Author
Listed:
- Christine Pelletier
(Carleton University, Institute of Environmental Science)
- Kyle C. Hanson
(Carleton University, Fish Ecology and Conservation Physiology Laboratory, Ottawa Carleton Institute of Biology)
- Steven J. Cooke
(Carleton University, Institute of Environmental Science)
Abstract
Many recreational anglers practice catch-and-release angling, where fish are returned to the water with the presumption that they will survive. However, not all fish survive, and those that do often experience sublethal consequences including injury and stress. There is compelling scientific evidence that angler behavior and gear choice can affect the success of catch-and-release as a management and conservation strategy. Because anglers often look to government natural resource agencies for guidance on how to handle and release fish properly, there is a need to assess whether their outreach materials are readily accessible and provide the necessary and correct information on the subject. Therefore, on-line catch-and-release guidelines developed by state and provincial natural resource agencies across North America were evaluated to determine whether their guidelines were consistent with the best available scientific information. This analysis revealed that there was immense variation in the depth and breadth of coverage among jurisdictions. Agency guidelines contradicted one another in several areas including air exposure, angling in deep water, venting trapped gases, and resuscitation. In many cases, the guidelines failed to provide sufficient direction to actually be of use to anglers or provide direction consistent with contemporary scientific literature. This analysis will assist with developing outreach materials that promote sustainable recreational fisheries and in maintaining the welfare status of individual fish.
Suggested Citation
Christine Pelletier & Kyle C. Hanson & Steven J. Cooke, 2007.
"Do Catch-and-Release Guidelines from State and Provincial Fisheries Agencies in North America Conform to Scientifically Based Best Practices?,"
Environmental Management, Springer, vol. 39(6), pages 760-773, June.
Handle:
RePEc:spr:envman:v:39:y:2007:i:6:d:10.1007_s00267-006-0173-2
DOI: 10.1007/s00267-006-0173-2
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:envman:v:39:y:2007:i:6:d:10.1007_s00267-006-0173-2. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.