snapper is currently being managed under a rebuilding 

plan and commercial fishermen are no longer exceeding catch limits. Commercial 

red snapper fishermen have the flexibility to fish during times that suit their needs 

and the needs of the market resulting in a safer, more efficient fishery. Under this 

program, restaurants like ours can now depend on a steady stream of snapper to 

fulfill our orders during times of peak demand. 

Under H.R. 3094, the successes we are experiencing in the seafood community as 

a result of this Federal program may be completely undone. The fishermen I work 

with are diametrically opposed to shifting management authority to the state authorities. As written, H.R. 3094 could potentially allow the reallocation of almost 10 

percent per year of red snapper away from the commercial sector to the recreational 

sector and history shows us that is a very real possibility. Alternatively, in the 

current, federally-managed program, the seafood supply chain is provided with business certainty and the knowledge that Federal oversight is in place to take a balanced approach to allocation decisions. 

Sustainability of the fishery is another concern I have with H.R. 3094. Under this 

legislation, there is no guarantee that the successful Federal sustainability standards mandated under Magnuson-Stevens will be preserved. 

H.R. 3094 relies heavily on a state management regime to solve the problems 

facing private anglers. Unfortunately, past experience with state management illustrates that this is not always a wise decision when it comes to preserving commercial catch and its availability on restaurant menus. 

For example, red drum, once an important commercial fishery along the northern 

Gulf coast, is now almost wholly restricted to recreational anglers. This is because 

63 

the Gulf states, in response to legitimate concerns regarding overharvesting of the 

species back in the late 1980s, determined that the best way to preserve the fishery 

was to designate red drum as a game fish only, thus eliminating an important menu 

item for our restaurants. At present, after nearly 30 years being designated as a 

game fish in almost all Gulf states, the red drum stock has rebounded and recreational catch is now at an all-time high of approximately 16 million pounds, yet 

commercial fishers remain completely shut out. The Gulf states have simply shifted 

the catch of red drum from commercial to recreational and refuse to consider opening back up a commercial harvest. In fact, because of this, the only redfish we serve 

at Redfish Grill in New Orleans is farmed. 

Unfortunately, past experience suggests that at the state level, the needs of the 

private anglers outweigh those of consumers, restaurants and the seafood community. Under the current Federal system for Gulf red snapper as authorized by 

Magnuson-Stevens Act, the 17-member Gulf Council represents an equitable crosssection of stakeholders, state representatives and fishery experts. Council decisions 

are transparent and carefully scrutinized. In terms of commercial red snapper management, we’ve already got a system that works. That’s why I and many others in 

the restaurant community oppose shifting management of red snapper to the states 

only. We are concerned the same thing will happen with red snapper as happened 

with red drum. 

CLOSING

After 20-plus years as a chef, I know that customers come to the Gulf coast to 

experience our bounty of delicious, sustainable, Gulf seafood—especially the iconic 

red snapper which is one of our most popular dishes. Snapper is part of our heritage 

and our history and, as a recreational fisherman myself, I want to be sure it is 

available for generations to come. 

I oppose H.R. 3094 because it would take red snapper out of the Federal management system that has worked so well for those of us in the restaurant and seafood 

industries. I believe that if we take a balanced approach to fixing what is broken, 

which is recreational management, that Louisiana can be both a Sportsman’s paradise and the restaurant capital of the United States. We, and especially the U.S. 

Congress, should not have to pick winners and losers. Thank you for the opportunity 

to testify, and I look forward to answering any questions you may have. 

Red Drum 

Year 

Figure 1. Red drum recreational and commercial landings in Gulf of Mexico state waters from 1981– 

2008. Data Source: Dr. Nick Farmer, NMFS–SEFSC St. Petersburg, Florida. 

64 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD BY THE HON. GARRET GRAVES TO HALEY

BITTERMANN

Question 1. You voiced concern over the continuation of a steady supply of red 

snapper and the importance of readily available snapper for your business. 

1a. Are you aware that members of the charter/for-hire sector are being courted 

aggressively to lease shares of red snapper from the commercial sector to conduct 

‘‘Commercial Fishing Experience’’ trips? 

Answer. Yes, I am aware of this program and I understand that it is an innovative, sustainable way for more Americans to enjoy red snapper fishing in the Gulf 

for longer seasons which, in turn, benefits the entire Gulf region. Since the overall 

commercial quota remains intact and our supply remains consistent, this program 

in no way impacts restaurants’ ability to source Gulf red snapper. 

Question 2. We understand that this is a program that is being endorsed and promoted by NOAA Fisheries, and it allows charter/for-hire vessels to take recreational 

anglers fishing for commercial allocations of red snapper. Those customers are 

charged for the charter trip and are then allowed to purchase that red snapper for 

some pre-determined price-per-pound from the fish house upon returning to shore. 

2a. As a chef and a restaurateur, what does this diversion of red snapper supply 

mean to seafood restaurants? How would a bidding war with charter vessels and 

recreational anglers over commercial red snapper potentially impact your business? 

Answer. In this question, I would like to take the opportunity to clarify a number 

of points. Congressman Graves asserts that the ‘‘commercial fishing experiences’’ are 

diverting snapper quota away from the restaurants, which is not the case. Because 

all fish caught as part of the commercial quota must be sold back into commerce, 

our overall supply remains the same. 

Under the authority of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the Gulf Council and the 

Department of Commerce determine the total amount of red snapper that can be 

caught annually and then divide that quota roughly in half between commercial and 

recreational interests. On the commercial side, this quota is further subdivided 

among leaseholders via an Individual Fishing Quota (IFQ) system. The commercial 

fishermen who own that quota are then allowed the opportunity to fish for their 

share or, alternatively, lease it out. Under current rules, they are allowed to lease 

this share to charter captains who can take customers out to fish for it commercially 

giving them the ‘‘commercial fishing experience’’ which has been a hit among tourists and locals alike. Of course, since this is commercially caught snapper, it must 

be sold at the dock and put back into the supply chain. The charter customers are 

typically offered an opportunity to buy a small portion of that fish, but the majority 

will be sold, as usual, to the supply chain and is then made available to chefs and 

restaurants like me. 

I see the ‘‘commercial fishing experience’’ program as a win-win for all involved: 

It allows tourists who don’t own their own boats an opportunity to fish for red snapper year-round in a management system that is 100 percent accountable while also 

continuing to provide consumers with fresh, Gulf seafood. 

Question 3. Do you believe that saltwater recreational fishing in the Gulf of 

Mexico, including for red snapper, attracts tourists and therefore restaurant goers 

for your business and other area restaurants? 

Answer. Yes, I believe that saltwater angling brings tourists to the Gulf coast. 

The business that private angling brings to the Gulf Coast is important to our restaurants. The charter-for-hire component of the recreational red snapper fishery 

brings patrons to the Gulf from all across the country - anglers who don’t own their 

own boats and would otherwise be unable to fish at all. In addition, many tourists 

come to New Orleans for the locally caught seafood we serve in our restaurants. In 

fact, according to the National Restaurant Association’s 2015 culinary survey of 

nearly 1,300 chefs, locally sourced meats and seafood ranked number one in the top 

20 food trends. 

3a. If so, is your business at all concerned by the limited recreational fishing 

opportunities for Gulf red snapper provided by Federal management, which is constraining tourism opportunities and potential restaurant goers? 

Answer. As a recreational angler myself, I find that opportunities available for 

snapper fishing in state waters are ample. For example, Louisiana is opening their 

fall snapper season November 20 which will run 7 days a week until further notice, 

and Texas has snapper fishing in its state waters 365 days a year. However, it is 

precisely these lengthy state snapper seasons combined with a lack of accountability 

and no control on fishing effort that is leading to a shortened Federal season. 

65 

Unfortunately, anglers in state waters are taking more and more of the available 

red snapper, leaving less for the season in Federal waters. I would very much like 

to see all stakeholders come together and work collectively on some innovative approaches to managing the private angling community in such a way that its participants are given more flexibility to fish during times that best suit their needs. 

Suggestions including tags, bag limits, and other accountability measures should be 

part of this discussion. 

3b. If so, in testifying against H.R. 3094, which the states and the recreational 

fishing community believes would provide for better recreational fishing opportunities, are you signaling that your restaurants are not concerned with attracting the 

business of resident and non-resident recreational fishermen? 

Answer. To say that there are only ‘‘limited recreational opportunities for red 

snapper’’ is misleading. In fact, under the new, separate Federal charter-for-hire 

component, anglers are given far greater opportunities to fish during a longer season that is the result of increased accountability measures and more flexibility 

regarding when this sector’s quota can be caught. 

Since less than 10 percent of Americans own their own boats, the charter component of our community is hugely important to driving tourism and bringing patrons 

into our restaurants and hotels. For example, under the Gulf Headboat Collaborative pilot program, the Gulf Council estimated that 32,000 more tourists were 

given opportunities to fish than in previous years. 

Question 4. A study 2013 by Oceana found that 93 percent of seafood labeled as 

red snapper was not in fact red snapper. 

4a. How do you guarantee to your customers that the red snapper you are serving at over $30 a plate is in fact sustainably caught Gulf of Mexico red snapper? 

Answer. I am familiar with the Oceana study that highlighted rampant 

mislabeling in the seafood industry and I find these statistics troubling. Unfortunately, economic fraud in terms of mislabeling for species, country of origin and 

other details were challenges to our industry long before the Oceana study was published. The good news is that innovative certification programs exist which can 

guarantee to consumers the freshest, most sustainable, accurately labeled seafood 

in the world. 

For example, at Red Fish Grill, my restaurant in New Orleans, we buy 

100 percent of our red snapper from a program called Gulf Wild. The Gulf Wild program represents authentic, wild-caught, responsibly harvested, safe and sustainable 

seafood from the Gulf of Mexico. This program provides all its customers with realtime traceability back to the original fisherman thus ensuring the authenticity of 

our wild finfish (including red snapper) from the Gulf. Every one of the fish sold 

as part of the Gulf Wild program is given a traceable identification number and 

scannable QR code. With this information, we can obtain detailed credentials of 

every single fish, including who caught it, when, from which vessel, and more. 

In addition to Gulf Wild, there are numerous other, voluntary certification programs readily available for seafood buyers across the Gulf. In Louisiana, we have 

the Louisiana Wild Seafood Certification Program run by the Louisiana Department 

of Wildlife and Fisheries. This program increases consumer confidence by certifying 

that seafood products are wild-caught, taken from Louisiana or Gulf waters, landed 

in Louisiana and handled and processed by licensed Louisiana commercial fishermen, dealers and processors. 

In addition, my restaurant Redfish Grill participates in Louisiana’s catch and cook 

program. This program allows a guest or angler to bring their catch into a restaurant for preparation and serving. The voluntary program requires the restaurant 

to register at no cost with the Department of Wildlife and Fisheries for a permit 

to participate in the program. The fish can only be prepared for the guest who 

caught it, and the guest must also sign a full release with the restaurant assuming 

all responsibility and releasing the restaurant of any liability. The restaurant can 

then cook and serve the fish and is allowed to charge the price they deem appropriate for preparation and handling of this meal. 

As consumer demand for more locally caught seafood continues to rise, I anticipate more restaurants across our region will engage with programs like Gulf Wild. 

