DOCSLIB.ORG

The Use of a Roving Creel Survey to Monitor Exploited Coastal Fish Species in the Goukamma Marine Protected Area, South Africa

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Use of a Roving Creel Survey to Monitor Exploited Coastal Fish Species in the Goukamma Marine Protected Area, South Africa The use of a Roving Creel Survey to monitor exploited coastal fish species in the Goukamma Marine Protected Area, South Africa by Carika Sylvia van Zyl A thesis submitted in fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Masters in Technoligae, Nature Conservation Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University 2011 i I, Carika Sylvia van Zyl (s208027504) hereby declare that the work in this document is my own. ii Abstract A fishery-dependant monitoring method of the recreational shore-based fishery was undertaken in the Goukamma Marine Protected Area (MPA) on the south coast of South Africa for a period of 17 months. The method used was a roving creel survey (RCS), with dates, times and starting locations chosen by stratified random sampling. The MPA was divided into two sections, Buffalo Bay and Groenvlei, and all anglers encountered were interviewed. Catch and effort data were collected and catch per unit effort (CPUE) was calculated from this. The spatial distribution of anglers was also mapped. A generalized linear model (GLM) was fitted to the effort data to determine the effects of month and day type on the variability of effort in each section. Fitted values showed that effort was significantly higher on weekends than on week days, in both sections. A total average of 3662 anglers fishing 21 428 hours annually is estimated within the reserve with a mean trip length of 5.85 hours. Angler numbers were higher per unit coastline length in Buffalo Bay than Groenvlei, but fishing effort (angler hours) was higher in Groenvlei. Density distributions showed that anglers were clumped in easily accessible areas and that they favored rocky areas and mixed shores over sandy shores. Catch documented between October 2008 and December 2009 included a total of 361 fish, of 27 species from 12 families. Sparidae had the highest contribution (12 species). A Shannon-Weiner diversity index showed that diversity was higher in Buffalo Bay (0.81) than Groenvlei (0.57). Catch composition of retained fish (336 individuals) showed that the six numerically most important species were blacktail (Diplodus sargus capensis) (66% of catch), followed by galjoen (Dichistius capensis) at 11 %, Cape stumpnose (Rhabdosargus holubi), belman (Umbrina robinsonii) and strepie at 3%, and elf (Pomatomus saltatrix) at 2 %. Catch composition of an earlier study in Goukamma (Pradervand and Hiseman 2006) was compared with the present study, as well as data from the De Hoop MPA, which iii is closed to fishing. A multi-dimensional scaling plot of catch composition showed tight clustering of the De Hoop samples, and high variability among the Goukamma samples. A bray-curtis similarity index and dendrogram of similarity between study sites and study periods showed that there was an 83% similarity among De Hoop samples and a 75% similarity among Goukamma samples (ignoring the two outliers). The two sites are different with respect to species composition, but this is expected because they are different areas. Differences between time periods in Goukamma (i.e. the previous study versus the present study) were not significant. The most significant result from the catch composition analyses is the high variability among the Goukamma samples. This can be explained by the variable fishing methods used by anglers in Goukamma, compared with the standardized fishing methods used by researchers in De Hoop, and the fact that fish are more abundant and populations are more stable in De Hoop – giving higher sample sizes which reduce the variability in the statistics. Species-specific CPUE was calculated for the six numerically most important species. In both sections, CPUE was highest for blacktail, with an average of 0.133 fish per hour for Groenvlei, and 0.060 fish per hour for Buffalo Bay, over the 12 months. The second highest CPUE values per section were 0.030 for galjoen in Groenvlei and 0.039 for strepie in Buffalo Bay. Remaining CPUE values ranged from 0.014 (belman in Groenvlei) to the lowest value of 0.001 (strepie in Groenvlei). Total estimated CPUE for these six species in the MPA using the estimated effort and catch results amounted to 0.018 