Providing context to the global code of practice for recreational fisheries

Abstract

An in-depth explanation of selected content of the European Inland Fisheries Advisory CommissionÕs ÔCode of Practice for Recreational FisheriesÕ (CoP) is presented. The focus is on core areas that were intensely debated in the drafting the CoP. These include definition of recreational fishing, recreational fishing practices, fish welfare, recreational fisheries management and research. It is anticipated that the CoP for recreational fisheries promotes best practice and management principles for sustainable recreational fisheries, within the recreational fisheries sector and ancillary industries/sectors regionally, nationally, and ultimately globally. To be viable, the CoP for recreational fisheries must be adopted by the international community complementing the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.

Unexpectedly high catch-and-release rates in European marine recreational fisheries: implications for science and management

“…European sea bass (Dicentrarchus labrax), can account for up to 100% of the commercial landings (Herfaut et al, 2013). However, if the goal is to incorporate recreational fisheries into future ecosystem-based management, more research on European recreational fisheries is urgently needed (Arlinghaus et al, , 2010Pawson et al, 2008).…”

Ecology and welfare of aquatic animals in wild capture fisheries

“…These include their support for research, and adoption of research findings that have improved aquatic animal survival (and hence welfare) in capture fisheries (Pepperell 2008), via their surveillance for early detection of incursions of exotic pests and diseases, via their vocal advocacy for improved management of biosecurity, fisheries and the environment (e.g. Salmon and Trout Association 2008), and through their financial support (through license revenue) and active participation in projects to improve water quality and restore aquatic habitats (Bate 2001;Arlinghaus et al 2007aArlinghaus et al , 2009Arlinghaus et al , 2010Granek et al 2008). This demonstrates that application of the feelings-based approach to welfare issues in wild capture fisheries is counterproductive because it can actually reduce aquatic animal welfare by inhibiting existing environmental initiatives undertaken by key stakeholders in those fisheries.…”

“…Indeed, codes of practice that outline acceptable welfare standards for aquatic organisms and encourage utilization of best practice methods relating to virtually every aspect of recreational fishing have been developed and adopted by fishers in some countries (Recfish Australia 2008;EIFAC 2008;Arlinghaus et al 2010). The use of best practice relating to maintenance of fish in live wells, maximizing survival of released fish as well as encouragement of use of humane killing methods has also been outlined in the NEATFish environmental standard for fishing tournaments that has been developed in Australia (Sawynok et al 2008) and is available online at www.neatfish.com.…”

“…The use of best practice relating to maintenance of fish in live wells, maximizing survival of released fish as well as encouragement of use of humane killing methods has also been outlined in the NEATFish environmental standard for fishing tournaments that has been developed in Australia (Sawynok et al 2008) and is available online at www.neatfish.com. Because many basic aspects of the angling process are reasonably standardized in most western countries, anglers in regions where codes of practice are not available can be guided by the contents of the existing codes of practice that have been developed for other jurisdictions (Recfish Australia 2008;EIFAC 2008;Arlinghaus et al 2010). Nevertheless, due to the enormous range of fishing techniques, environmental variables, target species and management arrangements that comprise recreational fisheries around the globe, fine tuning of welfare standards developed in these existing codes of practice may be needed and, if so, this should be pursued through research and development tailored for the unique situations that arise in each country.…”

Socioeconomic implications of recreational shore angling for the management of coastal resources in a Mediterranean marine protected area

“…Recreational activities carried out in the marine environment can help to prevent or improve many health disorders such as cardiovascular and mental diseases (reviewed by Lloret, 2010). When evaluating this activity, there is need for timely data about the socioeconomic and biological effects of recreational fishing in the Mediterranean, not only at national and international levels (Pawson et al, 2007;Arlinghaus et al, 2010), but also from a local and regional perspective. These evaluations should also consider the particular characteristics of the different recreational fishing methods (spear fishing, coastal boat fishing, offshore boat fishing, shore fishing, etc.…”