Conservation
When it comes to collecting data, there’s an app for that.
Useful Info or Just Big Brother?
EE For those who have read this column for any length of time, you understand that I am not a fan of bureaucracy for bureaucracy’s sake. But I have always supported sensible management of our common property resources. It is, in my opinion, one of the necessary functions of a government, which can easily overreach.
One of the major concerns with fisheries management is that in order to make the right decisions, it takes a lot of continuous data. Someone has to pay for that data collection, and that has consistently been a point of discussion. Should it be the general taxpayer, who may benefit from buying reasonably priced, commercially caught fish products? Or should it be the user who benefits from catching more abundant fish? As someone who supports user fees over additional taxes, I lean toward the latter.
In commercial fisheries, federal observers get randomly assigned to a certain percentage of trips. Their function is to record the composition of the catch, bycatch and discards. This helps managers assess the impact on the resources and ultimately increase or decrease the catch limits. Commercial fishermen have complained about the high cost of these observers and that they constitute an unfunded mandate. The net result of this in some parts of the country has been that the government (read: taxpayer) foots the bill. This has prompted a move toward electronic monitoring (EM), which can, in some fisheries, get the same results at lower cost. I agree with those who complain that the daily fee is too high, but that could be mitigated through the use of EM.
Another useful piece of information is where the fish are being caught. In a number of fisheries, that allows the catch to be assigned to the correct stock, and therefore the data is more useful. Historically, commercial as well as recreational fishermen have been reluctant to give up any information on where they fish. Many feel that kind of information is proprietary. That was made evident to
me when I was part of an advisory group trying to get the wind energy leaseholders to work on mitigating the potential impacts of the offshore wind farms. Fishermen were reluctant to give up their fishing locations. Going way back to the start of determining the placement of the wind energy areas (WEAS), all ocean users were asked to submit charts of their activity so the WEAS could be placed where activity was at a minimum. Once again, they did not want to let the government know where they were fishing. The result has been that the WEAS may not have been placed in the optimal areas for minimal interference with commercial fishing activity.
A recent op-ed in National Fisherman by Dr. Ray Hilborn, a fisheries professor from the University of Washington, outlined that this secretive attitude had to change. “The era of secret fishing spots is over. … I suggest that all fishing vessels voluntarily report their position on a minute-by-minute basis. … In conjunction with at-sea camera coverage of catch and landings, vessel tracking will ensure that vessels are correctly reporting the location of landings.”
It appears that the use of technology to generate the necessary data for fisheries management for the commercial users is progressing. Now those of us in the recreational fishing community need to start moving in that direction as well. Back in November, this column discussed the new Marine Recreational Information Program (MRIP). In order for the MRIP to produce reliable catch data, there needs to be an effective and comprehensive method to collect recreational catch data. Most everyone has that technology at their fingertips: smartphones. As this is written, the Marine Fisheries Advisory Committee (MAFAC), which gives advice to the Department of Commerce, is investigating this methodology, and so is the MRIP Executive Steering Committee. There are a number of apps that can be used to capture the needed data.
That is likely the easiest part. One of the major questions is how to get an unbiased cross section of participants, and how to retain them. An option being used in some states is to require data submission by all participants. Yes, this would work, but I sense there might be some pushback on the idea. We will have to see what the MAFAC or MRIP comes up with. The next issue is how to ground-truth the data. This can certainly be done with some local pilot projects.
There may be some resistance to this kind of data collection. However, I think that it makes real sense. As users, we need to be participants in our own future. Done correctly, this does not have to be Big Brother watching, but it could be our access to future fishing opportunities.