Evaluation of angler reporting accuracy in an off‐site survey to estimate statewide steelhead harvest

McCormick, Joshua L.; Whitney, Don W.; Schill, Daniel J.; Quist, Michael C.

doi:10.1111/fme.12109

Cited by 12 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…; McCormick et al. ). The information that is derived from run reconstruction efforts and various angler surveys has provided estimates for the total number of wild and hatchery steelhead that return to the Clearwater River, escaping to their natal tributaries.…”

Section: Study Areamentioning

confidence: 98%

Distribution and Movement of Steelhead and Anglers in the Clearwater River, Idaho

Feeken

Bowersox

Dobos

et al. 2019

N American J Fish Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Steelhead Oncorhynchus mykiss is a species that is of high economic value that supports popular sport fisheries across the Pacific Northwest. The Clearwater River in Idaho provides a trophy steelhead fishery, and it is home to both wild‐ and hatchery‐origin steelhead. To manage the fishery effectively, information is needed about the spatial and temporal overlap of wild and hatchery steelhead in the Clearwater River, as well as the activity of anglers. We conducted a radiotelemetry study to describe the distribution of steelhead and their final fate in the Clearwater River, and creel surveys were used to describe the distribution of anglers. In total, 289 wild (Potlatch River and Lochsa River) and hatchery (from Dworshak National Fish Hatchery and South Fork Clearwater River) steelhead were radio‐tagged at Lower Granite Dam, 51 river kilometers (rkm) downstream from the mouth of the Clearwater River. Fish were monitored upon their entry into the Clearwater River by using mobile tracking surveys (boat and vehicle) and stationary antennas. The majority of wild and hatchery steelhead arrived in the Clearwater River in the fall with the exception of those from the Lochsa River, which arrived in the fall and following spring. Average daily movement of the fish was minimal (range = 0.3–4.7 km/d) and dependent on water temperature and flow. The fates of wild and hatchery steelhead varied. Fish returned to spawning grounds, were harvested by anglers (hatchery fish only), or had unknown fates. Both wild and hatchery steelhead returned at high rates to their natal tributaries and release locations. No straying was observed in either group; however, occasions when steelhead have overshot their natal tributaries and release locations were documented. Spatial and temporal overlap of the distributions of wild and hatchery steelhead was minimal. The distribution of anglers overlapped with that of hatchery steelhead in the fall, winter, and spring. The distributional overlap of anglers and wild steelhead was minimal and largely occurred in September in the lower Clearwater River. This suggests that the Clearwater River has a highly compartmentalized fishery and that current fishing regulations in the Clearwater River are providing for a diversity of angling opportunities while conserving wild steelhead and offering harvest of hatchery fish. The results from this study have important implications for the conservation and management of wild and hatchery steelhead.

show abstract

Section: Study Areamentioning

confidence: 98%

Distribution and Movement of Steelhead and Anglers in the Clearwater River, Idaho

Feeken

Bowersox

Dobos

et al. 2019

N American J Fish Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Off-site surveys provide an alternative for estimating effort and catch at high mountain lakes (Pollock et al 1994). However, off-site surveys may suffer from several forms of bias, including nonresponse and recall bias (Connelly et al 2000;Connelly and Brown 2011;McCormick et al 2015). Pollock et al (1994) found that recall bias might be low in off-site surveys if species are rare and catch is memorable.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Feasibility and Evaluation of Probabilistic On‐site Surveys for Estimating Angler Use and Catch in High Mountain Lakes

McCormick

2015

N American J Fish Manag

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Estimating angling effort and catch at high mountain lakes can be difficult due the abundance, remoteness, and diffuse nature of angling effort that typify high mountain lake fisheries. In this study, a simulation was used to evaluate the accuracy of catch and effort estimates derived using on‐site access–access and roving–access creel surveys at a complex of 35 high mountain lakes. Five levels of angling effort and catch at the 35 lakes were simulated, and effort varied from 3,278 to 68,741 h and catch varied from 1,737 to 50,525 fish over the duration of the season. Access–access creel surveys had an average of 32% relative error and roving–access surveys had an average of 17% relative error in estimates of aggregate (i.e., at all 35 lakes) angling effort and catch when one creel surveyor was used. Estimates were relatively robust to temporal and spatial changes in patterns of effort and catch rate over the duration of the season. Relative error was inversely related to the amount of angling effort, catch, and creel surveyors. Roving–access surveys outperformed access–access surveys at all levels of sampling effort. Bias and relative error of estimates of angling effort and catch were greater at the individual‐lake scale than when estimates were derived for all 35 lakes. Results of this study suggest that on‐site surveys can provide relatively accurate estimates of angling effort and catch at as many as 35 lakes with minimal sampling effort. Received March 16, 2015; accepted August 14, 2015

show abstract

“…Although there are significant differences in the fishing effort (hours spent fishing, tools, skills, location along the river, etc.) among individual fisherman (McCormick et al, 2015), it is assumed that the average effort does not change much within the study periods. Therefore, the catch per unit effort (CPUE) was calculated as the annual catch in kilograms by one fisherman.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The co-existence of recreational and artisanal fisheries in the central parts of the Danube and Sava rivers

Treer

Kubatov²

2017

Croatian Journal of Fisheries

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The official data on recreational and artisanal fisheries in Croatia and Hungary were analysed. The data from Croatia relates to the entire Croatian section of the Danube River and to the section of the Sava River along the border with Bosnia and Herzegovina. The data from Hungary covers 60 km of the Danube River north of the Croatian border. Absolute catches in kilograms, as well as CPUE (kg per fisherman per year) by both groups in all three river sections varied from year to year without dramatic changes. Fishing with nets, artisanal fishermen differ from the anglers in two major ways: they are less selective and they catch bigger specimens. According to the official data, the existing ratio between recreational and artisanal fishermen in these three river sections does not negatively affect each other's or overall fishing. Therefore, a conclusion can be drawn that medium-intensive artisanal fisheries qualify to co-exist with recreational fisheries. How to CiteTreer, T., Kubatov, I. (2017): The co-existence of recreational and artisanal fisheries in the central parts of the Danube and Sava rivers. Croatian Journal of Fisheries, 75,[89][90][91][92][93][94]

show abstract

Evaluation of angler reporting accuracy in an off‐site survey to estimate statewide steelhead harvest

Cited by 12 publications

References 11 publications

Distribution and Movement of Steelhead and Anglers in the Clearwater River, Idaho

Distribution and Movement of Steelhead and Anglers in the Clearwater River, Idaho

Feasibility and Evaluation of Probabilistic On‐site Surveys for Estimating Angler Use and Catch in High Mountain Lakes

The co-existence of recreational and artisanal fisheries in the central parts of the Danube and Sava rivers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About