For Immediate
Release
March 4, 2009
Contact: Jim Hutchinson,
Jr. 888-JOIN
RFA
New Study Confirms RFA's
Claims on Red Snapper Abundance
Galloway, NJ - A new study released by Dr. Robert Shipp and Dr.
Steve Bortone reveals that the Gulf of Mexico Red Snapper stock
may be at a higher level of abundance than estimated by National
Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). Their work suggests that a
significant portion of the fish population remains unaccounted
through traditional abundance surveys, explaining that red snapper
are actually thriving due to the marked habitat improvements seen
through highly successful artificial reef programs and more than
5,000 oil rigs. The findings challenge the current status of
overfished and overfishing for red snapper.
"The Recreational Fishing Alliance (RFA) and our Gulf of Mexico
members were among the first to bring this issue of undercounted
red snapper to the attention of the Gulf of Mexico Fishery
Management Council years ago," said Jim Donofrio, Executive
Director of the RFA. "Ironically, the RFA was criticized by
conservation groups who refused to support the claims by actual
fishermen, and instead chose to go along with the flawed NMFS
assessment. We are encouraged that these groups now recognize
what we have for so long."
It is thought that red snapper, particularly age 2 fish, are
limited to available habitat and prior to 1950 very little natural
hard bottom features were available in the Gulf. Man-made hard
bottom deployed since that time has created thousands of square
miles of new habitat, allowing the population to expand beyond the
traditional red snapper range and making the stock more
productive. Much of this new habitat is not sampled by NMFS,
which the new study says creates a chronic underestimation of
stock size.
"Pure and simple, this illustrates the need for flexibility in
rebuilding and fisheries management, something the RFA has been
saying all along," Donofrio said. "Recreational anglers are being
denied access to this important fishery based on outdated
abundance estimates."
When testifying before Congress in 2007, Donofrio noted that
rebuilding provisions and rigid overfishing language hardcoded
into the federal fishing law would have a significant impact on
the red snapper fishery in the Gulf of Mexico. "The most recent
stock assessment establishes the spawning potential ratio at seven
times larger than the last assessment in 2000," Donofrio told the
Committee on Natural Resources, adding "red snapper is at
historically high levels of abundance."
Because of the inflexible requirements set forth by the Magnuson
Stevens Act, anglers' total allowable catch (TAC) of red snapper
has been cut by more than half in the past two years, resulting in
a significantly shorter snapper season and drastically reduced bag
limit. "This new regime is causing both unnecessary regulatory
discards and severe negative social and economic impacts to local
fishing communities throughout the Gulf," Donofrio testified in
2007.
The latest report by Dr. Shipp and Dr. Bortone helps bolster the
on-water observations from Gulf fishermen and continued lobbying
efforts by RFA. Fishermen often see changes on the water two to
three years before they are even picked up in NMFS assessment, and
in the case of red snapper around the reefs and rigs, NMFS does
not include these fish as part of their sampling protocol which
means there's no way for federal fisheries researchers to count
these fish as part of the total stock.
"It is clear to the RFA that the red snapper stock and many others
are in better shape," Donofrio said. "Fisheries managers must be
afforded some type of limited flexibility when rebuilding healthy
fish stocks such as red snapper to allow science to keep pace with
management." Donofrio explained that it was the RFA which had
recommended that Dr. Shipp be invited to the same Congressional
hearing in 2007 to testify on behalf these "observable facts"
within the Gulf of Mexico snapper fishery.
"The mission of the RFA forces us to challenge NMFS science when
it does not reflect what we see on the water. When other
organizations were willing to accept bad science while dismissing
the claims of the anglers themselves who were out on the water,
RFA was willing to fight for the recreational fishing community."
"We challenged what we knew was wrong and we hope other groups
will join us in the future, not just in being critical, but by
being analytical," Donofrio added.
#####
