FS Mag data collection

RK McLean

Isn't there anyway FS can create a link to allow all the many fisherman of Florida to report their catches (i.e. Red Snapper) so the totals can be review by FWC and see how prolific the species is. There are a lot of us who fish every week and would be able to help the FWC with accurate data of the catch and releases along with size, time, and date.
I believe the total numbers would be shocking to the scientists who are studying the issue with limited contact with the real world. FS should be commended for the fine job they do in trying to the record straight! Maybe this would be an added step toward that end.

Thanks, RK

surfman

There are lots of ways good data could be collected, that doesn't mean NMFS would consider it, good data that contradicts theirs has been laid out for them in the past and they are always happy to come up with whatever reason they need to dismiss it. If they didn't have something to do with collecting it they don't want to see it.

You will see soon, there will be responses that will back that up. Just watch.

[email protected] Special

There is also the issue with data collection consistency and how the computer models handle it.

I have dealt with many fishery issues that rely on one model and then get completely revised when a newer model technique is used.

In other words, you can make the data say anything you want it to say.

Mackeral Snatcher

Just as NMFS has been doing for a long while.

TrippleTailIV

RK
Surfman pretty much nailed it.

NMFS is extremely reluctant to use angler supplied data like you suggest. They fear things like biased reporting. They also know they aren't going to get 100% of fishermen reporting. Additionally, they argue that they can't be sure of what you report is actually what you did, saw, caught and so forth

An example (their logic): If they relied on angler supplied data and they don't get 100% reporting, then they need to make an estimate of catch based off those that did report. Now, let's say for argument's sake, that only those fishermen who fished a lot and caught a lot reported their catch. The resulting estimate process would use this high catch rate for all anglers. This could artificially inflate what was caught and could make it seem like more fish were caught than actually were.

Now, I argue our data is very useful. Take the USFWS. They can look at Audubon data (yes, birders keep very good records) and look at things like abundance or rare sightings and adjust their population models based on real, on the ground reporting.

So, while our data may not provide numbers directly used in management, they can be used to ground-truth what the science is saying.

And there isn't much, if any, ground truthing going on now at all.