It gives me great pride to be able to assure our patrons at Red Fish Grill that by 

dining with us, they’re supporting a strong, sustainable fishery and also bolstering 

our hardworking, Gulf fishermen. 

Dr. FLEMING. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Bittermann. 

66 

Next and last, but not least, David Cresson, Executive Director 

and CEO of the Coastal Conservation of America (sic). 

STATEMENT OF DAVID CRESSON, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR/CEO, 

COASTAL CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION, BATON ROUGE, 

LOUISIANA 

Mr. CRESSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Congressman Huffman, 

and members of the committee. Thank you for having me. My 

name is David Cresson, and I am the Executive Director of the 

Coastal Conservation Association of Louisiana. CCA is the Nation’s 

largest conservation group of its kind, with 120,000 members and 

19 state chapters on 3 coasts. I am also an avid angler myself, and 

I fish with my best fishing buddies, my three kids, as often as 

possible. 

On behalf of all CCA members, we would like to thank Congressman Graves for recognizing the challenges facing the recreational 

angling community, and for working with the states to create a 

path toward a better situation for all stakeholders: commercial, 

charter-for-hire, and recreational. 

I am not here to denigrate commercial fisheries, nor are we advocating for the elimination of commercial fishing. We simply want 

a system that provides appropriate access to the resource, something that is sorely lacking in the current management system for 

Gulf red snapper. Currently, almost 75 percent of the snapper resource is in the hands of private business. The rest of us get 10 

days. That is simply unacceptable. 

You have heard praise for the catch share programs being used 

today. And some would have you believe that privatization of more 

than half the red snapper stock is the sole reason the stock has recovered. It is not. Recreational anglers are mostly responsible for 

the miraculous recovery of the resource. 

In 2005, a lawsuit brought by concerned anglers forced NOAA to 

finally take action on the badly depressed stock, and called for a 

nearly 80 percent reduction in snapper mortality from shrimp 

trawls. After 30 years of mismanagement and failed policy by 

NOAA, it was recreational anglers who brought about change and 

put the stock in the position it is in today. 

It has been said here that recreational anglers are not accountable. Nothing could be further from the truth. It is the Federal 

system that is unaccountable to recreational anglers, and has produced results that make no sense. We have been asked to come up 

with a management plan. We have. The states have developed and, 

in some cases, have implemented these plans already. 

In Louisiana, in fact, anglers supported a 50 percent license fee 

increase for the sole purpose of enhanced data collection through 

the highly effective LA Creel program. Anglers gladly work with 

the states to develop, pay for, and provide information to the statebased programs. 

We trust the states; they listen. They have successfully managed 

species like red fish, speckled trout, bass, flounder, black drum, 

crab, shrimp, oysters, crawfish, catfish, and more. The state works 

to make fishing enjoyable and available, while managing for abundance. Meanwhile, the Federal system aims to privatize the resource for a select few, and limit access to the general public. 

67 

We have been at this for a while. And all we have to show for 

it are a few poorly placed bandages. Please support this bill, and 

let the states do what they have done very well for many years: 

manage their fisheries with great success. 

Thank you, and I am glad to answer any questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Cresson follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF DAVID CRESSON, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, COASTAL

CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION LOUISIANA ON BEHALF OF COASTAL CONSERVATION

ASSOCIATION, AMERICAN SPORTFISHING ASSOCIATION, CENTER FOR COASTAL

CONSERVATION, INTERNATIONAL GAME FISH ASSOCIATION, NATIONAL MARINE

MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION, THE BILLFISH FOUNDATION, AND THEODORE

ROOSEVELT CONSERVATION PARTNERSHIP

Thank you Mr. Chairman, Congressman Huffman and members of the committee. 

My name is David Cresson and I am the executive director for the Louisiana chapter of Coastal Conservation Association. CCA was established in 1977 and is the 

largest marine resource conservation group of its kind in the Nation, with more 

than 120,000 members in 19 state chapters along all three coasts. Comprised of recreational anglers and concerned conservationists, CCA has been active in state, regional and Federal fishery issues ranging from forage species at the bottom of the 

marine food chain to pelagic, apex predators at the top. CCA’s advocacy philosophy 

seeks to promote both the proper conservation of marine resources and the availability of those resources to the general public. 

The commitment of anglers, and indeed of all sportsmen and women, to act as 

stewards of the wildlife resources they cherish is at the heart of the North American 

Wildlife Conservation Model, which is built on the premise that all fish and wildlife 

are held in public trust and belong to the people—not designated individuals for 

personal gain. That is actually the first tenant in the North American Model, which 

has seven principal tenants in all. 

The North American Model has produced tremendous conservation victories in 

this country, most notably in waterfowl and inland fisheries. In case after case, 

Congress, and the states, recognized that placing a dollar value on a wild animal 

all too often drives harvest past sustainable levels. It was a lesson that relegated 

commercial harvest of ducks, geese and buffalo to a historical footnote in this country many decades ago, in many cases saving species from extinction. However, the 

lessons learned on land and in our Nation’s freshwaters so many years ago seem 

to have been disregarded when it comes to industrial harvest of marine resources 

in Federal waters. This stark philosophical contrast is at the heart of ongoing management dysfunction in the marine environment. 

That being said, I am not here to rail against commercial fisheries. The majority 

of recreational anglers are not advocating for the elimination of commercial fishing, 

despite many in that industry attempting to muddy the water with claims to the 

contrary. We simply want a system of management that provides appropriate access 

to the resource and nowhere is such a system more lacking than in Gulf of Mexico 

red snapper. Federal management dysfunction of red snapper in the gulf continues 

to push recreational fishing away from the extremely successful North American 

Model and toward schemes meant to limit the public’s access to abundant public resources in public waters. 

At a Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council in August in New Orleans, a 

comment was made by a commercial harvester advocating for limiting access for anglers that recreational red snapper fishing needs to be managed according to a plan 

like duck hunting. Ironically, recreational fishermen would be much happier if snapper were managed like ducks, where state and Federal wildlife managers share information and set remarkably consistent seasons and limits according to long-term 

population trends, not simply on best-guesses about harvest effort based on outdated information. Notice there isn’t a congressional hearing every 6 months or so 

on how to fix duck hunting? That’s because the system works for its stakeholders. 

In Louisiana, duck hunters have had 60-day seasons for 20 straight years. Over that 

same period, Federal seasons for red snapper have changed a dozen times, reduced 

from year-long access in 1996, when the population was beginning to recover, to just 

10 days this year despite snapper populations being at what is likely an all-time 

high. One of the reasons given by NOAA for these shortened seasons is that the 

fish are so abundant they are too easy to catch. In no other fisheries or game management system is abundance used as a reason to shorten seasons and restrict access. But, somehow Federal fisheries managers justify it for Gulf red snapper. 

68 

This year’s season got even more complicated by sector separation. Again, using 

duck hunting as a model, it would be absolutely unfair and absurd for the U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service to tell hunters they get 10 days to duck hunt Federal Wildlife 

Management Areas if they go on their own but if they hired a guide to take them 

to those exact same lands they could hunt four times longer. Yet, that’s exactly what 

happened with red snapper this year because of sector separation, a policy shoved 

through the Gulf Council and supported by NOAA despite opposition from every 

Gulf state fisheries agency and the overwhelming majority of anglers in the region. 

The Gulf Council held a meeting in Baton Rouge in August 2014 to gather public 

input on sector separation. Approximately 200 attended and those opposed to sector 

separation outnumbered those in favor 10–1. Gulf wide, according to figures provided by the Gulf Council, comments submitted to the Council were even more onesided in opposition to sector separation with more than 96 percent of the nearly 

3,000 comments submitted to the Council Web site opposing. The Council was even 

advised by its own reef fish advisory committee to not divide the season. The Council still divided the season. 

It’s disappointing, but the sector separation vote and the support for sector separation by NOAA staff was not a surprise. Gulf Council meetings have become freefor-alls for badmouthing recreational fishermen with Council members, commercial 

fishing interests, environmental groups and now a small but vocal group of charter 

captains accusing anglers of irresponsibility with the resource, a lack of accountability, selfishness and any number of other unfounded accusations. More irony— 

most of the accusers are selfishly making the case that they should be in control 

of their own individual quota of a public resource rather than having access for all 

fishermen. And, the commercial, charter and environmental special interests on the 

Council are now trying to push through additional efforts to expand and make privatization of red snapper and other fish permanent, another affront to the North 

American Model. 

NOAA regional staff points fingers too, accusing anglers of being too difficult to 

work with, unwieldy and unwilling to come up with a workable plan for snapper 

management. To NOAA’s credit, in 2014 it heeded the advice of organizations like 

CCA, The American Sportfishing Association, Theodore Roosevelt Conservation 

Partnership, National Marine Manufacturers Association and others to develop its 

first-ever national policy on saltwater recreational fishing. But as NOAA was working with anglers to write the policy with guiding principles like ‘‘expanding fishing 

opportunities based on conservation gains and understanding and addressing factors 

affecting angler participation and satisfaction,’’ NOAA Southeast Regional Staff was 

voting for sector separation at the Gulf Council, a move that severely limits fishing 

opportunities despite conservation gains and increases the already-pervasive 

dissatisfaction and distrust recreational fishermen have with Federal management. 

Recreational anglers are a force for conservation at the state level. They have 

stepped up to build world-class hatcheries and worked with universities to build 

world-class science centers. They have raised hundreds of thousands of dollars for 

law enforcement equipment and other support for state game wardens. They have 

been the driving force behind habitat projects ranging from marsh restoration and 

oyster shell recycling programs to offshore artificial reefs. 

In addition to the license anglers buy just to go fishing, every time we purchase 

a package of hooks, a fishing rod, reel, lure, tackle box, depth finder, trolling motor, 

fuel for our fishing boat and other supplies we gladly pay an excise tax that goes 

into a fund called the Sport Fishing and Boating Trust Fund. The majority of those 

funds go back to the states for fisheries conservation, angling and boating access 

and boating safety. And, 18.5 percent of that fund is dedicated to a program called 

the Coastal Wetlands Program. In 2015 alone, that 18.5 percent equates to around 

$112 million going to on the ground projects to conserve and restore coastal habitats. In the last two-plus decades, that money has helped rebuild and sustain more 

than 100,000 acres of coastal wetlands in Louisiana. It’s part of the American 

System of Conservation Funding —paid for solely by anglers and boaters—and it’s 

the lifeblood of the North American Model. 

Anglers have taken on these challenges because we have gladly accepted the responsibility of being stewards of the resource. Gulf anglers regularly ask state agencies to reduce creel limits when stocks show signs of decline or are affected by 

weather or other environmental factors. Gulf-coast anglers also led the charge in the 

1980s to end the use of destructive fishing gear like gillnets and purse-seines that 

were decimating speckled trout and redfish stocks, pushing these iconic species to 

the brink of collapse. 

The angling community is also largely responsible for the miraculous recovery of 

Gulf red snapper. In 2005, a lawsuit brought by concerned anglers forced implementation of arguably the single most significant action in the history of red snapper 

69 

management. After years of inaction by NOAA Fisheries and a relentlessly depressed red snapper stock, a Federal judge finally ordered a 79 percent reduction 

in red snapper mortality from shrimp trawls. After almost 30 years of failed policies 

and half-measures, this landmark decision finally set the stage for the incredible recovery in red snapper stocks that we are seeing today. Indeed, information presented by the Gulf Council consistently reflects an almost meteoric rise in Gulf red 

snapper populations beginning in 2005, coinciding exactly with the reduction in 

shrimp trawl bycatch mortality. 

