The Recreational Fishery in the Kosi Estuarine Lake System, South Africa
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
http://africanzoology.journals.ac.za The recreational fishery in the Kosi estuarine lake system, South Africa N.C. James1*, L.E. Beckley1, B.Q. Mann1 &R.Kyle2 1 Oceanographic Research Institute, P.O. Box 10712, Marine Parade, 4056 South Africa 2 KwaZulu-Natal Nature Conservation Service, P.O. Box 43, KwaNgwanase, 3973 South Africa Received 2 November 2000. Accepted 15 February 2001 The Kosi estuarine system, located in northern KwaZulu-Natal, is becoming an increasingly popular angling venue. Recreational catch card data from the National Marine Linefish System for the years 1986 to 1999 were analysed to determine total catch, catch composition, catch per unit effort (CPUE), seasonality of catches and annual trends in catch composition. A total of 17 families, comprising 34 species, was reported in catches of recreational anglers. Pomadasys spp., predominantly Pomadasys commersonnii, was the most prominent taxon caught in terms of both numbers and mass. Seasonal trends in catch rates were observed, with more fish caught in the summer and autumn months. The catch rate fluctuated annually. Fluctuations in CPUE were closely correlated to the number of cards collected, which reflects bias in the data. Despite annual fluctuations in CPUE, regression analysis revealed a slight increase in overall CPUE with time. However, CPUE for Acanthopagrus berda and Lutjanus argentimaculatus decreased steadily since 1986. The decline of these two estuarine-dependent species may indicate that the total fishing levels are not sustainable. Key words: angling, catch composition, catch per unit effort. INTRODUCTION (Makhawulani, Mpungwini and Nhlange). Since The Kosi estuarine system (Fig. 1), which consists 1950, there has been a camping facility, which is of four connected lakes, is located on the east coast used primarily by recreational anglers, on the of South Africa, and extends from 26°50’S to northwestern shore of Lake Nhlange (Kyle 1986). 27°11’S and 32°38’E to 32°53’E (Begg 1978). The Local children also fish by rod and line, but from system is approximately 10 km long and runs the banks of the system. Species caught by the parallel to the Indian Ocean, behind coastal children are generally small species which are not dunes. The four lakes drain through a perma- targeted by recreational anglers. The most com- nently open estuary, which opens to the sea 2 km monly caught species are the pouter (Gerres south of the Mozambique/South African border. acinaces) and Terapon jarbua, a species that is The southernmost lake, Amanzimnyama is com- viewed as a pest by recreational anglers (Kyle pletely fresh, but the other three lakes are influ- 1992). There is also a limited amount of recre- enced by the sea, and thus support euryhaline ational shore angling that takes place at the mouth fauna (Blaber 1978). The Kosi system is unique in of the system from the north bank. The small reef KwaZulu-Natal, in that it is a large clear-water sys- just inside the mouth and the beach south of the tem. The two small rivers which enter the system mouth fall into sanctuary areas closed to fishing. rise in leached acidic sands and, as a consequence, The diverse fish fauna supports a traditional trap carry little silt (Mountain 1990). fishery, a recreational fishery, and a recent gill net The clear water of the system, together with the fishery. The fish traps (kraals) are built in the proximity of the lakes to tropical waters, result in a estuary and Lake Makhawulani, which have diverse fish fauna (Blaber 1980). A total of 163 greater tidal flow (Kyle & Robertson 1997). Gill marine species has been recorded in the system. netting is only permitted at the margins of Lake The local Tonga inhabitants have fished in the Kosi Nhlange and away from any channel entrances system for centuries, using traps and traditional (Kyle 1999). Both the Kosi trap fishery and the gill spears. Recreational anglers began utilizing the net fishery have been studied (Kyle 1981, 1986, system towards the end of the 1940s, fishing 1999), but little research has been done on the from small boats in the three northern lakes recreational fishery in the Kosi estuarine system. This paper provides an analysis of recreational *Author for correspondence. E-mail: [email protected] angling in the Kosi estuarine system, based on 36(2): 217–228 (October 2001) http://africanzoology.journals.ac.za 218 African Zoology Vol. 36, No. 2, October 2001 a b Fig. 1. a, Location of the greater St Lucia Wetland Park in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa; b, map of the Kosi estuarine lake system. catch card data from anglers based at the Nhlange fishing outing. The catch cards, which are