fish per hour. An annual estimated 3897 fish were landed in the reserve during 2009. Most fish (n=2481, 64%) were caught in the Groenvlei section. Numbers of blacktail were the highest of all species, within both sections (2353 fish). Strepie was the next most common (561 fish), but was caught almost entirely within the Buffalo Bay section (97% of individuals), followed by galjoen (548 fish) caught mostly within the Groenvlei section (92% of individuals). Size comparisons of the six species between the Goukamma and De Hoop MPAs showed that ranges in size are similar, but there are substantial differences in mean sizes between the two MPAs. Sample sizes of all species from the Goukamma MPA were too small to draw conclusions about stock status, except for blacktail. iv The Goukamma MPA is a popular fishing destination and angler effort is high. It can be considered a node of exploitation for surf zone fish, for which it provides no protection. Even though the MPA allows shore angling, sustainable fishing practices should be incorporated in management plans if the MPA is expected to protect and conserve its stocks. Of noteworthy concern is the occurrence of illegal night fishing (the public may not enter the reserve between sunrise and sunset) which leads to underestimates of catch and effort (night surveys were not conducted because of safety concerns). It is recommended that more communication should take place between the angling community and the reserve management. Sign boards giving information on species which are under pressure, and why they are under pressure, with a short explanation on their life cycles, is advised. The roving creel survey method was suitable for the study area and delivered statistically rigorous results. I thus recommend that it is continued in the future by management. I make some recommendations for reducing costs of future surveys, as well as for altering the survey design if funds are very limited. v Table of Contents Page Chapter 1 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Problem Statement 1 1.2 Background 1 1.3 Study Area 7 1.3.1 Location 7 1.3.2 Vegetation and topography 8 1.3.3 Intertidal habitat and subtidal reefs 8 1.3.4 Access to coastline 11 Chapter 2 13 Review of monitoring methods for shore based fishing 13 2.1 Background 13 2.2 History of monitoring of shore-based fishing in South Africa 14 2.3 Review of monitoring methods for shore-based fishing 20 2.3.1 Methods for monitoring shore-based fishing 20 Fishery-dependent and -independent data 20 Off-site and on-site survey methods 21 Sampling frames 22 Off-site surveys 23 (i) Mail surveys 23 (ii) Telephone surveys 24 (iii) Door-to-door surveys 25 (iv) Logbooks, diaries and catch cards 26 On-site surveys 27 (i) Roving creel surveys (RCS) 27 (ii) Access point surveys 28 (iii) Aerial surveys 28 The present study 29 vi Chapter 3 30 Methods: the roving creel survey 30 3.1 Background 30 3.2 Week day versus weekend day sampling ratio 32 3.3 Questionnaire 35 3.4 Effort, Catch and CPUE 36 3.4.1 Background 36 3.4.2 Length frequencies 42 3.4.3 Spatial analysis 44 3.4.4 Comparison of catch composition among three data sets and diversity index 45 Chapter 4 46 Results and Discussion: Angler effort 46 4.1 Temporal distribution of anglers 46 4.1.1 Estimated angler averages - Buffalo Bay 48 4.1.2 Estimated angler averages - Groenvlei 48 4.2 Estimated angler hours 50 4.3 Spatial distribution of anglers 52 4.3.1 Angler density per habitat type 52 4.3.2 Angler density per 100 m section 53 4.4 Discussion 54 Chapter 5 57 Results and Discussion: 57 Catch composition, catch per unit effort and total Catch 57 5.1 Catch composition 57 5.1.1 Comparison of catch composition between three data sets 59 5.2 Size distribution of retained fish 64 5.3 Catch per unit effort 66 5.3.1 Size composition of individual species 68 (i) Blacktail 68 (ii) Galjoen 70 (iii) Strepie 72 vii (iv) Cape stumpnose 73 (v) Belman 74 (vi) Elf 76 5.4 Catch Estimates 78 5.5 Discussion 80 Chapter 6 85 Conclusions and recommendations 85 Glossary 92 References 94 Appendices (Electronic – please see attached CD) viii List of Figures Figure 1 Inshore bioregions of South Africa (Lombard et al. 2004) and the Goukamma study site. Figure 2 The Goukamma Marine Protected Area showing the two sampling sections. Figure 3 The Goukamma MPA boundary and reef systems. Figure 4 Intertidal habitats found in the Goukamma Marine Protected Area (based on Clark and Lombard 2007). Figure 5 Western access to