Premium
A Survey of Catfish Management in the United States and Canada
Author(s) -
Michaletz Paul H.,
Dillard Joe G.
Publication year - 1999
Publication title -
fisheries
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.725
H-Index - 79
eISSN - 1548-8446
pISSN - 0363-2415
DOI - 10.1577/1548-8446(1999)024<0006:asocmi>2.0.co;2
Subject(s) - catfish , ictalurus , electrofishing , fishery , flathead , stocking , resource (disambiguation) , economic shortage , fishing , ictaluridae , geography , fish <actinopterygii> , biology , computer network , linguistics , philosophy , government (linguistics) , computer science
We surveyed resource agencies in the United States and Canada to assess the status of the management of catfish species \[primarily channel catfish ( Ictalurus punctatus ), blue catfish ( I. furcatus ), and flathead catfish ( Pylodictis olivaris )\]. Thirty‐two of the fifty‐three agencies we surveyed considered catfish to be either moderately or highly important to anglers. Twenty‐eight states allowed commercial fishing in selected waters. Catfish populations were managed primarily by creel limits and gear restrictions, and less frequently by size limits. Put‐grow‐take fisheries for channel catfish were popular in small impoundments, and most catfish stockings were associated with these fisheries. Managers most commonly used gill nets and electrofishing to sample catfishes and used catch‐per‐unit effort, size structure, and creel information to evaluate catfish populations. Major constraints to the management of catfishes included (1) low priority or angler interest, (2) inadequate habitat, (3) inadequate data, and (4) inadequate sampling. A shortage of catfish for stocking also was a major constraint for small impoundments. Although catfish provide important fisheries throughout a wide geographical area, most resource agencies reported they do not intensively manage catfish populations, although put‐grow‐take and put‐take fisheries in small impoundments were notable exceptions.