|
FWC Recognizes Improved Population Status of Manatees (Seawatch, August 2006)
by Ted Forsgren, CCA Florida Executive Director
The Commissioner’s decision reflects a successful recovery of the Florida manatee and promises a future of management based on science—not emotion.
On June 7, the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) directed its staff to proceed with the final phase of reclassifying the West Indian manatee from “endangered” to “threatened.” Upon making their decision commissioners went to great lengths to point out that a change in designation would not mean less protection, but only reflected the improved population status of the species. In fact, according to the FWC, “Manatees, currently listed as an endangered species, have recovered to the point they are no longer in imminent danger of extinction, although they still require careful management.”
The issue of manatee status and protection has been ongoing for nearly six years, beginning in 2000 when the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) released information indicating that it was considering establishing manatee sanctuaries and refuges in 150 new areas in Florida. Around the same time, a major environmental and animal rights group, which had brought a lawsuit against the state and federal government over manatee protection, prepared a separate list recommending 115 new sanctuaries and refuges. Those lists included many of Florida’s most important saltwater fishing areas.
At the time, CCA Florida became involved in the issue to insure that the interests of saltwater anglers were fairly considered and to offer more reasonable alternatives than banning the public from public waters—alternatives that were based on fact not emotion. We were not proposing actions that would undermine the continuing recovery of manatees, however, there was concern that many of Florida’s premier saltwater fishing areas were being considered for severe boating and fishing restrictions or total closures at the very time when manatee population counts were at an all time high.
It was also felt that animal rights groups and sanctuary proponents were overstating the problem and misleading the public. For example, we noted that when the lawsuits were filed one of the major manatee groups stated, “manatee deaths continue to climb — causing manatees to sink further toward extinction” and “only an estimated 2,400 (manatees) survive in the wild in Florida’s coastal waters.”
Yet in January 2001, scientists counted an all time record 3,276 manatees in statewide aerial surveys, more than double the number counted 10 years before. Two months later, a revealing CCA Florida-funded report on the status of manatees entitled Manatees in Florida: 2001, by Thomas H. Fraser, Ph.D., was released. According to the in-depth study, “All of the biological data indicates that the West Indian manatee in Florida has sustained an increasing population for the last 25 years. The minimum count increase has been at a rate of 6-7% per year. Manatees should continue to be fully protected but they have recovered to a level where they no longer appear to be an ‘endangered’ species.”
The FWC consequently reached a settlement agreement over its lawsuit filed against the agency in June of 2001. FWC Commissioner Quinton Hedgepeth, who voted against the agreement said, ?I don’t think the Commission is guilty of what we’re being sued over.? Commission Chairman David Meehan agreed but voted in favor of the settlement stating, ?I don’t think we’re guilty either, but I do think settling the suit is the most practical way to keep the issue in Florida.?
In the separate, federal lawsuit a settlement agreement was approved in January 2001 in which the USFWS agreed to have new sanctuaries in place no later than September 28, 2001.
CCA Florida consequently called for the establishment of a measurable biological goal for manatee recovery rather than simply piling on more regulations even as manatee numbers continued to increase. Two months later, in a further attempt to get at the truth of the issue, we requested that the FWC re-evaluate the biological status of the Florida manatee, something that had not been done in 30 years. At the time, the CCA Board of Directors felt that before even more draconian measures were considered to restrict or stop boating access to large areas of public waters, it was important to determine the actual status of the species.
The request for a status review was filed in accordance with the agency‘s formal listing action process, which is used to determine whether a species can be listed as “endangered,” “threatened” or “species of special concern.” The process, which was adopted by the Commission in 1999, was developed with the assistance of a working group consisting of representatives from conservation organizations, landowners, businesses and industries.
CCA Florida further made the case that regardless of the species—snook, grouper or manatees—certain scientific information is needed to properly protect and manage that species. If such information is not available the effectiveness of existing regulations cannot be determined, nor can the need for additional regulations be properly evaluated.
