The effect of surveillance fishing on migration distance of Atlantic Salmon during the spawning period

Abstract Objective Surveillance fishing surveys can be performed to estimate the proportion of farmed salmon represented in the spawning stock of native Atlantic Salmon Salmo salar populations. These surveys take place after the recreational fishing period and therefore closer to the spawning period than the open recreational fishing season. Although catch-and-release angling has been demonstrated to affect salmon migration during the summer months, surveillance fishing that is conducted close to the spawning time could have more severe effects. Methods To test this, the migration distance of Atlantic Salmon (n = 74) caught in the Orkla River, Norway, was tracked by use of radiotelemetry. One group was tagged during the regular fishing season in the summer (control group), whereas another group was tagged in autumn during surveillance fishing (surveillance group). Result Sixty-one salmon remained for analysis after we excluded fish that were recaptured, died, or migrated to other rivers. Relocation of the salmon during autumn (October 11–31) was used to compare movements and test for differences in migration using negative binomial regression because distances were nonnegative integers. During the tracking period, the surveillance group moved 12 ± 14 km (mean ± standard deviation) and the control group moved 13 ± 15 km; both groups moved 1 ± 2 km/day on average. There was no evidence that surveillance fishing impacted movement of the salmon compared to controls. However, one salmon died after tagging and three were not released due to injuries; total mortality of 9% during surveillance fishing could be unsustainable for smaller populations. Consequently, factors such as surveillance sample size, the status of the salmon population, and the population size should be assessed for each river individually when deciding the necessity of and approach to surveillance fishing. Conclusion The results support existing recommendations to use careful handling and to end surveillance at least 2 weeks prior to the expected onset of spawning, thus providing a sufficiently long period for recovery after surveillance fishing.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
North American Journal of Fisheries Management
Published
2024-08-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/nafm.11020
Primary Topic
Fish Ecology and Management Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The effect of surveillance fishing on migration distance of Atlantic Salmon during the spawning period

Robert J. Lennox, Eva Marita Ulvan, Øyvind Solem, Jan Grimsrud Davidsen et al.
North American Journal of Fisheries Management
Fish Ecology and Management Studies
article

The effect of surveillance fishing on migration distance of Atlantic Salmon during the spawning period

Robert J. Lennox, Eva Marita Ulvan, Øyvind Solem, Jan Grimsrud Davidsen, Johan O. Munkeby, Dag H. Karlsen, Tor F. Næsje, Torgeir B. Havn
article en

Abstract

Abstract Objective Surveillance fishing surveys can be performed to estimate the proportion of farmed salmon represented in the spawning stock of native Atlantic Salmon Salmo salar populations. These surveys take place after the recreational fishing period and therefore closer to the spawning period than the open recreational fishing season. Although catch-and-release angling has been demonstrated to affect salmon migration during the summer months, surveillance fishing that is conducted close to the spawning time could have more severe effects. Methods To test this, the migration distance of Atlantic Salmon (n = 74) caught in the Orkla River, Norway, was tracked by use of radiotelemetry. One group was tagged during the regular fishing season in the summer (control group), whereas another group was tagged in autumn during surveillance fishing (surveillance group). Result Sixty-one salmon remained for analysis after we excluded fish that were recaptured, died, or migrated to other rivers. Relocation of the salmon during autumn (October 11–31) was used to compare movements and test for differences in migration using negative binomial regression because distances were nonnegative integers. During the tracking period, the surveillance group moved 12 ± 14 km (mean ± standard deviation) and the control group moved 13 ± 15 km; both groups moved 1 ± 2 km/day on average. There was no evidence that surveillance fishing impacted movement of the salmon compared to controls. However, one salmon died after tagging and three were not released due to injuries; total mortality of 9% during surveillance fishing could be unsustainable for smaller populations. Consequently, factors such as surveillance sample size, the status of the salmon population, and the population size should be assessed for each river individually when deciding the necessity of and approach to surveillance fishing. Conclusion The results support existing recommendations to use careful handling and to end surveillance at least 2 weeks prior to the expected onset of spawning, thus providing a sufficiently long period for recovery after surveillance fishing.

North American Journal of Fisheries ManagementVol. 44(4)
Dalhousie University (CA), Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NO), Ocean Tracking Network (CA), Vitensenteret i Trondheim (NO), Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NO)
Miljødirektoratet
Life below water
Openalex Percentile: Top 88%
Fish Ecology and Management Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.