Premium
Relative Catchability of Channel Catfish and Blue Catfish × Channel Catfish Hybrids by Anglers in Put‐and‐Take Urban Fisheries
Author(s) -
Hungerford Thomas J.,
Bodine Kristopher A.,
Tibbs John E.,
Myers Randall A.,
Prangnell David,
Daugherty Daniel J.,
Schlechte J. Warren
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
north american journal of fisheries management
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.587
H-Index - 72
eISSN - 1548-8675
pISSN - 0275-5947
DOI - 10.1002/nafm.10596
Subject(s) - stocking , catfish , ictalurus , fishery , fishing , channel (broadcasting) , fish <actinopterygii> , biology , engineering , electrical engineering
Texas’ Neighborhood Fishin’ Program provides close‐to‐home angling opportunities within nine large metropolitan areas to increase angling participation among urban constituents. Water bodies (0.4–2.4 ha) are typically stocked with harvestable (≈305 mm TL) Channel Catfish (CCF) Ictalurus punctatus to provide high‐catch, successful fishing experiences. However, fish producers have been increasingly rearing and stocking lower‐maintenance, faster‐growing CCF × Blue Catfish I. furcatus hybrids to reduce costs. Although recent research in put–grow–take fisheries has suggested no differences in catchability, a number of Texas anglers utilizing these put‐and‐take fisheries have reported lower catch rates of hybrids. Thus, we evaluated relative catchability between the two fish types by stocking equal numbers of uniquely marked CCF and hybrids simultaneously into four Neighborhood Fishin’ Program water bodies on three occasions during 2018. Harvest of each type was measured during five systematic daily creel surveys across a 2‐week period, with the first interviews occurring during the day of each stocking event. Nearly five times more CCF were harvested than hybrids during the first daily creel survey after each stocking event, but harvest of CCF declined significantly by the second daily creel survey. There were no significant differences in harvest between types among subsequent daily creels (surveys 2–5) over the 2‐week creel periods. Few uniquely marked fish of either type were harvested in daily creel surveys 4 and 5. Despite the varying harvest rates, anglers remained satisfied or extremely satisfied throughout the 2‐week creel periods. Our results indicate that CCF are more accessible to anglers than hybrids immediately after stocking. Managers’ choice of which type to stock should depend on relevant fishery objectives. Although CCF will likely produce higher initial catch rates, stocking a mixture of CCF and hybrids may provide a longer‐term fishery that still produces catch rates high enough to maintain or enhance angler satisfaction.