[House Hearing, 114 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
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
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.fdsys.gov
or
Committee address: http://naturalresources.house.gov
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
97-311 PDF WASHINGTON : 2016
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES
ROB BISHOP, UT, Chairman
RAUL M. GRIJALVA, AZ, Ranking Democratic Member
Don Young, AK Grace F. Napolitano, CA
Louie Gohmert, TX Madeleine Z. Bordallo, GU
Doug Lamborn, CO Jim Costa, CA
Robert J. Wittman, VA Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan,
John Fleming, LA CNMI
Tom McClintock, CA Niki Tsongas, MA
Glenn Thompson, PA Pedro R. Pierluisi, PR
Cynthia M. Lummis, WY Jared Huffman, CA
Dan Benishek, MI Raul Ruiz, CA
Jeff Duncan, SC Alan S. Lowenthal, CA
Paul A. Gosar, AZ Matt Cartwright, PA
Raul R. Labrador, ID Donald S. Beyer, Jr., VA
Doug LaMalfa, CA Norma J. Torres, CA
Jeff Denham, CA Debbie Dingell, MI
Paul Cook, CA Ruben Gallego, AZ
Bruce Westerman, AR Lois Capps, CA
Garret Graves, LA Jared Polis, CO
Dan Newhouse, WA Wm. Lacy Clay, MO
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
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 Grace F. Napolitano, CA
Robert J. Wittman, VA Jim Costa, CA
Tom McClintock, CA Ruben Gallego, AZ
Cynthia M. Lummis, WY Madeleine Z. Bordallo, GU
Jeff Duncan, SC Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan,
Paul A. Gosar, AZ CNMI
Doug LaMalfa, CA Raul Ruiz, CA
Jeff Denham, CA Alan S. Lowenthal, CA
Garret Graves, LA Norma J. Torres, CA
Dan Newhouse, WA Debbie Dingell, MI
Thomas MacArthur, NJ Raul M. Grijalva, AZ, ex officio
Rob Bishop, UT, ex officio
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
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
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 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:]
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 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 two-thirds 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, 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
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 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 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 federally-licensed 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.
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.
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.
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 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.
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 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 mid-1800s, 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 Magnuson-
Stevens 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.
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).
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Figure 1. Historical and Projected Trends in Gulf of Mexico Red
Snapper Biomass
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 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 state-specific 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.
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
short-changes 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, 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 science-
informed, 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.
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 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 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.
______
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?
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 Gulf-wide 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 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.
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 that is not, I do not know why they have to
recalibrate the state-level 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.
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 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 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.
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.
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, 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 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 five-state 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.
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.]
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.
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 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 fishery-independent 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 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 fishery-independent 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 site-affinity, 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 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, 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.
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 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.
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.
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 three-member 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 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 Gulf-wide. 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 wild-caught 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
federally-managed 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 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,
gulf-wide 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. 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 co-
management 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 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 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-for-hire 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-for-hire 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
charter-for-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
one-size-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----
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 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 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-fits-all 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
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.
______
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 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.
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.
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 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 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. Sec. 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
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
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.
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 all-time 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 cross-section 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.
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 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 cross-section 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
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
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.
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. 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 real-time 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.
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 state-based 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.
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.
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 one-sided 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 free-for-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 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 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 five-state 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.
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 federally-permitted 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 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
charter-for-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 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.
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 3\1/2\
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 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, ``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.
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.
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 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----
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.
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.
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.
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.
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]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
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 long-term 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 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
______
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
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.
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 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/[email protected]
*****
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 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/[email protected]
Website: www.shareholdersalliance.org
______
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
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.
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 explain 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.
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
precedent-setting 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.
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
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
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
[all]