Anglers are accountable as well despite the accusations to the contrary. Anglers 

in Florida asked the state to institute a saltwater fishing license in 1989 to help 

better account for angling effort and generate revenue specifically dedicated to conservation, science and management. In 2014, Louisiana anglers successfully backed 

a bill to increase their license fees from $15.00 per year to $22.50 specifically to better account for angling effort and increase and improve data collection and science. 

And, anglers in all five Gulf states are working with their state fisheries management agencies to develop better accounting systems like Florida’s Gulf Reef Fish 

Survey, Alabama’s Snapper Check Reporting Program and Louisiana’s LA Creel 

Program. 

Anglers gladly work with the states to help develop, pay for and contribute information to these state-based programs because they are state-based. Recreational 

fishermen trust the states. The states very successfully manage recreationally important species like redfish, speckled trout and largemouth bass. The states very 

successfully manage mixed-sector species like sheepshead, flounder, black drum and 

blue crabs. And, the states very successfully manage commercially vital species like 

shrimp, oysters, crawfish and wild catfish. Recreational fishermen confidently know 

that when they have concerns, the states will listen and work with them because 

states understand the economic and cultural value of both recreational and commercial fishing. And, the states work to make fishing an enjoyable experience for 

families and friends, providing ample opportunity to access the resource while conservatively managing fish and game for abundance. Meanwhile, the Federal 

approach in the Gulf is pointing to privatization of the resource, less access and 

yielding to the will of a small group of special interests determined to force anglers 

to hire guides to access the fish and limit time for family and friends to enjoy the 

resource. 

We’ve been in Washington and in courts fighting over Federal management of red 

snapper for far too long and the fundamental problems aren’t getting fixed—only 

poorly bandaged, creating more problems. It’s time to rip off the band aid and fix 

this system. A good way to start is to let the states do what they’ve done very successfully for a host of other fish and game, both recreationally and commercially, 

and manage red snapper in the Gulf of Mexico. 

Dr. FLEMING. Thank you, Mr. Cresson. All of this talk about crab 

and fish is making my stomach growl. 

[Laughter.] 

Dr. FLEMING. We are going to take a recess to go vote. It will 

take us about an hour. We will be back, and we will then get 

started with questions. Thank you. 

[Recess.] 

Dr. FLEMING. Well, we have finished voting, so we return. We 

thank you for your patience and indulgence, panel, for staying 

around. I know we have a couple of Members who may have to 

leave before we are done. So, we will wish you safe travels when 

you leave, but we want you to stay as long as you can. 

At this point we will begin asking questions, and I now yield 

myself 5 minutes. 

Ms. Bittermann, you have made mention of the fact that there 

have been some fish that have not remained commercially available. My concern, of course, is that New Orleans, which is really 

kind of the gateway of culture and many things for Louisiana, and 

all the great restaurants that we have—certainly one of the 

Brennan restaurants that you work at, and the many others that 

70 

are notable that have been in families for well over a century— 

these are the kind of things that draw people to Louisiana. 

So my concern is—and we have lost fish sustainability in certain 

species before—my concern is going forward. So, would you like to 

expand on the concern that we may have that, by expanding private angler fishing, recreational fishing, what has happened under 

that type of management, state management, in terms of sustainability for commercial use, and certainly availability in restaurants 

for consumers? 

Ms. BITTERMANN. Well, thank you very much for that question, 

Congressman. In my experience, and from my perspective in our 

industry, as you said, people come to New Orleans to eat the great 

seafood that comes out of the Gulf of Mexico. In the past we have 

seen fish species go away for commercial fishing, which also affects 

the restaurants, species like the red drum and the speckled trout. 

I think that it seems like when they go away, when the allocations change, that they do not come back. And eventually, they are 

not available for the commercial fisherman, which means they are 

not available to the restaurants or to the general public. So I think 

that is my fear, is what is going to happen. Will this continue to 

happen? 

Dr. FLEMING. Sure. The other thing I would, again, maybe just 

throw this out to our witnesses and get comments—under the fivestate plan, is it possible that as few as three of the states in the 

plan can declare a state—for instance, Louisiana—non-compliant, 

and recommend the Secretary of Commerce close fishing down entirely? Yes, go ahead. 

Mr. DELACRUZ. Yes, that is exactly what it is. So if it closes for 

one sector, it closes for both, the way the plan is written now. So 

even if one sector is working within their boundaries, and doing everything they probably can, but one sector goes over, and the determination is made by the group, then that entire state gets shut 

down. 

Dr. FLEMING. I see. Any others who would like to comment on 

that? 

Mr. JARVIS. When you have five voting members and you only 

need three votes to dictate what takes place in the management 

process, there is a level of politics that may not be part of the public process, and three state directors get together to make things 

work better for their three states at the expense of two others. I 

have grave concerns that that could take place on a variety of 

issues under this bill. 

Dr. FLEMING. Right. Now—oh, yes, go ahead. 

Mr. ZALES. If you have one state that the other states are going 

to say is not compliant, I would suggest that that state must be 

non-compliant, according to the data that is available, so they probably need to be shut down. If you remain within your perimeters, 

then you should not have any problem. I cannot imagine three 

states saying somebody is out of compliance, if they are not. 

Dr. FLEMING. But couldn’t the logic be applied to the current situation today under the Gulf Council, under the Federal program, 

that there has been a sharp drop in the number of fishing days? 

One could make the same argument in support of that, as well. 

71 

Mr. ZALES. Yes, and I have kind of upset some of the state directors in the past by making the comment that I am fixing to tell 

you—the National Marine Fisheries Service has not only the right, 

but the obligation under MSA to pre-empt when a fishery is being 

overfished outside the perimeters of the Fisheries Service guidelines. 

So, where the Fisheries Service has come in and said all the 

states are non-compliant, the Fisheries Service has allowed them 

to be non-compliant. They could have gone in and pre-empted at 

any time. They have not done it. You hear about Texas all the 

time. Texas could have been pre-empted years and years ago. You 

would not have had the excess there. 

Dr. FLEMING. OK. Thank you. And my time is up. I recognize the 

Ranking Member for 5 minutes. 

Mr. HUFFMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just finishing on that 

last point, Mr. Zales, you are right. Under Magnuson-Stevens there 

is that backstop of Federal authority that can kick in. But if this 

bill were to pass in its current form, that Federal backstop would 

not exist. Correct? 

Mr. ZALES. That is not my understanding of the reading of the 

bill. My understanding of the reading of the bill is that you still 

have the fisheries or the MSA umbrella in charge of—— 

Mr. HUFFMAN. That is not my reading. It would be entirely dependent on an act of this new five-party authority. So I think that 

is probably worth a careful look by you and all other stakeholders, 

and worth your consideration. 

Captain Jarvis, I understand you may need to leave us soon, so 

I am going to focus my questions on you. We have heard a lot of 

complaints from Gulf states about short recreational possession 

seasons in Federal waters. As you know, states have been increasingly lengthening their seasons in state waters. Texas has a 365- 

day keeper season, Louisiana 286, Mississippi 108, and down the 

line. 

How does state non-compliance with Federal regulations impact 

your business? 

Mr. JARVIS. As Federal permit holders, we have to be held to the 

higher standard of Federal regulations. Included in that Federal 

regulation is 30B, which was instituted by the Gulf Council in 2008 

or 2009. It required that we had to fall under the Federal season, 

regardless of the state action. So, from that point forward, every 

time the states start extending their season, it was like a nuclear 

option to us. 

Our fishing access started being reduced at a great rate, and that 

is part of the reason we were able to get industry support for 

amendment 40, pulling ourselves out of that environment in 2014, 

prior to amendment 40 being passed. The charter-for-hire sector 

caught 21 percent of the resource and, prior to that, for over 26 

years, we were averaging 62 percent of the resource. So, as soon 

as the state water loophole came into effect, the American public 

that do not own boats, but access the fishery on our federallypermitted vessels, started to be squeezed out of the fisheries. 

Mr. HUFFMAN. All right. And just to flip that around, if states 

had tried to align more closely with the Federal standards, in 

terms of setting their season, bag limits—if they were to even go 

72 

further with accountability measures, things like slot limits to protect the bigger fish so we can more quickly achieve our rebuilding 

goals, what would that mean for the Federal season determinations 

in Federal waters? Presumably, they would be longer, right, and 

more flexible? 

Mr. JARVIS. Thank you for the question, Congressman. That is 

exactly right. 

We hear about the 11-day season, but we have not heard about 

the 365-day season. So private recreational anglers really got a 

windfall with the state non-compliance. If those states would have 

been compliant, I think, if I remember correctly, the Federal recreational season for private-boat anglers would have been close to 

30 days this past season in 2015. It was the fact that most of that 

allocation of harvest was being done in state waters that reduced 

their fishing days to only 11. 

So, in essence, in Florida, they got 11 days of Federal water fishery, but they also got a 70-day season in state waters. So, in 

actuality, they got an 81-day season. 

Mr. HUFFMAN. Right. And I just want to ask you about the fishing experience, because there has been a suggestion that parents 

cannot take their kids out to catch red snapper in the Gulf of 

Mexico. My sense is, first of all, in state waters that is not true. 

Second of all, even in Federal waters, yes, it is true, you are not 

going to keep those snapper unless they are within the designated 

season and bag limit, but you can still fish. 

So, just talk to me about the fishing experience out there. Are 

there other types of snapper, grouper, other things that you could 

be fishing for, while just releasing the snapper that you may happen to catch? What is the fishing experience like, even with these 

restricted Federal rules in place? 

Mr. JARVIS. It is real apparent, especially in the summer time, 

that people are going to fish, whether red snapper are open or 

closed. There are over 27 reef fish species in the Gulf of Mexico, 

so there is plenty to fish for. Even when we had a situation this 

year where amberjack, gag grouper, triggerfish, and red snapper 

were closed, there was still angling opportunity. What you find, 

though, is that it just makes it more difficult, maybe, to get your 

targeted species if you are trying to catch grouper or vermilion 

snapper, and you have the bycatch mortality release. 

The key ingredient, as far as the private boat and the charterfor-hire experience, the main biomass of these fish are outside of 

these state waters. So if a state decides to make their anglers fish 

the majority of the time in state waters, and not give them maximum opportunity in Federal waters, it actually reduces their enjoyment and their ability to catch a larger fish, or a trophy fish, 

and that kind of thing. So, it is almost like they are penalizing 

them. 

In the state of Florida, only the northern part of the state has 

a 9-mile fishery. So 17 counties in Florida actually have no 9-mile 

fishery at all with the state non-compliance. 

Dr. FLEMING. Thank you. Mr. Graves is recognized. 

Mr. GRAVES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Captain Jarvis, I know you need to take off. I am going to ask 

you a few questions, as well. I am having trouble connecting dots 

73 

here. So, you are saying that the state non-compliance shows irresponsible management on the part of the states, and that you are 

concerned that same irresponsible management may carry over if 

they are given jurisdiction over the Federal waters, as well. Is that 

an accurate synopsis of what you are trying to say? 