available campsite. The Kosi estuarine system forms part at the fish cleaning site, are completed voluntarily of the Kosi Bay Nature Reserve, which was by anglers, and collected from the site by proclaimed in 1987, and has recently been incor- KZNNCS staff. Where possible, KZNNCS staff porated into the Greater St Lucia Wetland Park also visit the campsite to encourage and assist (GSLWP). The KwaZulu-Natal Nature Conserva- fishermen in filling out catch cards. There is no tion Service (KZNNCS) is the management cross-check on the accuracy of reporting. The authority responsible for the protection and man- angling details recorded are number of anglers per agement of the GSLWP, which was declared a boat, date, time spent fishing and catch (number World Heritage Site in 1999. and estimated mass per individual fish). Each catch card represents a complete angling outing. METHODS The completed catch cards are sent to the Oceano- Since 1986, recreational anglers at Kosi Bay have graphic Research Institute (ORI) in Durban, for been requested to complete catch cards after each entry onto the National Marine Linefish System http://africanzoology.journals.ac.za James et al.: Recreational fishery in the Kosi estuarine lake system 219 Table 1. Angling effort from the Kosi system between 1986 and 1999. Year Number of outings Number of anglers Number of hours Total number of recorded per outing per outing monitored hours (mean = 3.07 ± 0.25 S.D.) (mean = 5.3 ± 0.53 S.D.) 1986 510 3.7 5.4 2343 1987 991 3.1 4.9 4517 1988 1601 3.1 4.9 7674 1989 1181 3.0 5.1 5970 1990 1060 3.1 5.1 5370 1991 1312 3.0 5.0 6235 1992 1003 3.1 5.6 5265 1993 1973 2.9 5.2 10054 1994 2379 2.9 5.1 11619 1995 2288 2.9 5.2 11464 1996 1698 3.1 5.2 8223 1997 825 3.2 5.5 3916 1998 653 3.3 6.2 3611 1999 892 2.6 5.8 4824 (NMLS) database and subsequent analysis. a peak of 2379 in 1994, declining thereafter to 892 Recreational catch card data from 1986 to 1999 in 1999 (Table 1). The number of anglers per outing were analysed to determine total catch, catch varied little throughout the study period, with a composition, catch per unit effort (CPUE), season- mean of 3.07 anglers per outing (S.D. = 0.25). The ality of catches and annual trends in the numbers mean number of hours fished per outing was also and mass of important angling species. Owing to fairly stable throughout the study period, ranging the inability of fishermen to accurately identify all from 4.9 to 6.2 hours, with a mean of 5.3 hours per fish to species level, certain species were grouped outing (S.D. = 0.53). at genus level. The total number of monitored hours fished in a There are numerous biases in the voluntary year (Table 1) followed the same trends as the NMLS data, which can affect analyses. These number of angling outings reported and was biases include prestige bias, digit bias, uninten- highest between 1993 and 1996, and lowest at the tional misreporting, deliberate misreporting, beginning and end of the study period. Care apathy and non-response bias (Pollock et al. 1994). should be taken in interpreting these results as Prestige bias refers to the tendency of some they often reflect the amount of effort put into anglers to overestimate the number and size of collecting catch cards, rather than an actual fish caught, while digit bias occurs when anglers increase or decrease in angling effort. round up or round down the mass or number of CPUE was generally higher during the summer fish caught. Misreporting may be unintentional, as and autumn months (November to May) and anglers are often unable to distinguish between lowest during winter and spring (June to October) different fish species, or intentional out of fear of (Fig. 2). prosecution. Apathy in completing cards is also problematic. In addition, effort by and efficiency Catch composition of KZNNCS staff in collecting catch cards varied Based on the information provided by anglers, a with time. Some anglers were confused and total of 17 families and 34 species was recorded in entered shore fishing data on estuarine catch the catches from 1986 to 1999 (Table 2). Species cards. believed to have been caught by shore anglers were excluded from the analysis (Appendix 1). RESULTS Teleosts accounted for 33 of the species, while elasmobranchs were only represented by one spe- Angling effort cies. Fig. 3a,b depicts the catch composition for the The number of reported angling outings in- 14-year study period by numbers and mass, creased from 510, at the inception of the project, to respectively. Pomadasys (almost exclusively http://africanzoology.journals.ac.za 220 African Zoology Vol. 36, No. 2, October 2001 Fig. 2.Mean monthly CPUE (fish/angler/h) for all angling species reported on catch cards in the Kosi system between 1986 and 1999; error bars are the standard error of mean.