1 / 31

THE OTHER BYCATCH Recreational Fishing Gear and Non-Target Wildlife

THE OTHER BYCATCH Recreational Fishing Gear and Non-Target Wildlife. Jonathan Balcombe, PhD Humane Society Institute for Science and Policy jbalcombe@humanesociety.org. Recreational Fishing. 55 billion 12% Cooke SJ, Cowx IG. 2004. BioScience , 54: 857–859. Photo: George Christopher.

yasir-alford
Download Presentation

THE OTHER BYCATCH Recreational Fishing Gear and Non-Target Wildlife

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. THE OTHER BYCATCHRecreational Fishing Gear and Non-Target Wildlife Jonathan Balcombe, PhD Humane Society Institute for Science and Policy jbalcombe@humanesociety.org

  2. Recreational Fishing 55 billion 12% Cooke SJ, Cowx IG. 2004. BioScience, 54: 857–859.

  3. Photo: George Christopher

  4. Study Aims preliminary investigation range of species affected species at high risk survival versus mortality inform mitigation efforts

  5. APPROACH Wildlife Rescue/Rehabilitation Centers professional contacts social media NWRA website

  6. DATA COLLECTED case volume species gear (line, hook, both) final disposition

  7. Participating facilities N = 29 15 states 2004 - 2014

  8. Florida (9)

  9. Participating facilities Alaska Hawaii

  10. CASE VOLUME 2,544 cases 1,913 species identity provided

  11. SPECIES (110) N = 1,918

  12. CASES N = 1,918

  13. TOP TEN Brown Pelican 631 35% Muscovy Duck 144 8% Royal Tern 143 8% Northern Gannet 100 6% Great Blue Heron 96 5% Double-crested Cormorant 95 5% Common Loon 67 4% Canada Goose 58 3% Laughing Gull 50 3% Red-eared Slider 50 3% TOTAL 1,434 80%

  14. 57 Raptors (7 spp.) 45 Ducks (14 spp.) 35 Passerines (12 spp.)

  15. N = 1,522

  16. N = 2,544

  17. CONCLUSIONS Aquatic birds most vulnerable Aquatic turtles often affected Hooks > line but both important Rescue and treatment often effective (58%)

  18. MITIGATION

  19. MITIGATION “Green fishing” equipment: Biodegradable fishing line Tungsten sinkers Circle hooks  Fishing license applications?

  21. Stein et al. 2012. Fisheries Research 113:147-152 “Barbless hooks were expelled 3.9 times faster when located deep in the oral cavity compared to barbed hooks…”

  22. Courtesy of Greg Golgowski, Harmony Devel. Co.)

  23. Study limitations Small scale of study Uneven case loads: most were coastal >50% from SFWC Skewed recovery rates? (rescued animals)

  24. RECOMMENDATIONS expanded mitigation efforts: all public fishing areas fishing license applications abstension

  25. Photo: George Christopher

More Related