Mr. JARVIS. Thank you for your question, Congressman. I would 

not call it irresponsible management. Those states felt that they 

could give their anglers an opportunity in state waters to fish. In 

our state, that decision of how many days at the meetings was not 

really based in science. Most state waters cannot take a season of 

these durations. 

Mr. GRAVES. OK. So let’s take that statement, that these state 

waters cannot take a season of that duration. 

Now, I am going to realign from one of the letters that the 

groups that you are affiliated with have been sending out. In fact, 

in 2015, red snapper quotas in the Gulf of Mexico saw their largest 

1-year increase on record. Now, how is it that the states—my 

words—being irresponsible on the management of their fisheries, 

yet we are actually seeing a record increase in snapper quotas in 

Federal waters? Those two things do not seem to line up correctly. 

Or, I guess, they just do not seem to make a whole lot of sense to 

me. 

Let me ask something else. I was looking at your restaurants, 

and you have some phenomenal menus, by the way. I am anxious 

to go eat. OK. So, Brotula’s, did I get that right? 

Mr. JARVIS. Yes. 

Mr. GRAVES. I found one thing that is really interesting on this 

menu. You have a number of fish on here. I am guessing some of 

this is drum or sheepshead, but I do not see any red snapper on 

the menu. But I will tell you what I see on the menu is actually 

Dungeness crab. 

Mr. JARVIS. Yes, sir. 

Mr. GRAVES. A species that is managed by states on the West 

Coast. 

Now, why is it that the West Coast can manage their Dungeness 

crabs? Why is it that the East Coast states can manage the striped 

bass? Why is it that Alaska can manage their salmon, but it is only 

the Gulf of Mexico states that are unable to do this responsibly? 

Mr. JARVIS. Thank you for the question, Congressman. In our 

restaurants, we serve only IFQ red snapper and grouper. We also 

serve other, what we call bycatch fish, caught from the Gulf of 

Mexico—trigger fish, amberjack, bearded brotula, the name of the 

restaurant, which is a deepwater fish. Our Brotula’s happens to be 

a seafood house and steamer, and part of the steamer experience 

is using snow crab, king crab, Dungeness crab. So we access—we 

really take pride in the fact—and, because I am a fisherman—that 

we serve—— 

Mr. GRAVES. I am running out of time. I have some other questions, but I am just trying to understand. So you have sustainable 

supplies of Dungeness crab, to where you can put it on the menu, 

but you do not have red snapper on the menu. 

Mr. JARVIS. Sir, we do have red snapper. It is called pan-crusted 

snapper. It is on our menu every day. It is on our permanent menu. 

74 

Mr. GRAVES. I will go back and look again, but I looked through 

it twice and—— 

Mr. JARVIS. It is a wonderful dish. 

Mr. GRAVES. I will take a look again and see if I can find it. But 

I did not see it on here when I looked through a couple of times. 

Now, let me go back. Let’s see, one other thing. You mentioned 

your charter boat business. I referenced earlier that I think it was 

72 percent of the federally-licensed charter boat captains in the 

Gulf—I believe that was the stat—actually support state management. Why are you in a different spot? 

Mr. JARVIS. In Venice, Louisiana, I have a lot of friends that operate out of there. They are mainly a blue-water fishery, concentrating on tunas, wahoos, and the offshore species. The reef fish 

complex is just a bycatch fishery for them when they have a tough 

day if the tunas do not bite. A lot of those guys in the Venice 

Marina are not engaged in this whole red snapper controversy, because it is not all that important to them, unlike in my fleet, or 

in the Orange Beach Charter Boat Association, or the Mississippi 

Charter Boat Association, or the entire Texas fleet, where red 

snapper is a staple of our business, sir. So that is the difference, 

probably, in that deal. 

I think it was pointed out that some of the questioning, how the 

survey questions were laid up, it may have an impact—— 

Mr. GRAVES. The Louisiana charter boat folks have actually been 

active, and have come and met with me a number of times, and 

they are advocating for this. So, I do not think they are on the sidelines, or not paying attention to this. They are actually very much 

engaged, and very concerned about this. I think it is important to 

note that. 

Mr. DeLaCruz, you made some mention of how the Gulf states 

voted to take away snapper from commercial folks. I did not understand that comment, and I am wondering if you can clarify that. 

Mr. DELACRUZ. At the last Gulf Council—actually, two Gulf 

Council meetings ago—there was a vote on amendment 28. And 

even though the methodology and the science that was used in that 

process, they had not completely vetted, the vote was to push to remove 5 percent, or the swing all together was 31⁄2 percent, over to 

the recreational sector. 

The vote was really very clear across party lines. All the states 

voted in that direction without unequivocal doubt. As a matter of 

fact, the Council itself, being the fact that all the Council members 

are actually picked by state governors, is controlled almost solely 

by the states. So it kind of breeds the question as to why is this 

even necessary, if the Council already has a good enough control 

over—— 

Mr. GRAVES. We are out of time, but I am more than happy to 

talk about the ratios and makeup of the Gulf Council. I think it 

would be a very informative decision and I think you know the answer to that, actually. But—— 

Dr. FLEMING. OK. Mr. Scott, 5 minutes. 

Mr. SCOTT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And, ma’am, you said, you 

know—picking winners and losers. Well, with all due respect, as a 

dad, I am the loser. You know, we are down to 10 days. There is 

not much else you can take from us. So we are either going to be 

75 

able to fish together, or we can shut down the whole fishery, as far 

as I am concerned. But you know, we ought to be working together. 

Unfortunately, what has been taken from us has gotten to the 

point there is nothing else to take from us. So, it seems that it is 

fine if we go fish and kill the fish, as long as I am willing to pay 

somebody else to take me. But I cannot be the one that teaches my 

kids, like my granddad taught me and my dad, and we cannot just 

enjoy that time together by ourselves. We have to pay somebody 

else to do it. 

So, the catch shares system, Mr. Zales, I want to ask you about 

this, because you stand to personally gain financially, as the commercial fishermen did, the ones who ended up with the quotas. It 

is a license to create revenue from the government that nobody 

ever paid for. My opinion is it should have been auctioned off, just 

like oil rights, timber rights, or anything else. If I am willing to 

pay $5 a pound for it, and somebody else is only willing to pay $4, 

I should be able to buy the poundage and catch it with my family. 

But you are still opposed to this, even though you would personally benefit financially to what is happening with the Gulf Council, 

and you actually support the legislation. Would you speak to that 

issue a little bit? 

Mr. ZALES. Yes. And, real quick, if I could answer the thing 

about the 3 percent shift in allocation. The Fisheries Service, in 

their data system, 2 or 3 years ago they did a study and they 

determined that people actually land fish after 3 o’clock in the 

afternoon. When they did that, they had to go back over time and 

re-adjust the landings from recreational data to commercial. The 

difference in the current allocation between commercial and recreational in the Gulf for red snapper is based on people actually 

harvesting fish after 3 o’clock in the afternoon for many, many 

years. 

But to your point—— 

Mr. SCOTT. Can I ask you that—and what we call harvesting is 

actually bringing the fish back to shore. The one that I catch, kill, 

and feed Flipper—— 

Mr. ZALES. In other words, up until 2 years ago the Fisheries 

Service did not think people fished after 3 o’clock in the afternoon. 

I always have. 

But getting to the point about the quota thing—in 2000, I think 

it was, a lady by the name of Pam Baker, who was with the 

Environmental Defense Fund at the time, came to several of us 

throughout the Gulf and suggested that we join in to a concept of 

community-based quota systems that would work with forming a 

board—for Panama City they would get a certain share of the 

quota. A board would be developed with people like me sitting on 

the board, and then we would determine how that quota would be 

allocated. That was where this whole thing has kind of evolved. 

At the time, it sounded good for somebody like me that, OK, well, 

I am going to benefit greatly. But the people that are around me— 

some of them friends, some of them not—they are not going to benefit. Some of them are going to be put out of business, some of 

them are going to lose. And I couldn’t see, because I believe in the 

fair market system—I will compete with Gary any day of the week, 

side by side, on booking trips. But as far as having somebody say, 

76 

‘‘OK, well, this person is going to be given this amount,’’ that then 

gives them an unfair advantage over me, which I would be one of 

those people to have the unfair advantage. I do not see the purpose 

in that. To me, it is just not right, it is not fair. So I do not support 

it. 

Mr. SCOTT. Thank you for standing up for the rights of 

Americans that just want to fish. And you can laugh all you want 

to. I mean the bottom line is that this is about money, guys. That 

is all you all want. It is OK for me to go fish, as long as you get 

paid for it. 

Mr. DeLaCruz, when you were allocated your catch shares, did 

you have to pay for them? 

Mr. DELACRUZ. As a matter of fact, I did. 

Mr. SCOTT. Did you? 

Mr. DELACRUZ. I actually was a very small participant in the 

fishery. I bought my first reef fish permit in 2006, when I was 

commercially spearfishing. 

Mr. SCOTT. You bought a permit, though. Did you—— 

Mr. DELACRUZ. I bought the Federal reef fish permit. It is a 

limited-access permit, so it had a certain amount of value. It was 

about $8,000 or $9,000, and that permit was going to allow me to 

catch about 1,500 pounds of fish a year. 

I had to invest in the fishery, so I took out a second mortgage 

on my house, like any person in the world that is going to invest 

in a business does, and I went out and pursued—— 

Mr. SCOTT. I am going to ask real quick. What is 15,000 pounds—snapper sells for about $4 a pound, right? 

Mr. DELACRUZ. Well, no, no, no. I did not get 15,000, I got 1,500 

pounds, and it was not snapper—— 

Mr. SCOTT. Fifteen hundred pounds. 

Mr. DELACRUZ [continuing]. It was a mixture of fish across the 

thing. By the time that I had moved into the fishery, there actually 

was no snapper already allocated, it was grouper. So if you want 

to place a value on that, I promise you that the value that I spent 

was a lot more than what that permit was worth. 

Mr. SCOTT. But today it trades per pound, right? 

Mr. DELACRUZ. Yes, it trades—exactly. There is an allocation of 

assessed value, but it depends on whether you do that. I land most 

of those fish on the boats that I own. So myself, and then other 

people that fish for me, just like any other business. 

Mr. SCOTT. But a high net worth recreational fisherman could go 

out and buy a commercial license and could buy commercial poundage, and could effectively go fish whenever he wants to. But the 

guy who is working on the assembly line, he is just out of luck. 

Mr. DELACRUZ. Well, the guy working on the assembly line in 

Ohio is completely out of luck, because the only way he gets that 

product is when I send it to him. And he gets it about 9 days a 

year—— 

Mr. SCOTT. Nobody is trying take what you are doing away—— 

Mr. DELACRUZ. It is the same exact thing. 

Mr. SCOTT. Nobody is trying to take what you are doing away 

from you, we are trying to get a reasonable fishing season back. 

Mr. DELACRUZ. Well, the reasonable fishing season could be 

achieved in other manners. 

77 

Mr. SCOTT. The reason we have a 10-day season is because of the 

lawsuit that you filed. 

Dr. FLEMING. Somehow I am going to regain control here. 

[Laughter.] 