the Goukamma Marine Protected Area at Platbank (red arrow). Figure 6 Eastern access to the Goukamma Marine Protected Area (red arrows). Figure 7 Comparisons of different week day (WD): weekend day (WE) sampling ratios, and different number of surveys per month, with respect to the total fishing effort sampled. Figure 8 The average number of anglers encountered per month during 2009 in the Groenvlei (GV) and Buffalo Bay (BB) sections of the Goukamma MPA. Bars indicate one standard error and Y axis average number of anglers. Figure 9 GLM predicted average number of angler counts through the year, and by day type, at Buffalo Bay. WE = weekend days and WD = week days. Figure 10 GLM predicted average number of angler counts through the year, and by day type, at Groenvlei. WE = weekend days and WD = week days.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Sturgeon Making Comeback in Lake Ontario He Lake Sturgeon Is a Living Dinosaur of Sorts
    by Bill Hilts, Jr. Sturgeon Making Comeback in Lake Ontario he lake sturgeon is a living dinosaur of sorts. The origin Tof this interesting species can be traced back 200 million years, which is one heck of a long time ago, maintaining the same physical characteristics as its ancestors. To people associated with fish and fish- ing, they appeared to be a limitless resource here in New York and the Province of Ontario. Despite this longevity, our knowledge of these fish is amazingly limited. Tales of long stringers of sturgeons were backed up with photos and filled area bragging boards in the 19th Sturgeon along the shoreline of the Niagara Gorge in May. and 20th centuries. Overfishing for meat and caviar combined with “We are trying to collect as Niagara River — with most of them habitat degradation and pollution much information as possible,” says being in the Niagara River. The to whittle away population levels Gorsky, a U.S. Fish and Wildlife receiver is anchored to the bottom for this fish. In less than 200 years, Service employee. “So far in five of the river with a concrete block lake sturgeon numbers were declin- years of setting overnight setlines in and picks up signals from the fish ing rapidly. It was feared that they the Niagara River, we have managed transmitter. When it comes time to would soon be going the way of the to catch, tag and release in excess collect the data, they simply scuba- blue pike (now extinct) and stur- of 800 lake sturgeons. The amazing dive into the river or lake and pick geon became a protected species.
    [Show full text]
  • New Jersey FREE Fish & Wildlife Digest a Summary of Rules and Management Information VOL
    New Jersey FREE Fish & Wildlife Digest A Summary of Rules and Management Information VOL. 15 NO. 3 MAY 2002 20022002 MarineMarine IssueIssue Visit our website at: www.njfishandwildlife.com New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection © Carol Decker New Jersey Fish & Wildlife Digest The Director’s Published by the New Jersey Division of Fish and Wildlife P.O. Box 400, Trenton, NJ 08625-0400 Message www.njfishandwildlife.com State of New Jersey By Bob McDowell James E. McGreevey, Governor Department of Environmental Protection Bradley M. Campbell, Commissioner Value of the Marine Resource— Division of Fish and Wildlife Robert McDowell, Director Cost of Management: Who Pays the Bill? David Chanda, Assistant Director Martin McHugh, Assistant Director ew Jersey is fortunate to have a rich coastal heritage. The state has 120 miles of ocean coastline, Thomas McCloy, Marine Fisheries Administrator James Joseph, Chief, Bureau of Shellfisheries Nover 390,000 acres of estuarine area and inlets spread all along the coast allowing easy access Rob Winkel, Chief, Law Enforcement between bays and the ocean. Fishery resources are both abundant and diverse with northern species in Jim Sciascia, Chief, Information and Education Cindy Kuenstner, Editor the winter, southern species in the summer and others available year round. Large recreational fisheries are supported by these diverse resources. Every year about one million recreational anglers spend over The Division of Fish and Wildlife is a professional, five million days fishing New Jersey’s marine waters. New Jersey’s recreational saltwater anglers spend environmental organization dedicated to the protection, management and wise use of the state’s about $750 million annually on fishing related products, with a resultant sales tax income to the state of fish and wildlife resources.
