Upload
others
View
0
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries
For-Hire SurveyFor-Hire Survey
Presentation to the Marine Fi h i C i iFisheries Commission
1/23/2009
For-Hire Survey
BackgroundBackground
Purpose/Need For Change
New Methodology
Results
L ki Ah dLooking Ahead
For-Hire Survey
BackgroundNorth Carolina Coastwide ContributionContribution
Primary Species Landed
Changes in Fleet Size
Participant Demographicsp g p
For-Hire SurveyHarvest (Number of Fish Landed 2007)
1,400,000
( )
1,000,000
1,200,000
er)
600 000
800,000
st (N
umb
200 000
400,000
600,000
Har
ves
0
200,000
York sey
and lina
etts ida nia hire lina
and
icut
are gia ine
New Yor
New Jerse
y
Marylan
North C
arolin
Massa
chuse
tt
East Florid
Virgini
New Hampsh
i
South C
arolin
Rhode Is
lan
Connecti
cu
Delawar
GeorgiMain
For-Hire SurveyHarvest (Pounds of Fish Landed 2007)
8 000 000
9,000,000
Harvest (Pounds of Fish Landed 2007)
6,000,000
7,000,000
8,000,000
nds)
4,000,000
5,000,000
est (
Poun
2,000,000
3,000,000
Har
ve
0
1,000,000
linaYork se
yetts rid
a andicu
thire an
dinia lina ain
e are rgia
North Carolin
New Yo
New Jerse
y
Massa
chuse
tt
East Florid
Marylan
Connectic
u
New Hampshi
Rhode Is
lanVirg
in
South Carol
inMain
Delawar
Georgi
For-Hire SurveyNumber of Trips (2007)
600,000
Number of Trips (2007)
400,000
500,000
ips
300,000
400,000
mbe
r of T
r
100,000
200,000
Num
0
rsey
Yorkolina
etts landrid
aolin
ash
ire land
ginia
ware ticut
aine
rgia
New Jerse
New Yo
North Caroli
Massa
chuse
t
Maryla
East Florid
South Carol
i
New Hampsh
Rhode Is
laVirg
in
Delawa
Connectic Mai
Georg
For-Hire Survey
Primary Species Targeted During 2007
(Top 5)
Target Species Number Percent RankTuna Genus 411 36.5 1Yellowfin Tuna 213 18 9 2Yellowfin Tuna 213 18.9 2Striped Bass 159 14.1 3Dolphin 101 9.0 4pBillfish Family 48 4.3 5
For-Hire Survey
Primary Species Landed (number) During 2007
(Top 5)
Species Number Percent RankDolphin 411,242 34.3 1Bluefish 145 850 12 2 2Bluefish 145,850 12.2 2W hite Grunt 90,813 7.6 3Vermilion Snapper 77,454 6.5 4Yellowfin Tuna 65,890 5.5 5
For-Hire SurveyChanges in Fleet Size By Permit Requirement
900
1000
No Permit Required
Changes in Fleet Size By Permit Requirement
700
800
900
nts
qCRFL BlanketFor-Hire Permit
500
600
00
Part
cipa
n
300
400
Num
ber P
100
200
N
0
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
For-Hire SurveyDemographics (Angler Residency) 2007
H db t Ch tHeadboat Charter
RankState of
Residence Number PercentState of
Residence Number Percent1 North Carolina 299 29.72 Virginia 152 15.13 Pennsylvania 88 8.7
North Carolina 716 31.9Virginia 667 29.7Maryland 216 9.6y
4 Ohio 80 7.95 Maryland 62 6.26 New York 38 3.8
Pennsylvania 186 8.3New Jersey 84 3.7South Carolina 52 2.3
7 West Virginia 34 3.48 New Jersey 32 3.29 South Carolina 31 3 1
New York 46 2.1West Virginia 43 1.9Ohio 36 1.69 South Carolina 31 3.1
10 Indiana 30 3.0Total 846 84.01
Delaware 24 1.12,070 92.08
For-Hire SurveyVessels By County Port of Landing
CountyYear Percent
Change2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Vessels By County Port of Landing
County Change2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008Dare 235 245 244 239 261 260 10.6Carteret 131 142 174 189 202 200 52.7New Hanover 81 89 94 105 120 119 46.9Brunswick 78 69 68 80 92 99 26.9Onslow 14 29 24 35 26 24 71.4Pender 12 8 11 17 16 22 83.3Pamlico 10 10 8 4 9 11 10.0Beaufort 9 5 9 11 13 10 11.1Hyde 9 12 18 18 22 15 66.7Chowan 3 2 4 3 2 3 0.0Currituck 3 5 1 6 8 4 33.3Craven 2 3 1 2 5 5 150.0Oth ti 5 6 5 7 9 9 80 0Other counties 5 6 5 7 9 9 80.0Out of State 1 1 1 9 48 30 2900.0Total 593 626 662 725 833 811 36.8
For-Hire Survey
Purpose/Need for Changep gProblems with existing methodologymethodology
ACCSP evaluation/study
3 way comparison (MRFSS, logbooks, Captains calls) in South Carolina
For-Hire Survey
Problems with existing methodology
Very low contact rate on l h (hi h
ConclusionsConclusionstelephone survey (high percentage out-of-state)
Pooling of data was required
Low dockside sample sizeLow dockside sample size
Results lacked credibility
Discard problem headboat
For-Hire Surveyy
ACCSP 3 Way Comparison Conclusionsy p
ACCSP recommendations based on consensusconsensus
MRFSS- Least preferredR lt l k d dibilitResults lacked credibility