Dr. FLEMING. Well, the gentleman’s time is up, but if Members 

would like to have another 5 minutes each, and the panel is 

willing, we will be happy to have another round. 

I have no further questions, so I will yield to Mr. Graves for 

another 5 minutes. 

Mr. GRAVES. Great. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate it. 

It has been interesting, listening to folks talk about the importance of the fishery, the habitat and species, and sustainable 

management, overfishing, and all those things. Can you tell me— 

I would like to just, very briefly, have each one of you tell me something that you have done to improve the habitat, to improve the 

fishery, investments you have made, projects you have been 

involved in—could you all go through and explain those? 

Mr. DELACRUZ. On the 15 boats that fish in my fishery, I have 

4 boats that have a video monitoring system. We are working with 

Mote Marine Laboratories in Sarasota to actually try to understand 

our bycatch mechanisms, and how that happens, and how we can 

evolve it, and to see if we can actually move video monitoring into 

a full-scale system. It is actually the second time I have done it. 

I had it on four boats, then we changed the system and I moved 

it to three boats. 

I also have four boats right now that I am working with NOAA 

specifically on that actually have electronic log books, where we are 

tracking our landings by spot, each and every spot, to develop a 

better understanding of what the carrying capacity is in the Gulf. 

The biggest toll on those stock assessments is we do not actually 

know how much bottom is usable to maintain the stock. So, we are 

helping solve that problem with both of those. 

Mr. GRAVES. All right. Others? Let’s go. Yes, sir—oh, I am sorry, 

Ms.—— 

Ms. BITTERMANN. At Red Fish Grill, one of our restaurants in 

New Orleans, which uses a lot of seafood, we have been working 

with the Gulf Wild Program, with the red snapper, so that we can 

actually trace it back to the fisherman who has caught it, and 

which boat it came off of. 

Mr. GRAVES. To the fisherman. OK. 

Ms. BITTERMANN. Yes. 

Mr. GRAVES. Other folks? Very quickly, because I have a couple 

other questions. 

Mr. JARVIS. I can tell you that fishermen across the country have 

supported taxes on themselves, on their tackle, on their gear that 

they buy—a lot of money—in the tune of $1.5 billion to go back into 

habitat work and fishing enhancement projects around the country. 

So fishermen support the betterment of habitat all across the country through these very significant taxes. 

Mr. CRESSON. Yes, Mr. Congressman, that is the point I was 

going to make, as well; we support the Fish and Boating Trust 

Fund that we all support and advocate for every year to make sure 

that we still have that funding coming back for conservation of the 

states. And I have been up to my knees in mud many times. 

78 

Mr. GRAVES. I understand. Thank you. 

Ms. Bittermann, I met with the Louisiana Restaurant 

Association folks, and I find this whole just paradox that we are 

in interesting, because when I met with them, we had a great 

meeting. The restaurant guys talked about how the Federal 

Government—Department of Labor, specifically—is imposing all 

sorts of labor standards that are incredibly problematic and expensive. We talked about tax and depreciation issues—I think it was 

219, or whatever it was—talked about Obamacare, the 30-hour 

work week, and the problems associated with that. Some of the 

wage mandates were the things that were discussed. 

I do not remember—and, look, we sat down, had a lengthy discussion. I talk to Stan and a lot of your board members often. I do 

not remember a single thing coming up in regard to problems the 

state had. It was all major problems with the Federal Government. 

The Federal Government was making decisions that they had no 

business making, because they did not understand the conditions 

on the ground, they did not understand what it was like to own a 

business. 

Yet, in this case, I find you in an entirely different perspective, 

in that you are standing here saying that you want the Federal 

Government to be involved. You want them to be involved in managing this fishery and this species. Can you reconcile that, versus 

the state? 

Ms. BITTERMANN. Yes, sir. Thank you for the question, 

Congressman. 

I would tell you, in this instance, that we have seen the management of the snapper fishery rebuild it, as we have seen in the past 

when the fishery has not been managed—for instance, for red fish, 

where it was overfished, and overharvested, and then became unavailable for commercial—— 

Mr. GRAVES. Which, I think it is important to note that, based 

on the information I have seen, the data I have seen, the overfishing and the lopsidedness came from the commercial side, not 

the recreational side in regard to the fishing. 

Ms. BITTERMANN. Yes, sir. But I think that what you have seen 

with the red snapper is that the management of the fishery has 

worked. And, maybe, if they had had that management with red 

fish back in the late 1980s, then it would not have been over-harvested, and we would still be serving wild-caught red fish in our 

restaurants. 

Mr. GRAVES. Let me ask you a question. Under our bill, can the 

quotas or can the percentages—can the poundage for the commercial be increased, or can it only be decreased? 

Ms. BITTERMANN. I am sorry, sir. Are you asking me? 

Mr. GRAVES. Yes, I am. 

Ms. BITTERMANN. I do not think I can answer that question. 

Mr. GRAVES. Mr. DeLaCruz, can you answer that question? 

Mr. DELACRUZ. Yes. It could definitely be increased, if the stock 

assessment was there. But one of the things that keeps getting 

missed in this conversation, is the fact that most of the state data 

collection is the input into the stock assessment, and the stock assessment process happens with oversight from state biologists. The 

head of the FWC sits on the committee that does the stock 

79 

assessment for red snapper. So our state is already vehemently 

involved. So, we are building a bill here that does not—— 

Mr. GRAVES. Mr. DeLaCruz, we had hearings in this committee 

last year and the year before, where folks sat here and acknowledged that the surveys that were being used to inform the fisheries 

management did not even include survey assessments around reef 

structures. 

Mr. Cresson, would you care to comment on that? Also comment 

on the other earlier comment by Mr. DeLaCruz on the Council 

vote. All the accuracy to stock assessments. 

Mr. CRESSON. Well, the fact is that the state science is light 

years better than the Federal science. And the Federal Government 

has acknowledged that. The states know it. 

So, back to the original—there was a comment earlier about how 

the state seasons may have affected our eventual Federal season. 

In Louisiana, for instance, in the lengthened state season, we still 

did not hit the projected catch that the Federal Government used 

to set our 9-day season. 

So, to your original—therefore, the state has now given us a few 

extra days in Louisiana because, even in 100-and-some-odd days, 

we did not get to the 800,000 pounds they projected we would catch 

in 9 days in Louisiana. 

The bottom line is that everybody recognizes that the data is 

bad, that the Federal science is no good. It is part of why the reallocation happened two meetings ago. It is not because anybody 

was begging for more fish, it is because they recognized themselves 

that it needed to be reallocated, because the data that they used 

to set it in the first place was wrong. And that is it. 

Mr. GRAVES. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you. In 

closing I just want to say this. What this bill does is it does exactly 

what is being allowed on the East Coast, it is being allowed in 

Alaska, it is being allowed on the West Coast. Louisiana is just as 

trustworthy—and I would actually say better resource managers, 

in some cases, than these other states are. To discriminate against 

the state of Louisiana is ridiculous. 

I want to say this. All of you sitting in the room, you have great 

ideas on how to do this, I told you. The protections we have in 

there for commercial, I made them up because I could not get any 

feedback from you. You have better ideas on how to do it? Door is 

wide open, the phone works. Give me a call, shoot me an email. 

We have the top commercial fisheries in the United States. We 

are one of the top tourist destinations. Your boss, Ralph Brennan, 

is a good friend of mine. I appointed him to a board when I was 

working for the state. I have no desire to shut down tourism or restaurants, or anything else. 

But, I will also say the current management regime for the recreational fishery is absolutely unacceptable. We can find a better 

balance, and we can tailor the management strategy among the 

five states in a way that benefits both sides. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Dr. FLEMING. OK. The gentleman yields back. I want to thank 

the witnesses—— 

80 

Mr. GRAVES. Can I ask unanimous consent that five letters from 

each of the five Gulf states endorsing the legislation be included in 

the record of the hearing? 

[No response.] 

Dr. FLEMING. Without objection, so ordered. 

[The letters submitted by Mr. Graves for the record follow:] 

STATE OF ALABAMA, 

DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES,

MONTGOMERY, ALABAMA 36130 

September 23, 2015 

Hon. Garret Graves 

U.S. House of Representatives 

204 Cannon House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

Dear Representative Graves: 

On behalf of the Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources 

(ADCNR), I am pleased to support H.R. 3094, the ‘‘Gulf States Red Snapper 

Management Authority (GSRSMA) Act.’’ 

Red snapper is one of the most valuable recreational and commercial fisheries to 

the State of Alabama. Orange Beach, Alabama, is well-known as the ‘‘Red Snapper 

Capital of the World.’’ Even though Alabama has less than 5% of the Gulf of Mexico 

coastline, more than 30% of all red snapper caught in the Gulf of Mexico are landed 

in Alabama. The management of this most sought after species is of the utmost importance to our State. We have worked diligently through the Gulf of Mexico 

Fisheries Management Council and the National Marine Fisheries Service to 

sustainably manage red snapper. However, the current federal management system 

is not working. 

The federal data collection methods currently being utilized, as well as the red 

snapper stock assessments and management strategies, have resulted in shorter 

and shorter seasons at the time when our state scientists, fisheries managers and 

fishermen feel that the stock is recovered and growing. Along with our counterparts 

in Mississippi, Texas, Florida and Louisiana, Alabama is confident that the five Gulf 

states have the ability to provide the data collection and assessments needed to better manage this fishery and improve access for anglers while maintaining a viable 

commercial red snapper fishery. The Marine Resources Division of ADCNR is in 

close contact with the recreational, charter and commercial fishermen on our coast 

and can better assess the needs of the fishery and respond accordingly to ensure 

access while sustainably managing this most valuable fishery. 

Thank you for your work on this issue. I look forward to continuing to work with 

you, Representative Bradley Byrne from Alabama and the other members of 

Congress to provide relief to our fishermen and better sustainable management of 

the red snapper fishery. 

Sincerely, 

N. GUNTER GUY, JR., 

Commissioner. 

81 

FLORIDA FISH AND WILDLIFE CONSERVATION COMMISSION, 

TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA

August 6, 2015 

Hon. Garret Graves 

U.S. House of Representatives 

204 Cannon House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

Dear Representative Graves: 

On behalf of the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC), I am 

pleased to support H.R. 3094, the ‘‘Gulf States Red Snapper Management Authority 

(GSRSMA) Act.’’ 

The Gulf of Mexico is one of America’s great natural resources. Tourists from the 

United States and the rest of the world flock to the Gulf of Mexico to enjoy everything it has to offer: world-class fishing, beautiful beaches, great food, and diverse 

wildlife. 

Unfortunately, fishing for red snapper in the Gulf of Mexico is becoming more and 

more challenging for all parties involved because of the manner in which red snapper is being managed. This uncertainty and challenging environment is leading to 

increasingly more dissatisfaction for all. 

GSRSMA is a step in the right direction for anglers and conservationists. By joining together with our colleagues in Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama, 

FWC believes the five states in the Gulf of Mexico are better equipped to manage 

the red snapper fishery, to establish and meet conservation goals based on sound 

scientific data, and to respond faster to the needs of all anglers. 

Representative Graves, thank you for your leadership on this issue. FWC looks 

forward to working with you, Congressman Jeff Miller, your colleagues in Congress, 

and our colleagues along the Gulf to advance this legislation. 

