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