In an ensuing document issued in January 2002 titled, Why CCA Florida Became Involved in Manatee Protection Issues, CCA Florida made a series of important points including:
- The best available scientific evidence from state and federal agencies indicates that over the last 25 years, manatee populations have been increasing, not decreasing.
- Evidence shows that the geographic areas where manatees are found on a regular basis is expanding.
- Major manatee groups either do not know or are deliberately misrepresenting the biological status of manatees.
- Manatee deaths attributed to boats are not “skyrocketing” as manatee groups claim. Instead, boating mortalities are rising at rates similar to natural and other mortalities. An increase in all forms of mortality over time is exactly what can be expected as the manatee population expands.
- Some of the coastal areas targeted by state and federal agencies and manatee groups for additional speed, no-entry or motorboat-prohibited zones have never had a watercraft related mortality in the 30 years that governmental agencies have been tracking manatee mortalities.
- As a criteria for delisting the manatee status, environmental and animal rights groups want an annual manatee population growth rate that is greater than the annual growth rate of Florida’s human population.
- CCA Florida supports increased law enforcement, public education and angler awareness programs to provide additional protection for manatees.
That same year, the Florida legislature passed bills that required the FWC to establish measurable biological goals for manatee recovery and set up balanced local advisory groups to review proposed protection zones. Consequently, we worked with local stakeholder groups and the FWC over the development of additional zones, but always with an eye toward seeking a fair balance between manatee protection and access for recrea-tional fishing.
“From the beginning, our goal in this process has been to insure that the interests of saltwater anglers are fairly considered and to offer reasonable recommendations and alternatives based on facts, not emotion,” said Dr. Ernie Hendry, CCA Florida Chairman at the time.
In October of 2002, the FWC released a preliminary report on the biological status of the manatee which recommended that manatees fall within the criteria for “threatened” status rather than “endangered.” According to the report, The Preliminary Biological Status Review of the Florida Manatee:
Current information on population trends of the Florida manatee do not suggest a reduction in population size over the last 45 years (three generations). Current data, both scientific and anecdotal, indicate that the Florida manatee population has increased since the 1970s.
Just prior to release of the report, the FWC decided to re-examine its listing process. The FWC commissioners further decided to table petitions to reclassify the bald eagle, gopher tortoise and bobwhite quail until it received the panel’s suggestions. Petitions to reclassify the red-cockaded woodpecker and West Indian manatee, however, were well into the reclassification process and the FWC decided to continue toward final action that year.
However, in January 2003, the FWC instead decided to postpone, until at least November of that year, its decision concerning whether manatees should be reclassified from “endangered” to “threatened.” Eventually the reclassification decision of manatees was postponed until completion of the FWC’s review of its imperiled species process.
Around the same time, CCA Florida joined the FWC and boating interests throughout Florida in blasting action by the U.S. Department of Interior over a deal worked out between Interior officials and animal rights groups to enact another major wave of federal manatee speed zones. Objections filed by the FWC stated that remedies for the Department of Interior’s mishandling of the settlement agreement “should not be to prematurely create additional Federal manatee refuges and sanctuaries” and that “it is unfair to the Commission (FWC) and to all Floridians to thrust burdens on them because of the alleged failure of U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) efforts.”
CCA Florida’s Chairman Michael Kennedy pointed out at the time that, “The issue here is not mismanagement of manatees whose populations are at record levels of abundance, but of gross mismanagement of a manatee lawsuit settlement agreement by high level federal officials. Federal judges shouldn’t punish Florida’s citizens and saltwater anglers for the incompetence of the leadership and legal staff of the U.S. Department of Interior.” Despite these objections additional restricted zones were enacted.
As part of the discussion, at our request, the FWC calculated the total area of Florida’s inshore waters that were currently in state manatee sanctuaries, refuges and speed zones. The result was astounding. The state alone had already established 298,817 acres under one or more manatee protection designations—more than 24 percent of the state’s inshore waters. That figure didn’t even include a currently unknown number of acres with identical or similar manatee zones that had been established by other entities such as the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, or zones found within the state’s many national wildlife refuges and national parks. In addition, a number of Florida’s coastal counties have also established large manatee zones that were not included in the state’s figure.