Sincerely, 

NICK WILEY, 

Executive Director. 

STATE OF LOUISIANA, 

DEPARTMENT OF WILDLIFE AND FISHERIES,

BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA 70898 

August 7, 2015 

Hon. Garret Graves 

U.S. House of Representatives 

204 Cannon House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

Dear Representative Graves: 

On behalf of the Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries (LDWF), I am 

pleased to support H.R. 3094, the ‘‘Gulf States Red Snapper Management Authority 

(GSRSMA) Act.’’ 

Red snapper is an iconic American fish—it is well-known and appreciated by both 

residents and visitors of Louisiana, whether it is on the end of an angler’s line or 

on a diner’s plate at one of our fine restaurants. Both recreational and commercial 

fisheries for red snapper are extremely important to our economy and way of life. 

We should take great care in managing these fisheries for the benefit of all users. 

We should strive to have sound data to guide our management decisions and seek 

out solutions to ensure our fisheries are ecologically and economically sustainable. 

82 

As such, we are especially troubled with the current management of Gulf red 

snapper, namely management of the recreational fishery, as it continues to face 

challenges due to inadequate data and an inflexible, unresponsive management 

framework. The GSRSMA Act would address these challenges. Along with our colleagues in Texas, Mississippi, Alabama, and Florida, LDWF is confident the five 

Gulf states have the necessary tools to provide the data needed to better manage 

red snapper fisheries, improving access for recreational anglers while maintaining 

a viable commercial fishery. We are also more receptive and responsive to the wants 

and needs of our constituents while still addressing Gulf-wide conservation goals. 

Representative Graves, we appreciate your leadership on this issue. LDWF looks 

forward to working with you, your co-sponsors and colleagues in Congress, and our 

colleagues along the Gulf to advance this legislation. 

Sincerely, 

ROBERT BARHAM, 

Secretary. 

STATE OF MISSISSIPPI, 

MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF MARINE RESOURCES,

BILOXI, MISSISSIPPI 39530 

September 24, 2015 

Hon. Garret Graves 

U.S. House of Representatives 

204 Cannon House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

Dear Representative Graves: 

On behalf of the Mississippi Department of Marine Resources (MDMR), I am 

pleased to support H.R. 3094, the ‘‘Gulf States Red Snapper Management Authority 

(GSRSMA) Act.’’ 

Red snapper is a valuable recreational and commercial fishery in Mississippi. We 

have worked diligently through the Gulf of Mexico Fisheries Management Council 

and the National Marine Fisheries Service to sustainably manage red snapper. 

However, the current federal management system is not working or at best working 

too slow. 

The federal data collection methods currently being utilized, as well as the red 

snapper stock assessments and management strategies, have resulted in shorter 

and shorter seasons at the time when our state scientists and fisheries managers 

believe the stock is recovered and growing. I am confident the five Gulf States have 

the ability to provide the data collection and assessments needed to manage this 

fishery and improve access for anglers while maintaining a viable commercial red 

snapper fishery. The MDMR hosted a Red Snapper Summit in May of 2014 and 

have remained in contact with the recreational, charter and commercial fishermen 

to ensure access while sustainably managing this most valuable fishery. 

Thank you for your work on this important issue. I look forward to continuing 

to work with you, Representative Steven Palazzo from Mississippi and the other 

members of Congress to provide our fishermen the best opportunities and access to 

this valuable fishery. 

Sincerely, 

JAMIE M. MILLER, 

Executive Director. 

83 

TEXAS PARKS & WILDLIFE, 

AUSTIN, TEXAS 78744 

October 20, 2015 

Hon. Garret Graves 

U.S. House of Representatives 

204 Cannon House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

Re: H.R. 3094—Gulf States Red Snapper Management Authority Act 

Dear Congressman Graves: 

As Chairman of the Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission, I write to express my 

strong support for H.R. 3094, a proposed amendment to the Magnuson-Stevens 

Fishery Conservation and Management Act, for the purpose of transferring to the 

states of Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas, the responsibility and 

authority to manage red snapper fisheries in the Gulf of Mexico. 

Recent history has demonstrated that management of red snapper fishing in 

federal waters has been uncertain, arbitrary and has not been based upon sound 

science. Although the numbers of red snapper have dramatically increased in recent 

years, federal management has led to inequities and has made it difficult for the 

states to manage state waters. There can be little question that the current system 

has failed and caused significant dissatisfaction among red snapper anglers. 

The proposed bill is a positive step that in my view, will be supported by conservationists interested in this fish. H.R. 3094 would require each of the five states 

to establish a science-based fishery management plan and then submit that plan for 

approval by each of the other four states. I believe that the state agencies who work 

with this fish in these waters are better equipped to manage the fishery and to establish and pursue conservation goals founded on scientific data. Each of the states 

is also able to move quickly when necessary to respond to any challenges that may 

arise in the fishery. 

I look forward to working with you and your colleagues in Congress and our counterparts in the other four Gulf states, regarding this important bill. The mission of 

the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department is to manage and conserve the natural 

and cultural resources of Texas and to provide hunting, fishing and outdoor recreation opportunities for the use and enjoyment of present and future generations. I 

am excited about this bill and believe that it provides the best assurance that 

present and future generations of snapper anglers will enjoy improved red snapper 

fishing in the future. 

Sincerely, 

T. DAN FRIEDKIN, 

Chairman. 

Dr. FLEMING. I want to thank the witnesses today, and Members 

and staff. 

Look, folks, this is a controversial issue. It has been controversial 

for some time. There are certainly some points of agreement. 

Number one is that we all want sustainability of the species. We 

want good management. We want good science. These are things 

that we all agree with. I hope that we agree that we want to keep 

all three sectors strong: the private anglers, the recreational people; the charter boat people, they have to have a minimum number 

of days in order to stay viable, as a business model; and, of course, 

the commercial fishermen, who are supplying our restaurants, 

which is so important. 

Again, it is my hope, and certainly dream, for working as 

Subcommittee Chairman for a number of years now, that we can 

come together in a common solution. 

84 

But I do thank you for the work. We have had plenty of hearings 

in the past, I am sure we will have more. You are welcome back 

any time. Under Committee Rule 4(a), the hearing record will be 

held open for 10 business days for any responses that you may 

have to additional questions that we may provide to you in writing. 

Therefore, without objection, we are adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 5:25 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.] 

[ADDITIONAL MATERIALS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD]

October 16, 2015 

Hon. JOHN FLEMING, Chairman, 

Hon. JARED HUFFMAN, Ranking Member, 

House Subcommittee on Water, Power and Oceans, 

Washington, DC 20515. 

Dear Chairman Fleming and Ranking Member Huffman: 

The Fishing Community Coalition (FCC) is an association of community-based, 

small-boat commercial fishing groups, representing more than 1,000 independent 

fishermen and business owners from Maine to Alaska, who share a commitment to 

the sustainable management of America’s fishery resources. The FCC was formed 

to strengthen and unify the individual voices of our member organizations. 

Our fishermen work tirelessly to promote marine stewardship and thriving commercial fisheries within their communities and the FCC seeks to translate these regional efforts into a cohesive approach to achieving sustainable fisheries nationwide 

under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA). 

That’s why the FCC strongly opposes H.R. 3094—the ‘‘Gulf States Red Snapper 

Management Authority Act’’ (Act)—as it would exempt this fishery from the science 

and conservation requirements of the MSA. 

All of our organizations have witnessed the successful recovery of fisheries in our 

own regions under the MSA, which requires managers to establish reasonable catch 

limits and accountability measure to prevent overfishing and ensure stocks rebuild 

in a timely manner. Under the MSA a total of 37 stocks have been successfully rebuilt and less than 10 percent of the nation’s assessed fish stocks are now subject 

to overfishing. These successes were achieved through a science-based, transparent 

process involving all stakeholders, including communities of fishermen. We understand that the future of our nation’s fisheries, as well as the fishermen and businesses they support, depends on maintaining commitments to end overfishing and 

rebuilding depleted stocks. 

H.R. 3094 is a short-sighted and misguided effort to eliminate community participation in management decisions in order to prioritize near-term gains over the longterm success of the fishery. The plan undermines existing successful management 

plans for the commercial and charter sectors, and fails to provide sufficient detail 

on how the fishery would be better managed by the Gulf states and what measures 

would be taken to prevent sufficient transparency and end overfishing in the future. 

In fact, H.R. 3094 would allow nearly 10% of the commercial fishery to be eliminated each year, and while the Act proposes to keep commercial red snapper shares 

‘‘intact’’ it does nothing to protect the commercial allocation upon which the shares 

are based. This uncertainty threatens the sustainability of the stock as well as the 

livelihoods of the fishermen and communities that depend on access to this fishery. 

Adoption of H.R. 3094 would also set a dangerous precedent for fisheries management across the nation by allowing a group of states to circumvent the core national 

85 

conservation principles of the MSA in order to placate a single interest group. 

Nationwide, our organizations have worked constructively with sport and charter 

fishermen to ensure sustainable access for all fishermen and that fish stocks are not 

overfished because all fishermen, fishing communities and fishing business depend 

on robust fisheries. 

As members of the FCC, we urge you to oppose this blatant effort to place one 

user group’s interests over all others. The MSA established an open, inclusive management process to balance the interests of all user groups in allocation decisions. 

The law requires that decisions be fair and equitable so as not to disadvantage any 

particular group. H.R. 3094 is anything but fair and equitable as we believe it will 

result in significant harm and would open the door for complete elimination of the 

commercial red snapper fishery in the coming years. 

Thank you for your consideration. We appreciate your show of support for fishing 

dependent communities nationwide by opposing this ill-conceived plan. 

Sincerely, 

The Fishing Communities Coalition 

Linda Behnken John Pappalardo 

Executive Director Chief Executive Officer 

Alaska Longline Fishermen’s 

Association 

Cape Cod Commercial Fishermen’s 

Alliance 

Ben Martens Shannon Carroll 

Executive Director Fisheries Policy Director 

Maine Coast Fishermen’s Association Alaska Marine Conservation Council 

Eric Brazer 

Deputy Director 

Gulf of Mexico Reef Fish 

Shareholders’ Alliance 

October 19, 2015 

Hon. JOHN FLEMING, Chairman, 

Hon. JARED HUFFMAN, Ranking Member, 

House Subcommittee on Water, Power and Oceans, 

Washington, DC 20515. 

Dear Chairman Fleming and Ranking Member Huffman: 

The Gulf of Mexico Reef Fish Shareholders’ Alliance (Shareholders’ Alliance) is a 

non-profit organization that represents the interests of commercial reef fish fishermen and other stakeholders in the Gulf of Mexico. By working closely with regional 

managers, state agencies, and federal representatives, we strive to stabilize and improve fishery management to ensure that we can continue to provide the American 

public with a sustainable source of domestically-caught Gulf of Mexico seafood. 

Everything we do is founded in our belief that conservation and stewardship protect 

fish populations and fishermen’s businesses. 

86 

On behalf of the Shareholders’ Alliance, please accept the attached documents 

that showcase our strong opposition to H.R. 3094—Gulf States Red Snapper 

Management Authority Act: 

1. A July 2015 press statement from the Shareholders’ Alliance opposing the 

multiple proposals attempting to legislate state management of red snapper 

in the Gulf of Mexico. 