    [Show full text]
  • 2020 Journal
    THE OFFICIAL Supplied free to members of GFAA-affiliated clubs or $9.95 GFAA GAMEFISHING 2020 JOURNAL HISTORICAL THE OFFICIAL GAME FISHING ASSOCIATION OF AUSTRALIA 2020 JOURNAL THE OFFICIAL GAME FISHING ASSOCIATION SPECIAL FEATURE •Capt Billy Love – Master of Sharks Including gamefish weight gauges, angling Published for GFAA by rules/regulations, plus GFAA and QGFA records www.gfaa.asn.au LEGENDARY POWER COUPLE THE LEGEND CONTINUES, THE NEW TEREZ SERIES OF RODS BUILT ON SPIRAL-X AND HI-POWER X BLANKS ARE THE ULTIMATE SALTWATER ENFORCER. TECHNOLOGY 8000HG MODELS INFINITE POWER CAST 6’6” HEAVY 50-150lb SPIN JIG 5’10” MEDIUM 24kg CAST 6’6” X-HEAVY 65-200lb SPIN JIG 5’8” HEAVY 37kg THE STELLA SW REPRESENTS THE PINNACLE OF CAST 6’6” XX-HEAVY 80-200lb SPIN JIG 5’9” MEDIUM / HEAVY 24-37kg SHIMANO TECHNOLOGY AND INNOVATION IN THE CAST 7’0” MEDIUM 30-65lb OVERHEAD JIG 5’10” MEDIUM 24kg PURSUIT OF CREATING THE ULTIMATE SPINNING REEL. CAST 7’0” MEDIUM / HEAVY 40-80lb OVERHEAD JIG 5’8” HEAVY 37kg SPIN 6’9” MEDIUM 20-50lb SPIN 7’6” MEDIUM 10-15kg SPIN 6’9” MEDIUM / HEAVY 40-80lb SPIN 7’6” HEAVY 15-24kg TECHNOLOGY SPIN 6’9” HEAVY 50-100lb SPIN 7’0” MEDIUM 5-10kg SPIN 6’9” X-HEAVY 65-200lb SPIN 7’0” MEDIUM / LIGHT 8-12kg UPGRADED DRAG WITH SPIN 7’2” MEDIUM / LIGHT 15-40lb SPIN 7’9” STICKBAIT PE 3-8 HEAT RESISTANCE SPIN 7’2” MEDIUM lb20-50lb SPIN 8’0” GT PE 3-8 *10000 | 14000 models only SPIN 7’2” MEDIUM / HEAVY 40-80lb Check your local Shimano Stockists today.
    [Show full text]
  • Arizona Fishing Regulations 3 Fishing License Fees Getting Started
    2019 & 2020 Fishing Regulations for your boat for your boat See how much you could savegeico.com on boat | 1-800-865-4846insurance. | Local Offi ce geico.com | 1-800-865-4846 | Local Offi ce See how much you could save on boat insurance. Some discounts, coverages, payment plans and features are not available in all states or all GEICO companies. Boat and PWC coverages are underwritten by GEICO Marine Insurance Company. GEICO is a registered service mark of Government Employees Insurance Company, Washington, D.C. 20076; a Berkshire Hathaway Inc. subsidiary. TowBoatU.S. is the preferred towing service provider for GEICO Marine Insurance. The GEICO Gecko Image © 1999-2017. © 2017 GEICO AdPages2019.indd 2 12/4/2018 1:14:48 PM AdPages2019.indd 3 12/4/2018 1:17:19 PM Table of Contents Getting Started License Information and Fees ..........................................3 Douglas A. Ducey Governor Regulation Changes ...........................................................4 ARIZONA GAME AND FISH COMMISSION How to Use This Booklet ...................................................5 JAMES S. ZIELER, CHAIR — St. Johns ERIC S. SPARKS — Tucson General Statewide Fishing Regulations KURT R. DAVIS — Phoenix LELAND S. “BILL” BRAKE — Elgin Bag and Possession Limits ................................................6 JAMES R. AMMONS — Yuma Statewide Fishing Regulations ..........................................7 ARIZONA GAME AND FISH DEPARTMENT Common Violations ...........................................................8 5000 W. Carefree Highway Live Baitfish
    [Show full text]
  • Programme and Abstracts THANKS to OUR SPONSORS!
