PissonDFS

New Quote and Regulations interesting article

Rate this topic

35 posts in this topic

Posted (edited) · Report post

Captain Monty Hawkins article is very interesting. Morningstarfishing.com or Facebook 

Edited by PissonDFS
Info didn’t wasn’t sent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited) · Report post

HOLY CRAP!!  It's a great read, albeit tough to find.  I've always know that MRIP was total BS, but I had no idea as to what extent.  Check out below what they reported for Maine this past spring. 

 

In May/June 2019 the Average striped bass caught from Maine's Shore was 39 lbs and 46 inches...

 

I've got an email into Maine DMR to check that.  If it's true, I have to find where Maine DMR gets their drugs...

 

Edited by Roccus7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 mins ago, stripedbassking said:

Yeaaahhh there’s No way the average was that in ME this year for May/June lol

Agreed, but IF the only response they got for surf fishing during the May/June time frame was from somebody who caught that 39 lb fish, then that's what got reported.  MRIP is a flawed system to begin with, but if this is a true statement, you'd have a better sampling using a dartboard.  Just amazed that someone besides a data entry person doesn't have to do a reality check on the data...

 

Like I said above, email into contact at Maine DMR to see if this is a true statement...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's insane!! MRIP has been a load of crap from day one, even though there are those who defend the data collection , it consistently misses entire ports and regions . By consistently missing I mean never. The arrogance of the fishcrat telling the Captain that it all averages out is a glaring example of the hubris exhibited by the alphabet soup of fishery regulators.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 mins ago, stripedbassking said:

Yeaaahhh there’s No way the average was that in ME this year for May/June lol

Out of that whole article that’s what you took from it ?? And I’m 99% sure his data is legitimate. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 mins ago, Roccus7 said:

Agreed, but IF the only response they got for surf fishing during the May/June time frame was from somebody who caught that 39 lb fish, then that's what got reported.  MRIP is a flawed system to begin with, but if this is a true statement, you'd have a better sampling using a dartboard.  Just amazed that someone besides a data entry person doesn't have to do a reality check on the data...

 

Like I said above, email into contact at Maine DMR to see if this is a true statement...

Yeah true I guess one fish reported would make the “average” that size, that is pretty flawed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 mins ago, PissonDFS said:

Out of that whole article that’s what you took from it ?? And I’m 99% sure his data is legitimate. 

I wouldn’t put too much stock in a charter from MD that harvests 19” fish and looking to increase harvests in the long run... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The real problem is that MRIP ignores the PSEs when cobbling together their estimates. PSE = percent standard error = if it's greater than 50% it means the data is more likely wrong than correct. Yet MRIP combines all of the data, regardless of the PSE to come up with their overall estimate. If you look at the state by state numbers, more often than not the PSEs are well over 50% and the smaller the geographic area the higher the PSEs get.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 mins ago, pakalolo said:

That's insane!! MRIP has been a load of crap from day one, even though there are those who defend the data collection , it consistently misses entire ports and regions . By consistently missing I mean never. The arrogance of the fishcrat telling the Captain that it all averages out is a glaring example of the hubris exhibited by the alphabet soup of fishery regulators.

They only miss some areas for the intercepts, the survey covers the entire coast. You are correct on the hubris part, I have had many heated discussions about the with Richard Cody of MRIP and he refuses to see the point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 mins ago, stripedbassking said:

I wouldn’t put too much stock in a charter from MD that harvests 19” fish and looking to increase harvests in the long run... 

Always a few here that just don’t get it or comprehend things 

14 mins ago, MakoMike said:

They only miss some areas for the intercepts, the survey covers the entire coast. You are correct on the hubris part, I have had many heated discussions about the with Richard Cody of MRIP and he refuses to see the point.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A couple of months ago NMFS was soliciting comments on the MRIP. I provided comments, with emphasis on their misuse of high PSE data. The NMFS response acknowledged my comments but didn't commit to do anything about it. If you guys want I'll post the comments, but they are relatively technical.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Roccus7 said:

HOLY CRAP!!  It's a great read, albeit tough to find.  I've always know that MRIP was total BS, but I had no idea as to what extent.  Check out below what they reported for Maine this past spring. 

 

In May/June 2019 the Average striped bass caught from Maine's Shore was 39 lbs and 46 inches...

 

I've got an email into Maine DMR to check that.  If it's true, I have to find where Maine DMR gets their drugs...

 

Don't take Monty Hawkins comments too seriously.  He's made a career out of criticizing MRIP and MRFSS for his own purposes, and from your response, you're falling into his trap.

 

MRIP works pretty well, when it's used properly.  It got a decent review from the National Academy of Science in 2017.  But using it well means using it on a coastwide basis, because MRIP accuracy improves with the number of people interviewed.

 

Thus, when used on a coastwide basis, the results are accurate.  Break it down to the state level, and they get worse, because there are fewer intercepts.  Break state data down to a single two-month wave, and accuracy declines again.  And then break that single-wave data into sector, and it becomes worthless.

 

As Mike noted, the accuracy of estimates is measured by something called PSE--Percent Standard Error.  A PSE under 10 is good, and perfectly adequate for management use.  Managers will usually use anything below 30 or so, which is beginning to stretch it, and make regulations iffier than they should be.  NMFS flags any estimate with a PSE over 50 as essentially unusable--but PSEs over 100 are sometimes seen.

 

So let's break down your example. based on PSEs.  I'm going to use 2018 rather than 2019, just because we can work with a full year's data.

 

In 2018, the coastwide (Northeast and Mid-Atlantic) PSE for striped bass is 7.6, which is pretty good; restrict it only to landings and not releases, and it gets a little worse, to 8.3, because there are already fewer intercepts involved, as there are fewer people who keep fish than there are people who both keep and release.

 

If we shrink the universe to just the State of Maine, for all of 2018, the PSE jumps to 20.8 for all bass caught, and 41.3 for people who kept their fish.  The former number is getting a little high, but managers would still use it; the latter is already out of the accuracy range that managers feel comfortable using--although sometimes they use it anyway.

 

Now, let's shrink the universe further, to Maine in Wave 3 (May/June) of 2018.  We find a PSE of 32.4 for all fish caught, which is right at the cusp of what's usually seen as acceptable levels of error, and 54.7--a number red-flagged as clearly unreliable--for landings only.

 

Finally, we'll shrink the universe to its smallest level, Maine in Wave 3 2018, but only with regard to shore-caught fish.  That gets us a PSE for all shore-caught fish of 53.7, and a PSE for 115.3 for harvested fish.  The former number is already unusually inaccurate, the latter just ridiculous (and note that size data comes only from harvested fish, not releases, because released fish can't be measured by the surveyors).

 

So yes, if someone looks up data for a particular species of fish, caught in one state, during a particular wave, by a single mode, they're going to get an unusably bad number.  That's how the numbers work.

 

But the thing to remember is that fishery managers, and fishery scientists, know that.  They don't try to use those incredibly bad numbers to manage fish stocks, because they understand the limitations of the data.  But you will get gadflies such as Hawkins, who have a personal interest in impeaching the data, using such an example to try to make anglers believe that all of the MRIP data is no good.  

 

Whether they really believe what they say, because they just don't understand how MRIP works and how it should be used, or whether they're being willfully ignorant in an effort to poison people's attitudes, is something that's hard to say.  Whyever they do it, they are not accurately representing how MRIP works or how the data is used.

 

F

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to register here in order to participate.

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.