2. An April 2015 press release from the Shareholders’ Alliance opposing this 

concept as it was announced. 

3. An April 2015 commercial fishing organization sign-on letter coordinated by 

the Shareholders’ Alliance with over 40 commercial fishing organizations from 

throughout the United States opposing this move and the federal precedent 

it sets. 

H.R. 3094 is a threat to our fishing businesses, fishery jobs, and the fishing communities of the Gulf of Mexico. We also believe H.R. 3094 will jeopardize the strong 

rebuilding we’ve seen in the red snapper fishery in recent years. It creates loopholes 

that will undermine our businesses to the point where the commercial fishery could 

actually be eliminated, and raises questions of transparency, accountability, enforcement, and funding. The Gulf states do not have the best long term interests of commercial fishermen or seafood suppliers at heart, and we therefore ask to remain 

under federal management. Please do not advance this controversial, ill-advised, 

and precedent-setting proposal. 

Thank you for your consideration of our position. 

Sincerely, 

ERIC BRAZER, DEPUTY DIRECTOR

Gulf of Mexico Reef Fish Shareholders’ Alliance 

Attachments 

***** 

Attachment 1 

Official Statement of the Gulf of Mexico Reef Fish Shareholder’s Alliance 

State Management of the Gulf of Mexico Red Snapper Fishery 

The Gulf of Mexico Reef Fish Shareholders’ Alliance (Shareholders’ Alliance) and 

the commercial fishermen and women we represent stand strong in supporting the 

sustainable federal management of our nation’s commercial red snapper fishery. We 

are able to build stable, long-term business plans; we live within sustainable limits; 

and we can provide the American seafood consumer with sustainable, fresh, Gulf of 

Mexico red snapper. The commercial red snapper management plan is working. 

That’s why we cannot support any legislative attempt to strip the commercial red 

snapper fishery away from federal mangers and turn it over to the Gulf states. This 

plan, developed by the fishery directors of the five Gulf states in a secret backdoor 

meeting without any fishermen allowed in the room, threatens to eliminate the commercial red snapper fishery and the of tens of thousands jobs it supports in order 

to bring fresh red snapper to your plates. 

Our federal fisheries law, the Magnuson-Stevens Conservation and Management Act 

(MSA), requires that sustainable fishing limits be identified and adhered to, conservation be promoted and that unhealthy fish stocks be rebuilt to healthy levels. 

It is these protections that have helped bring red snapper back to some of the highest levels in recent history. Turning the commercial red snapper fishery over to the 

Gulf states through an act of legislation will allow them to undermine our federal 

fisheries law and sidestep these conservation protections. Over forty commercial 

fishing organizations from throughout the Nation, representing thousands of commercial fishermen and tens of millions of pounds of commercially important seafood, 

support us as we work to protect our businesses and consumer access to red 

snapper. 

Legislating state management, whether in the form of Congressman Graves’ 

proposed amendment to the MSA reauthorization (H.R. 1335), Congressman 

Graves’ stand-alone amendment, Senator Vitter’s ‘‘Gulf States Red Snapper 

Management Authority’’ Act (S. 105), or any other similar acts of lawmaking, is the 

wrong answer for fish and fishermen in the Gulf. We have an existing process for 

87 

developing fishery solutions in the Gulf of Mexico and that’s done with a 

Congressionally-approved, stakeholder-driven, transparent Gulf of Mexico Fishery 

Management Council (Gulf Council). In fact, the Gulf Council is working on a state 

management plan right now, and the five Gulf states fishery directors are members 

of this Gulf Council. Let’s create regulations where they’re intended to be created— 

through a transparent, public, and accountable process; not behind closed doors and 

then imposed by politicians. 

If state management is the right solution for private anglers, it should be established under federal law, promote conservation, and refrain from destabilizing our 

commercial businesses. Helping private recreational red snapper fishermen doesn’t 

have to come at the expense of hurting hard working commercial fishermen and our 

families. 

The Gulf of Mexico Reef Fish Shareholders’ Alliance is a non-profit 

organization that represents the interests of commercial reef fish fishermen 

and other stakeholders in the Gulf of Mexico. We work hard to maintain accountability and conservation-based management for our region’s fisheries 

for today and future generations. By working closely with regional managers, state agencies, and federal representatives, we strive to stabilize and 

improve fishery management to ensure that we can continue to provide the 

American public with a sustainable source of domestically-caught Gulf of 

Mexico seafood. Everything we do is founded in our belief that conservation 

and stewardship protect fish populations and fishermen’s businesses. 

www.shareholdersalliance.org 

For press inquiries, please contact: Eric Brazer, Deputy Director 

Gulf of Mexico Reef Fish Shareholders’ Alliance 

(919) 451–1971/eric@shareholdersalliance.org 

***** 

Attachment 2 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE 

April 28, 2015 

Commercial Fishermen Throughout the U.S. Oppose Gulf States Red 

Snapper Takeover 

(Galveston, TX): Commercial fishermen throughout the United States have stood up 

and opposed the plan by the Gulf of Mexico state managers to take over red snapper 

management and eliminate the commercial quota system. 

‘‘It’s incredible the response we’ve gotten,’’ said Buddy Guindon, Executive Director 

of the Gulf of Mexico Reef Fish Shareholders’ Alliance based in Galveston, TX. 

‘‘From Alaska to Maine, California to South Carolina, our brother and sister commercial fishermen have united around this issue and see it for what it is—a 

precedent-setting backdoor means by the recreational lobby to reallocate this fishery, undermine federal laws, and take fish away from seafood consumers.’’ 

Forty-two commercial fishing organizations, representing thousands of commercial 

fishermen and tens of millions of pounds of commercially important seafood, signed 

onto a letter drafted by the Shareholders’ Alliance which states, ‘‘The implications 

of such a takeover are far-reaching and set a dangerous precedent for our region 

and others—over 97% of the more than 300,000 million Americans get their access 

to fish and shellfish by purchasing it in restaurants, grocery stores, and fish markets that we supply. We cannot support this plan in the Gulf because we would not 

support it at home.’’ 

‘‘This isn’t just a Gulf issue, it has national implications,’’ said John Pappalardo, 

CEO of the Cape Cod Commercial Fishermen’s Alliance based in Chatham, MA. ‘‘We 

stand with the Gulf fishermen and oppose this dangerous plan that will destroy 

small American ‘mom and pop’ businesses.’’ 

According to an announcement, representatives from the five Gulf States met in a 

closed-door off-the-books meeting in New Orleans where they developed a plan to 

take over management of red snapper in the Gulf of Mexico and eliminate the commercial individual fishing quota (IFQ) system. The management responsibility, currently held by the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council and National 

Marine Fisheries Service, would be turned over to a yet-to-be-developed group called 

88 

the Gulf States Red Snapper Management Authority, and would consist of 5 individuals, one from each Gulf State, that propose to operate outside of U.S. federal fisheries laws and sustainability policies. Each Gulf State would be responsible for 

management of their own waters out to 200 nautical miles, and would be in charge 

of creating the science and data to use for their management. Funding for this 

program would be siphoned from existing federal programs. 

For press inquiries, please contact: Eric Brazer, Deputy Director 

Gulf of Mexico Reef Fish Shareholders’ Alliance 

(919) 451–1971/eric@shareholdersalliance.org 

Website: www.shareholdersalliance.org 

October 20, 2015 

Hon. JOHN FLEMING, Chairman, 

Hon. JARED HUFFMAN, Ranking Member, 

House Subcommittee on Water, Power and Oceans, 

Washington, DC 20515. 

Dear Chairman Fleming and Ranking Member Huffman: 

We represent commercial and charter fishermen in the Gulf of Mexico and 

throughout the United States, and write to you today to voice our unified opposition 

to H.R. 3094 (Gulf States Red Snapper Management Authority Act). 

Every year tens-of-millions of Americans enjoy fresh caught seafood from their 

favorite restaurants and grocery stores, and millions of tourists travel to the coasts 

for a day of fishing on charter boats. Fish and shellfish are public resources, and 

our four fishing industry organizations work hard to provide your constituents and 

the rest of the American public with sustainable access to the bounty of the Gulf 

of Mexico and other coastal regions of the nation. Here’s who we are: 

• The Charter Fisherman’s Association (Corpus Christi, TX) represents 

charter captains from Texas to Florida that works to ensure American public 

access to fishing, to engage and represent the Charter for Hire industry, and 

to ensure long-term sustainability of our fisheries. 

• The Gulf Fishermen’s Association (Clearwater, FL) is the largest organization of offshore fishermen in the Southeastern U.S., with members in Texas 

and Florida, that strives to put healthy, sustainable seafood on America’s 

table. 

• The Gulf of Mexico Reef Fish Shareholders’ Alliance (Galveston, TX) is 

an organization of commercial reef fish fishermen and other stakeholders 

from Texas to Florida that strives to stabilize and improve fishery management to ensure that we can continue to provide the American public with a 

sustainable source of domestically caught Gulf of Mexico seafood. Everything 

we do is founded in our belief that conservation and stewardship protect fish 

populations and fishermen’s businesses. 

• The Seafood Harvesters of America (Washington, DC) is a broadly based 

national organization that represents 17 commercial fishing organizations 

from the Gulf of Alaska to the Gulf of Maine south to the Gulf of Mexico. The 

Harvesters strive for accountability in our fisheries, encourage others to do 

the same, and speak out on issues of common concern that affect the U.S. 

commercial fishing industry, the stewardship of our public resources and the 

many millions of Americans who enjoy seafood. 

89 

Together, our organizations and the thousands of fishermen we represent have 

embraced science and management tools that promote conservation and sustainable 

fishing practices, reduce wasteful bycatch, operate safer and more stable small businesses, and protect fishing and shoreside jobs. We strive for sustainability, accountability, and access to some of the world’s best seafood; and we do so through active 

and progressive campaigns that bring fishermen, stakeholders, and regulators together to solve problems. 

H.R. 3094 poses a clear and imminent threat to our jobs, our fishing communities, and the red snapper resource that we have helped rebuild to some of the 

highest levels on record. Here’s why we cannot support H.R. 3094 and any other 

similar legislation: 

• H.R. 3094 creates loopholes that will erode the commercial red 

snapper fishery and access to red snapper by millions of American 

consumers. Commercial management of red snapper in the Gulf is a success 

story—overfishing was stopped, wasteful discarding was all-but-eliminated, 

and fishing businesses and jobs are profitable and stable. This is all due to 

the core conservation and management protections that are afforded to us 

under federal law (the Magnuson-Stevens Conservation and Management 

Act). Turning this fishery over to the Gulf states strips us of these protections 

and we have unanimously opposed this proposal every time it appears. We 

want to also point out that H.R. 3094 allows the Gulf states to take away 

nearly 10% of the commercial quota every year without conferring with the 

Congressionally approved and stakeholder-comprised Gulf of Mexico Fishery 

Management Council (Gulf Council). This doesn’t just hurt commercial fishermen, it impacts the public because commercial fishermen don’t keep what 

they catch—it goes to American seafood consumers who purchase red snapper 

from restaurants and grocery stores. To add insult to injury, H.R. 3094 deceives the public by claiming it will not change the individual fishing quota 

(IFQ) shares in this fishery. However, those who developed this language fail 

to point out that the ‘‘shares’’ are a percentage of the whole commercial allocation, and that any reduction in commercial allocation will reduce the quota 

associated with the shares. 