    5th Pan-European Duck Symposium 16th-20th April 2018 Isle of Great Cumbrae, Scotland Programme and Abstracts THANKS TO OUR SPONSORS! 2 ORGANISING COMMITTEE Chris Waltho (Independent Researcher) Colin A Galbraith (Colin Galbraith Environment Consultancy) Richard Hearn (Wildfowl & Wetlands Trust / Duck Specialist Group) Matthieu Guillemain (Office National de la Chasse et de la Faune Sauvage / Duck Specialist Group) SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE Tony Fox (University of Aarhus) Colin A Galbraith (Colin Galbraith Environment Consultancy) Andy J Green (Estación Biológica de Doñana) Matthieu Guillemain (Office National de la Chasse et de la Faune Sauvage / DSG) Richard Hearn (Wildfowl & Wetlands Trust / Duck Specialist Group) Sari Holopainen (University of Helsinki) Mika Kilpi (Novia University of Applied Sciences) Carl Mitchell (Wildfowl & Wetlands Trust) David Rodrigues (Polytechnic Institute of Coimbra) Diana Solovyeva (Russian Academy of Sciences) Chris Waltho (Independent Researcher) 3 PROGRAMME Monday 16th April: Pre- meeting Workshop on marine issues 11.00 – 16.00. DAY1 (Tuesday 17th April) Chair: Chris Waltho 9:00 – 9:05 Chris Waltho – Welcome. 9:05 – 9:10 Provost Ian Clarkson - North Ayrshire Council. 9:10 – 9:20 Lady Isobel Glasgow - Chair of the Clyde Marine Planning Partnership. 9:20 – 9:30 Colin Galbraith – The aims and objectives of the Conference. 9:30 – 10:20 Plenary 1 Dr. Jacques Trouvilliez, (Executive Secretary of the Agreement on the Conservation of African-Eurasian Migratory Waterbirds (AEWA)) 10:20 - 10:45 Coffee break SESSION 1 POPULATION DYNAMICS AND TRENDS Chair: Colin Galbraith 10:45 – 11:00 New pan-European data on the breeding distribution of ducks. Verena Keller, Martí Franch, Sergi Herrando, Mikhail Kalyakin, Olga Voltzit and Petr Voříšek 11:00 – 11:15 Trends in breeding waterbird guild richness in the southwestern Mediterranean: an analysis over 12 years (2005-2017).