Difficult to capture guideboat data
Dockside sample very lowDockside sample very low
For-Hire SurveyLogbook Evaluation
AdvantagesLogbook approach more credible among constituents
DisadvantagesOut-of-State and part time may operate without licenseamong constituents
Offer more timely data (potential quota monitoring instrument)
operate without licenseMust be validated (25%) under-reporting
Logbooks would be mandatory and enforceableConsidered a census with no
Biological data not availableNo way to statistically evaluate error
missing dataNo “mumbo jumbo science”
Requires a licensing/permit system
For-Hire SurveyVessel Directory and Captains Calls Evaluation
AdvantagesNot as much burden as logbooks
DisadvantagesCredibility issues, most question survey resultsComprehensive frame needed
but could adjustBiological data obtained
question survey resultsEstimates not very timelyNeed observers to sample
docksideAnalytical ways to measure errorImprovements in results
discardsCost more than logbooksNot all states can require a license or permit
For-Hire SurveyACCSP 3 Way Comparison Conclusions (cont’)
To Make a Long Story Short
ACCSP Committee split on recommendationACCSP Committee split on recommendation
NOAA supported the “Captains Call Surveys”
NOAA is paying for the programs
Guess which one we decided to use
For-Hire SurveyNew Methodology (Captains Calls)
Comprehensive List of vesselsComprehensive List of vesselsPermits pre-CRFL
Blanket license with rule requiring permit if no CRFLBlanket license with rule requiring permit if no CRFL
10% vessels randomly contacted each weekweek
Notification (warm-up) letter with trip log t 2 k h dsent 2 weeks ahead
Warm-up letter has PIN for webtool
T i l d i h b f dTrip log to record trips that can be faxed
Survey and contact information for questions
For-Hire SurveyNew Methodology (Captains Calls)
Reporting Options AvailableCaptain can wait to be called
Sampler must make 10 attempts
Fax in logFax in log1 or 2 logs faxed each weeks
Use webtoolUse webtool1 or 2 Captains use webtool each week
%Less than 5% coastwide
For-Hire Survey
New Methodology (Captains Calls)Trip validation (how do we know if Captains are reporting all trips)Captains are reporting all trips)
We know who has been selected
f fMonitor fishing activity on few vessels each week to compare to actual reported trips
Adjustment factor calculatedAdjustment factor calculated
For-Hire SurveyAnnual 2007 Trip Adjustment Factor
3
Annual 2007 Trip Adjustment Factor
2
2.5
Fact
or
No adjustment (good)
1.5
stm
ent F
0.5
1
Adj
u
0
cticut
wareorid
aorgi
aMain
eyla
ndse
tts shire rse
yYork
olinasla
ndolin
agin
ia
Connectic
Delawa
East Flor
Georg MaMary
la
Massa
chuse
New Hampsh
New Jers
New Yo
North Carol
Rhode Is
la
South Carol Virg
i
For-Hire SurveyyNew Methodology (Captains Calls)
Problems in North CarolinaValidation adjustment highj g
Captains complain of “too many calls”
Still problem with guideboatsStill problem with guideboats
Very costly
Many man-hours required
For-Hire SurveyFrequencies of the number of times boats were chosen in 2007
180
Frequencies of the number of times boats were chosen in 2007
120
140
160
ples
80
100
120
r of S
amp
40
60
80
Num
ber
0
20
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 14
Number of Times Chosen for Sample
For-Hire SurveyFrequency Number of Trips Reported (2007)
450
Frequency Number of Trips Reported (2007)
350
400
mpl
es)
250
300
ssel
s (s
am
150
200
ber o
f Ves
50
100
Num
b
0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 24 27 28 31 34 39 43
Number of Trips
For-Hire SurveyInland and Ocean Trips (2000-2007)
250,000 Ocean
p ( )
New method began
200,000
Inlandg
150,000
50 000
100,000
0
50,000
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Year
For-Hire SurveyyNew Methodology (Captains Calls)
Benefits to North CarolinaDMF has best sample frame on the Coast p
(couldn’t be much better)
Information obtained directly from Captain, not someone who rode on the vessel
Headboat discard data extremely valuable in stock assessments
For-Hire SurveyyLooking Ahead
National Research Council (NRC) recommended that For-Hire berecommended that For Hire be considered commercial
Marine Recreational InformationMarine Recreational Information Program (MRIP) is currently evaluating
The EndThe End End