• H.R. 3094 undermines the management of the charter fishery and 

access to red snapper by millions of recreational fishermen who don’t 

own a boat. Charter fishermen strive to run successful small businesses and 

have spent years working toward management solutions with the Gulf 

Council that give them stability and the flexibility they need under federal 

fishery laws and conservation guidelines. These federally-permitted vessels 

operate in federal waters, and have been near-unanimous in their vocal support for federal management—they do not want to be managed by the Gulf 

states. They have worked too hard to build a better federal management system for their sector to have the rug pulled out from under them by 

H.R. 3094. 

• H.R. 3094 removes essential transparency and public input, and fails 

to provide necessary information. The language in this bill was hatched 

from a plan that was developed by the five Gulf state fishery directors in a 

secret meeting with no fishermen informed or present. Rather than run this 

proposal through the Gulf Council—which is made up of fishery stakeholders 

and is legally required to allow for public input and review—the proposal is 

being imposed on the fishermen by Congress. This sounds like government 

overreach to us. In addition, through H.R. 3094, management authority for 

red snapper caught between the beaches of the Gulf of Mexico and the 200 

nautical mile exclusive economic zone would be concentrated into the hands 

of 3 Gulf state fishery directors. Furthermore, H.R. 3094 only requires this 

new body to report performance to the Secretary of Commerce once every 5 

years, whereas the current federally-managed commercial fishery can be publically evaluated daily. H.R. 3094 also fails to explain how the fishery would 

be enforced, how the public will be allowed to participate, and how this plan 

would be funded. 

• H.R. 3094 fails to protect and continue to rebuild the red snapper 

population. Federal law clearly lays out how unhealthy fisheries must be rebuilt to healthy levels using accountability measures and catch limits, and 

identifies the timeline by which this should happen. H.R. 3094 fails to ex- plain how it will promote conservation and the long-term health of the red 

snapper resource. It only vaguely refers to ‘‘necessary measures’’ and ‘‘proper 

management’’ that would be implemented to rebuild the fishery. 

90 

• Gulf of Mexico private recreational anglers have not proposed 

management system improvements for their own fishery that would 

extend their fishing season. Gulf commercial and charter red snapper 

fishermen developed alternative management and catch reporting systems 

that have allowed them to extend their seasons without taking red snapper 

allocations from other fishing sectors. Instead of trying to steal red snapper 

allocations from the commercial and charter fishing sectors, private recreational anglers should develop their own management and reporting alternatives that would allow them to extend their season as well. 

• H.R. 3094 is a controversial, ill-advised, unfunded, and precedentsetting measure that would ripple from the Gulf of Mexico to Alaska 

and New England. Over 40 commercial fishing organizations from throughout the U.S. have signed on opposing this plan to sidestep federal fisheries 

law and undermine the commercial red snapper fishery in the Gulf of Mexico. 

This is about more than red snapper—it’s about protecting the small businesses that deliver our nation’s seafood to the American consumer and providing sustainable access to this public resource to the millions of Americans 

who don’t own a boat. This Bill undermines the Magnuson-Stevens Act and 

could set a dangerous national precedent that could unravel the successes of 

this landmark piece of legislation. 

State management of red snapper is not the right solution for commercial and 

charter fishermen and they should not be forced into this form of regulation. If the 

private red snapper angler wants to be managed by the Gulf states, then let’s do 

it the way it’s supposed to be done—through the Congressionally approved Gulf 

Council, with a public and transparent stakeholder-driven process, under federal 

conservation requirements, and with the support of the private recreational fishermen themselves. H.R. 3094 is not the answer, and we hope you consider voting 

against this proposal. 

Thank you very much for your time and thoughtful consideration of our position. 

Sincerely, 

Shane Cantrell, Exec. Director Buddy Guindon, Exec. Director 

Charter Fisherman’s Association Gulf of Mexico Reef Fish 

Shareholder’s Alliance 

Glen Brooks, President Brett D. Veerhusen, Exec. Director 

Gulf Fishermen’s Association Seafood Harvesters of America 

Hon. John Fleming, Chairman 

House Subcommittee on Water, Power and Oceans 

1324 Longworth House Office Building 

Washington, DC 20515 

Dear Chairman Fleming: 

We write to you today as a unified group of commercial fishing organizations and 

seafood suppliers from throughout the United States that are concerned with what 

we see unfolding in the Gulf of Mexico. Specifically, we strongly oppose the push 

by the five Gulf states to take possession of the red snapper fishery through a legislative exemption to the Magnuson Stevens Act. This action sets a dangerous 

precedent for fishermen like us throughout the United States and the conservation 

measures we need to protect our fisheries. 

According to the most recent report of fisheries economics of the United States, 

commercial fishermen in the U.S. harvested 9.6 billion pounds of finfish and shellfish in 2012, earning $5.1 billion for their catch. Additionally, commercial fishing 

contributes 1.3 million jobs and $141 billion in total sales to the economy of the U.S. 

The Gulf states’ ploy directly threatens the seafood industry and our economic contribution to the nation by removing accountability to the Magnuson Stevens Act, 

failing to protect the commercial fishery, eliminating public involvement in the regulatory process, and prioritizing recreational fishing interests above all others. 

91 

The Gulf states’ fishery directors hold five seats on the Gulf of Mexico Fishery 

Management Council, the body that that oversees the implementation of the 

Magnuson Stevens Act. Time and time again these same individuals have voted 

against the interests of the commercial fishery. That, combined with their refusal 

to explain how they would manage the commercial fishery, and the admittance of 

at least one major private angler organization that the goal is to shut down the commercial red snapper fishery, should give every Member of Congress pause—it 

certainly raises concern with us. 

The Magnuson Stevens Act requires fishermen to be accountable for what they 

catch and for fishery management plans to prioritize conservation measures. Without these protections, healthy fisheries can return to an overfished state and fisheries that need protection may not get it. This will hurt fishing businesses like ours, 

cause the loss of our fishing and shoreside jobs, and harm our fishing communities 

that rely on healthy stocks to survive. American seafood consumers will feel the 

sting of this impact as their healthy and sustainable seafood choices become limited 

and replaced by cheap imports or are fraudulently mislabeled. 

The nation’s supply of Gulf of Mexico red snapper will be threatened if the Gulf 

states take over the commercial red snapper fishery, exempt themselves from the 

Magnuson Stevens Act, and turn over this fishery to the recreational sector. The implications of such a takeover are far-reaching and set a dangerous precedent for our 

region and others—over 97% of the more than 300,000 million Americans get their 

access to fish and shellfish by purchasing it in restaurants, grocery stores, and fish 

markets that we supply. We cannot support this plan in the Gulf because we would 

not support it at home. 

Thank you for your consideration. We appreciate your help in protecting commercial fishermen, the seafood supply chain, and seafood consumers throughout the 

United States by opposing this ill-advised, precedent-setting plan. 

Alaska Bering Sea Crabbers Alaska Independent Fishermen’s 

Marketing Association 

Mark Gleason, Executive Director David Harsila, President 

Seattle, Washington Seattle, Washington 

Alaska Independent Tendermens 

Association 

Alaska Longline Fishermen’s 

Association 

Lisa Terry, Executive Director Linda Behnken, Executive Director 

Petersburg, Alaska Sitka, Alaska 

Alaska Marine Conservation 

Council 

Alaska Trollers Association 

Kelly Harrell, Executive Director Dale Kelley, Executive Director 

Anchorage, Alaska Juneau, Alaska 

Alaska Whitefish Trawlers 

Association 

American Bluefin Tuna 

Association 

Bob Krueger, Executive Director Rich Ruais, Executive Director 

Kodiak, Alaska Norwell, Massachusetts 

Associated Fisheries of Maine At Sea Processors Association 

Maggie Raymond, Executive Director Stephanie Madsen, Exec. Director 

South Berwick, Maine Seattle, Washington 

California Sea Urchin 

Commission 

California Wetfish Producers 

Association 

Dave Goldenberg, Executive Director Diane Pleschner-Steele, Exec. Dir. 

Folsom, California Buellton, California 

Cape Cod Commercial 

Fishermen’s Alliance 

Central Coast Seafood Marketing 

Association 

John Pappalardo, CEO Rob Seitz, Vice President 

Chatham, Massachusetts Morro Bay, California 

92 

Commercial Fishermen of Santa 

Barbara 

Fish for America 

Chris Voss, President Jim Zurbrick, Managing Director 

Santa Barbara, California Steinhatchee, Florida 

Fishing Vessel Owners’ 

Association 

Florida Keys Commercial 

Fishermen’s Association 

Per Odegaard, President Bill Kelly, Executive Director 

Seattle, Washington Marathon, Florida 

Fort Bragg Groundfish 

Association 

Georges Bank Cod Fixed Gear 

Sector 

Michelle Norvell, Executive Director Jim Nash, President 

Fort Bragg, California Chatham, Massachusetts 

Gulf Coast Professional 

Fishermen 

Gulf Fishermen’s Association 

Wayne Werner, Co-Founder Glen Brooks, President 

Alachua, Florida Lecanto, Florida 

Gulf of Mexico Reef Fish 

Shareholders’ Alliance 

Gulf Wild 

Bubba Cochrane, President Jason DeLaCruz, President 

Galveston, Texas St. Augustine, Florida 

Half Moon Bay Groundfish 

Marketing Association 

Half Moon Bay Seafood 

Marketing Association 

Lisa Damrosch, Executive Director Geoff Bettencourt, Vice President 

Half Moon Bay, California Half Moon Bay, California 

Maine Coast Fishermen’s 

Association 

Maine Lobstermen’s Association 

Ben Martens, Executive Director Patrice McCarron, Exec. Director 

Topsham, Maine Kennebunk, Maine 

Massachusetts Lobstermen’s 

Association 

Midwater Trawlers Cooperative 

Beth Casoni, Executive Director Heather Mann, Executive Director 

Scituate, Massachusetts Newport, Oregon 

North Pacific Fisheries 

Association 

Northeast Fishery Sector 11 

Malcolm Milne, President Jamie Hayward, President 

Homer, Alaska New Hampshire 

Northeast Seafood Coalition Penobscot East Resource Center 

Jackie Odell, Executive Director Kyle Molton, Policy Director 

Gloucester, Massachusetts Stonington, Maine 

Purse Seine Vessel Owner’s 

Association 

Rhode Island Commercial 

Fishermen’s Association 

Bob Kehoe, Executive Director Christopher Brown, Exec. Director 

Seattle, Washington Wakefield, Rhode Island 

Small Boat Commercial Salmon 

Fishermen’s Association 

South Atlantic Fishermen’s 

Association 

Don Marshall, President Matt Ruby, President 

Grass Valley, California Charleston, South Carolina 

93 

Southeast Alaska Fishermen’s 

Alliance 

Southern Offshore Fishing 

Association 

Kathy Hansen, Executive Director Bob Spaeth, Executive Director 

Juneau, Alaska Madeira Beach, Florida 

United Catcher Boats United Cook Inlet Drift 

Association 

Brent Paine, Executive Director David Martin, President 

Seattle, Washington Soldotna, Alaska 

Æ