    [Show full text]
  • Customers 'Left Holding the Bag'
    Life insurance medical exams on life support C1 PANORAMA Appearing at the Sumter Opera House Game show, country music, comedy and more at Main Stage series A5 SERVING SOUTH CAROLINA SINCE OCTOBER 15, 1894 SUNDAY, AUGUST 6, 2017 $1.75 IN SPORTS: Week by week look at the prep football season B1 Customers ‘left holding the bag’ Sen. McElveen calls for special session of Legislature on abandoned nuke plants BY JEFFREY COLLINS actors is impulsive, and there by Senate Major- “There just needs to be a this week to review that law Associated Press isn’t a reason to immediately ity Leader Shane timeout, a pause, whatever and to consider firing the call a special session. Massey of Edge- you want to call it, until the members of the Public Ser- COLUMBIA — Both Demo- Pressure to do something, field and Senate General Assembly has the op- vice Commission, which has cratic and Republican law- whether stopping any new Minority Leader portunity to understand in de- to approve all of SCE&G’s makers in South Carolina, in- rate hikes or firing lawmaker- Nikki Setzler of tail what has happened here,” rate hikes. cluding Sen. Thomas approved regulators, is McELVEEN West Columbia, said Setzler, who was one of Sen. McElveen, a member McElveen, D-Sumter, want mounting in the days after calling for law- 25 Senate sponsors of a 2007 of the caucus, said he would the Legislature to return soon South Carolina Electric & Gas makers to return law that allowed utilities to in- like to halt any further rate to deal with the abandonment and Santee Cooper decided to Columbia and pass a reso- crease rates to pay for the increase requests.
    [Show full text]
  • South Carolina Marine Game Fish Tagging Program 1978 -2009
    South Carolina Marine Game Fish Tagging Program 1978 -2009 Robert K. Wiggers SEDAR68-RD23 June 2019 This information is distributed solely for the purpose of pre-dissemination peer review. It does not represent and should not be construed to represent any agency determination or policy. South Carolina Marine Game Fish Tagging Program 1978 - 2009 By Robert K. Wiggers South Carolina Department of Natural Resources Marine Resources Division DNR SOUTH CAROLINA MARINE GAME FISH TAGGING PROGRAM 1978 - 2009 By Robert K. Wiggers Marine Resources Division South Carolina Department of Natural Resources P.O. Box 12559 Charleston, South Carolina 29422 June 2010 This project was funded through the South Carolina Saltwater Fishing License. Table of Contents Page List of Tables……………………………………………………………………..ii List of Figures……………………………………………………………………iii Introduction………………………………………………………………………1 Methods…..………………………………………………………………………2 Results…………………………………………………………………………… 5 Results by Species……………………………………………………………….. 9 Discussion…………………………………………………………………………45 Acknowledgements……………………………………………………………….51 Literature Cited……………………………………………………………………52 Appendix I………………………………………………………………………...53 Appendix II……………………………………………………………………….54 Appendix III………………………………………………………………………55 i List of Tables Table Page 1. Number of target species tagged and recovered in the Marine Game Fish Tagging Program, 1978-2009…………………………………………………………6 2. Tagged greater amberjack recovered in the Gulf of Mexico…………………………9 3. Tagged bluefish recovered outside South Carolina…………………………………..11 4. Tagged cobia from the MGFTP recovered in the Gulf of Mexico…………………....14 5. Tagged dolphin recoveries from the MGFTP………………………………………..15 6. Tagged black drum recovered outside South Carolina………………………………16 7. Tagged flounder (species not identified) recovered outside South Carolina…………18 8. Tagged red drum with 6 recapture occurrences………………………………………23 9. Tagged crevalle jack recovered outside South Carolina……………………………..25 10. Examples of king mackerel recoveries by month…………………………………...28 11.
