Can Anglers Influence the Abundance of Native and Nonnative Salmonids in a Stream from the Canadian Rocky Mountains?

Paul, Andrew J.; Post, John R.; Stelfox, Jim D.

doi:10.1577/1548-8675(2003)023<0109:caitao>2.0.co;2

Cited by 44 publications

(49 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Step Paul et al, 2003). Our results are consistent with the findings of these previous studies (Fig.…”

Section: Selectivity Due To Phenotypic Variationsupporting

confidence: 93%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Selectivity effects on wild white-spotted charr (Salvelinus leucomaenis) during a catch and release fishery

Tsuboi

Morita

2004

Fisheries Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Step Paul et al, 2003). Our results are consistent with the findings of these previous studies (Fig.…”

Section: Selectivity Due To Phenotypic Variationsupporting

confidence: 93%

“…fishres.2004.04.009 angling, vulnerability to fishing is related to a condition factor (Fernö and Huse, 1983), growth rate (Raat, 1985;Tsuboi et al, 2002), sex (Holtby et al, 1992), age (Mezzera and Largiadèr, 2001), and body size (e.g. McDonald and Hershey, 1989;Yamamoto et al, 2001;Paul et al, 2003).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Selectivity effects on wild white-spotted charr (Salvelinus leucomaenis) during a catch and release fishery

Tsuboi

Morita

2004

Fisheries Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Indeed, Larson et al (1986) showed that angling pressure reduced the nonnative rainbow trout population in an Appalachian stream by only about 10%. Other studies, in the Rocky mountain creeks in Alberta (Paul et al 2003;Stelfox et al 2004), have demonstrated that nonnative brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) populations were highly resilient to overexploitation, and so selective angling exploitation was not an effective way to eliminate nonnative trout populations.…”

Section: Failure Of the Genetic Refuge Strategy Implemented Alonementioning

confidence: 99%

Multiple electrofishing as a mitigate tool for removing nonnative Atlantic brown trout (Salmo trutta L.) threatening a native Mediterranean brown trout population

Caudron¹,

Champigneulle²

2010

Eur J Wildl Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the native range of the brown trout (Salmo trutta L.) in Europe, the hybridization of native populations by nonnative domesticated strains introduced by stocking is one of the most serious threats to the long-term conservation of diversity within this species. With the objective of conserving and restoring the native gene pool, fishery managers are beginning to implement various management strategies at the local scale. Nevertheless, few case studies have been published that investigate the effectiveness of the various different conservation strategies for native brown trout populations. In the Chevenne Creek, a small French mountain stream, we tested the strategy of removing nonnative individuals by multiple electrofishing carried out by fishery managers in order to evaluate its feasibility and effectiveness for eliminating a nonnative population threatening a native population. Electrofishing produced major reductions in the nonnative population between 2006 and 2009, with 82-100% of nonnative individuals being removed over a period of 4 years. Nevertheless, despite multiple-electrofishing campaigns, this nonnative population was not entirely eradicated, and some natural recruitment persisted. The young of the year and subadults were less effectively removed than the adults. The results suggest that repeated electrofishing campaigns can be used by managers to reduce the nonnative brown trout population with the objective of conserving the native gene pool, but the removal operation must be continued for at least 4 consecutive years. This strategy, which is feasible in small streams, has to be followed by complementary operations to allow the restoration of a new, native, self-sustainable brown trout population.

show abstract

“…The most common methods for removing nonnative, stream-dwelling salmonids have been electrofishing (e.g., Moore et al 1983; Thompson and Rahel 1996;Kulp and Moore 2000;Shepard et al 2002) andtoxicants (e.g., Phinney 1975;Gresswell 1991), although selective angling (Larson et al 1986;Paul et al 2003) and trapping (Young et al 2003) have been used as well. In general, removal projects have met with little success.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of an Unsuccessful Brook Trout Electrofishing Removal Project in a Small Rocky Mountain Stream

Meyer

Lamansky

Schill

2006

N American J Fish Manag

108

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract.-In the western United States, exotic brook trout Salvelinus fontinalis frequently have a deleterious effect on native salmonids, and biologists often attempt to remove brook trout from streams by means of electrofishing. Although the success of such projects typically is low, few studies have assessed the underlying mechanisms of failure, especially in terms of compensatory responses. A multiagency watershed advisory group (WAG) conducted a 3-year removal project to reduce brook trout and enhance native salmonids in 7.8 km of a southwestern Idaho stream. We evaluated the costs and success of their project in suppressing brook trout and looked for brook trout compensatory responses, such as decreased natural mortality, increased growth, increased fecundity at length, and earlier maturation. The total number of brook trout removed was 1,401 in 1998, 1,241 in 1999, and 890 in 2000; removal constituted an estimated 88% of the total number of brook trout in the stream in 1999 and 79% in 2000. Although abundance of age-1 and older brook trout declined slightly during and after the removals, abundance of age-0 brook trout increased 789% in the entire stream 2 years after the removals ceased. Total annual survival rate for age-2 and older brook trout did not decrease during the removals, and the removals failed to produce an increase in the abundance of native redband trout Oncorhynchus mykiss gairdneri. Lack of a meaningful decline and unchanged total mortality for older brook trout during the removals suggest that a compensatory response occurred in the brook trout population via reduced natural mortality, which offset the removal of large numbers of brook trout. Although we applaud WAG personnel for their goal of enhancing native salmonids by suppressing brook trout via electrofishing removal, we conclude that their efforts were unsuccessful and suggest that similar future projects elsewhere over such large stream lengths would be costly, quixotic enterprises.

show abstract

Can Anglers Influence the Abundance of Native and Nonnative Salmonids in a Stream from the Canadian Rocky Mountains?

Cited by 44 publications

References 17 publications

Selectivity effects on wild white-spotted charr (Salvelinus leucomaenis) during a catch and release fishery

Selectivity effects on wild white-spotted charr (Salvelinus leucomaenis) during a catch and release fishery

Multiple electrofishing as a mitigate tool for removing nonnative Atlantic brown trout (Salmo trutta L.) threatening a native Mediterranean brown trout population

Evaluation of an Unsuccessful Brook Trout Electrofishing Removal Project in a Small Rocky Mountain Stream

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About