Finally, on April 14, 2005 the FWC voted to update the state’s imperiled species listing process by adopting criteria developed by the highly respected International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN). Then in March of 2006, six years after we petitioned for a review of the biological status of the manatee, three separate biological review panels, each consisting of five experts appointed by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission recommended that the Florida manatee be reclassified from “endangered” to “threatened.”
That outcome was followed by the decision in June to proceed with the final phase for reclassifying the manatee from “endangered” to “threatened.”
“We’re pleased that action has finally been taken which reflects the true biological status of the manatee,” said David Howton, CCA Florida Chairman. “We have consistently supported rational manatee measures that protect the species while still allowing reasonable access by the public to public waters. Now that the truth is on the table about the status of the species, we can work together to achieve those goals.”
During the final phase of the reclassification process a new management plan will be drawn up. Management plans typically take a year to draft, and once completed the reclassification will take place.
More information on manatee protection and angler access issues, or the complete text of reports referenced in this article.
[Return to Table of Contents]
CCA Florida Convinces FWC to Increase Snook Protection (Seawatch, August 2006)
by Ted Forsgren, CCA Florida Executive Director
Recently released stock assessments show that the species is not reaching management goals.
The FWC approved a rule in June to change the minimum size limit for snook from 26 to 27 inches while retaining the 34-inch maximum size limit. The change was designed to compensate for a new regulation that requires snook to be measured from the most forward point of the head with the mouth closed to the farthest tip of the tail with the tail compressed or squeezed together. The new measuring method, which went into effect on July 1, would have extended the legal length of a large portion of the snook population and pushed them into the slot limit. [See CCA Florida press release.]
Initially, the FWC staff recommendation brought before the agency’s commissioners sought to increase both the minimum and maximum size limit for snook by one inch to compensate for the new measuring rules. CCA Florida, however, after reviewing stock assessments and other data, made the case for increasing only the minimum size limit by one inch and retaining the maximum size limit at 34 inches. We felt that would provide snook with needed, additional protection. In addition, an increase in the maximum size limit at this time would have placed increased harvest pressure on larger fish, which are predominantly females.
Snook are one of Florida’s premier gamefish and for many years CCA Florida, as well as Florida’s saltwater anglers and fishing guides, have urged and endorsed strong conservation measures for snook. The FWC has also established a strong conservation resource management goal of a 40 percent spawning potential ratio (SPR). Seatrout and mullet are managed for a 35 percent SPR resource goal. (SPR is the portion of the stock that has reached maturity).
As a premier recreational fishery, we also believe that snook should be managed for maximum abundance and larger fish rather than simply for maximum yield. A high protection standard is also warranted because snook are subjected to occasional severe mortality episodes caused by early winter freezes.
The most recent FWC stock assessment—released in February—shows that snook SPR values on both coasts are significantly below the 40 percent goal. East coast SPR values range from 25 percent to 26 percent and west coast values range from 26 percent to 32 percent. Of further concern is that these figures are based on information gathered only through 2004 and do not include 2005, a year during which the west coast of Florida suffered its worst red tide in 30 years.
To address this situation, the FWC is establishing a stakeholder group of anglers, guides and other interested parties who will meet this summer to discuss measures needed to bring the snook SPR value up to 40 percent on both coasts. However, it will be many months before additional measures are identified and implemented. In the meantime, we believed it was necessary to take the opportunity to increase conservation protections while addressing the changes required by the new measurement procedure. The one-inch increase in the lower end of the slot limit will result in a 7 percent increase in the SPR on the west coast, and a 5 percent increase in the SPR on the east coast.
At press time, the FWC’s Division of Marine Fisheries Management was in the process of scheduling a workgroup for snook to address concerns raised at the Snook Symposium held in February. Topics to be considered include spawning potential ratio, impact of red tide and cold kills on recruitment, enforcement and poaching, catch and release education and slot limits. The first meeting is scheduled for July 25. For a CCA Florida review of the outcome of the stakeholder meetings go to snook.
|