    [Show full text]
  • REFERENCE LIST Status Report: Focus on Staple Crops
    AGRA (Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa). 2013. Africa Agriculture REFERENCE LIST Status Report: Focus on Staple Crops. Nairobi: AGRA. http://agra-alliance.org/ AAAS (American Association for the Advancement of Science). 2012. download/533977a50dbc7/. “Statement by the AAAS Board of Directors on Labeling of Genetically AgResearch. 2016. “Shortlist of Five Holds Key to Reduced Methane Modified Foods.” Emissions from Livestock.” AgResearch News Release. http://www. Abalos, D., S. Jeffery, A. Sanz-Cobena, G. Guardia, and A. Vallejo. 2014. agresearch.co.nz/news/shortlist-of-five-holds-key-to-reduced-methane- “Meta-analysis of the Effect of Urease and Nitrification Inhibitors on Crop emissions-from-livestock/. Productivity and Nitrogen Use Efficiency.” Agriculture, Ecosystems, and AHDB (Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board). 2017. “Average Milk Environment 189: 136–144. Yield.” Farming Data. https://dairy.ahdb.org.uk/resources-library/market- Abalos, D., S. Jeffery, C.F. Drury, and C. Wagner-Riddle. 2016. “Improving information/farming-data/average-milk-yield/#.WV0_N4jyu70. Fertilizer Management in the U.S. and Canada for N O Mitigation: 2 Ahmed, S.E., A.C. Lees, N.G. Moura, T.A. Gardner, J. Barlow, J. Ferreira, and R.M. Understanding Potential Positive and Negative Side-Effects on Corn Yields.” Ewers. 2014. “Road Networks Predict Human Influence on Amazonian Bird Agriculture, Ecosystems, and Environment 221: 214–221. Communities.” Proceedings of the Royal Society B 281 (1795): 20141742. Abbott, P. 2012. “Biofuels, Binding Constraints and Agricultural Commodity Ahrends, A., P.M. Hollingsworth, P. Beckschäfer, H. Chen, R.J. Zomer, L. Zhang, Price Volatility.” Paper presented at the National Bureau of Economic M.
    [Show full text]
  • Commercial Fishing Guide |
    Texas Commercial Fishing regulations summary 2021 2022 SEPTEMBER 1, 2021 – AUGUST 31, 2022 Subject to updates by Texas Legislature or Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission TEXAS COMMERCIAL FISHING REGULATIONS SUMMARY This publication is a summary of current regulations that govern commercial fishing, meaning any activity involving taking or handling fresh or saltwater aquatic products for pay or for barter, sale or exchange. Recreational fishing regulations can be found at OutdoorAnnual.com or on the mobile app (download available at OutdoorAnnual.com). LIMITED-ENTRY AND BUYBACK PROGRAMS .......................................................................... 3 COMMERCIAL FISHERMAN LICENSE TYPES ........................................................................... 3 COMMERCIAL FISHING BOAT LICENSE TYPES ........................................................................ 6 BAIT DEALER LICENSE TYPES LICENCIAS PARA VENDER CARNADA .................................................................................... 7 WHOLESALE, RETAIL AND OTHER BUSINESS LICENSES AND PERMITS LICENCIAS Y PERMISOS COMERCIALES PARA NEGOCIOS MAYORISTAS Y MINORISTAS .......... 8 NONGAME FRESHWATER FISH (PERMIT) PERMISO PARA PESCADOS NO DEPORTIVOS EN AGUA DULCE ................................................ 12 BUYING AND SELLING AQUATIC PRODUCTS TAKEN FROM PUBLIC WATERS ............................. 13 FRESHWATER FISH ................................................................................................... 13 SALTWATER FISH .....................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Mapping Aquatic Animal Diseases in Southern Africa
    Mapping Study of Aquatic Animal Diseases in Southern Africa – Walakira J. K Mapping Aquatic Animal Diseases in Southern Africa Inter African Bureau for Animal Resources Fisheries Governance Project 1st Final Draft Report February, 2016 Prepared by: John K. Walakira (PhD) Mapping Aquatic Animal Diseases in Southern Africa – Walakira J. K Table of Contents Acknowledgments Executive Summary List of Tables List of Figures 1. Background 2. Purpose and Scope 3. Methodology 4. An Overview of the Status of Aquaculture in the Region 4.1. Fish Production Systems in the Region 4.2. Overview of the Levels and Systems of Production between the Countries within the Region 5. Status of Aquatic Animal Disease in the Region 5.1. Prevalence and Incidences and of aquatic animal diseases in the region 5.2. The distribution of reported aquatic animal diseases in the region 5.3. A Brief Overview of the Factors associated with the occurrence and spread of aquatic animal diseases in the region. 5.3.1. Biological Factors (e.g. Species, production system) 5.3.2. Environmental Factors (e.g. Season, geographical attributes, watershed/water body, etc) 5.3.3. Socio-Economic Factors (e.g. Trade, commodity, live fish, processed, etc.) 6. Overview of Aquatic Animal Disease Control In the Region 6.1. Presence of National and Regional Aquatic Animal Disease Control Policies and Measures. 6.2. Opportunities, Issues and Challenges 6.2.1. Production Systems 6.3. A General Overview/Analysis of the Status and Control of Aquatic Animal Diseases in the Region: Issues, Challenges, and Recommendations. List of Annexes 1. TORs of the study 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Indecon International Economic Consultants
    An Economic/Socio-Economic Evaluation of Wild Salmon in Ireland Submitted to the Central Fisheries Board by Indecon International Economic Consultants INDECON International Economic Consultants www.indecon.ie April 2003 © Copyright Indecon. No part of this document may be used or reproduced without Indecon’s expressed permission in writing. Contents Page Glossary of Terms i Executive Summary iii 1 Introduction and Background 1 Introduction 1 Background and Context to Review 1 Scope and Terms of Reference of Evaluation 2 Approach 4 Acknowledgements 4 2 Review of Existing Research on Socio-economic Value of Atlantic Salmon 5 Irish-based Research 5 International Evaluations on the Economic Value of Salmon 13 Conclusion 18 3 Review of Salmon Management in Ireland 19 Developments in Salmon Management Policy 19 Historical Trends in the Salmon Catch 28 Conclusions 39 4 Economic Impact of Commercial Salmon Fishing 41 Regional Structure of Commercial Salmon Catch 41 Analysis of Commercial Catch by Type of Fishing Licence 46 Indecon Survey of Commercial Salmon Fishermen 49 Estimates of Total Commercial Salmon Revenue 59 Summary and Conclusions 68 Indecon April 2003 i Contents Page 5 Economic Impact of Salmon Angling 70 Regional breakdown of Rod & Line Salmon Catch 70 Value of Overseas Salmon Tourism 72 Value of Domestic Salmon Angling 95 Indecon Survey of Tourism Interests 104 Analysis of Salmon Angling Accommodation 108 Summary and Conclusions 110 6 Views of Commercial Salmon Fishermen, Tourism and Angling Interests 111 Views of Commercial Salmon
    [Show full text]
  • Hypothetical Effects of Fishing Regulations in Murphy Flowage, Wisconsin
    ::if I 3 Dept. of Natura1 Reeour~ Technical li !J rary 3911 Fish Hatc.tl9fY Road FitchburR; Wl 53711 • ~97 / HYPOTHETICAL EFFECTS OF FISHING REGULATIONS IN MURPHY FLOWAGE, WISCONSIN Technical Bulletin No. 131 • Department of. Natural Resources • Madison, Wisconsin • 1982 ABSTRACT This paper summarizes the hypothetical effects of bag, season, and size limits on the harvest of panfish, northern pike, and largemouth bass in Murphy Flowage; Wisconsin. Complete angler records were obtained through a compulsory registration-type creel census for 15 years. There were no bag, season, or size limits in effect at any time during the study. The hypothetical reduction in harvest with various regulations was calcu­ lated from detailed harvest records. The present bag limits in effect in most of Wisconsin would have had little effect on the observed harvest in Murphy Flowage. A 50-fish daily bag limit on panfish in aggregate would have reduced the observed harvest 2.9% in summer and 13.8% in winter. A 5-fish daily bag on gamefish would have reduced the northern pike harvest 0:5% in summer and 1.5% in win­ ter, while the harvest of largemouth bass·would have been reduced 2.5% in summer, with no effect in winter. A year-round open season would have had very little effect on the har­ vest. A maximum of 7% of the northern pike and 4% of the largemouth bass were taken during the normal closed season, 1 March to the 1st Saturday of May. A later opening date could have a marked effect on the harvest, especially on largemouth bass since 50% of the annual harvest was taken by the end of June.
    [Show full text]