Cultural biases impact native fish, too
Study calls for end to `rough fish' pejorative and the paradigm that
created it

Date:
July 27, 2021
Source:
University of California - Davis
Summary:
From art to religion to land use, much of what is deemed valuable
in the United States was shaped centuries ago by the white male
perspective.

Fish, it turns out, are no exception. A study explores how
colonialist attitudes toward native fishes were rooted in elements
of racism and sexism. It describes how those attitudes continue
to shape fisheries management today, often to the detriment of
native fishes.



FULL STORY ==========================================================================
From art to religion to land use, much of what is deemed valuable
in the United States was shaped centuries ago by the white male
perspective. Fish, it turns out, are no exception.


==========================================================================
A study published in Fisheries Magazine, a journal of the American
Fisheries Society, explores how colonialist attitudes toward native
fishes were rooted in elements of racism and sexism. It describes how
those attitudes continue to shape fisheries management today, often to
the detriment of native fishes.

The study, led by the University of California, Davis, with Nicholls
State University and a national team of fisheries researchers, found
that nearly all states have policies that encourage overfishing native
species. The study maintains that the term "rough fish" is pejorative
and degrading to native fish.

"That has bothered me for a long time," said lead author Andrew Rypel,
co- director of the Center for Watershed Sciences and the Peter B. Moyle
and California Trout Chair in Coldwater Fish Ecology at UC Davis. He
and others have been disturbed by images of "glory killings" of native
fish that periodically pop up on the internet, as well as the lump categorization of less preferred species as "rough" or "trash" fish.

"When you trace the history of the problem, you quickly realize it's
because the field was shaped by white men, excluding other points of
view," Rypel said.

"Sometimes you have to look at that history honestly to figure out what
to do." The study offers several recommendations for how anglers and
fisheries managers can shift to a new paradigm that's more inclusive
and beneficial to all fish and people.



==========================================================================
A 'rough' start The term "rough fish" dates to commercial riverboat
fishing in the mid-late 1800s. Slow, heavy boats would lighten their
loads by "rough-dressing" - - removing organs but not filleting -- less desirable species and discarding them. Biologists came to use the term
to describe an unsubstantiated idea that native fish limit game fish
species historically desired by Europeans. That attitude posed a major
threat to many native species, which were killed in large numbers.

For instance, the alligator gar, an ancient species that can grow more
than 8 feet long and weigh 300 pounds, was particularly persecuted in
the past century. Called a "wolf among fishes," poison, dynamite and electrocution were used to greatly reduce its population. But now some
fishers spend thousands of dollars for the opportunity to catch and
release a giant gar. In 2021, Minnesota changed its statute to describe
gar as a "game fish" rather than a "rough fish." Co-author Solomon David
has helped fuel renewed appreciation for gar and its relative, bowfin. He
runs the GarLab at Nicholls State University in Louisiana, where he is
an assistant professor. He said many native fishes, such as suckers and
gars, have long been valued by Indigenous people and people of color.

"European colonists heavily influenced what fishes were more valuable,
often the species that looked more similar to what they're used to,"
David said. "So trout, bass and salmon got their value while many other
native species got pushed to the wayside." Limited view


==========================================================================
The study authors conducted a survey of fishing regulations across the
United States to compare policies and bag limits on "rough fish" with
those of largemouth bass, a ubiquitous sport fish.

"When I was a kid fishing, you might go to the river with a worm and catch
all these interesting species," Rypel said. "The guidebook would just
say 'rough fish, bag unlimited.' Not much has changed since I was kid."
The study found that no states had bag limits rivaling those for the bass.

While black basses were often managed at five fish per day, regulations
for most native fishes were extremely liberal. Forty-three states had
unlimited bag limits for at least one native species. In the remaining
states, bag limits were between 15 and 50 fish a day.

Freshwater ecosystems are threatened by pollution, habitat loss
and climate change. Up to half of fish species globally are in some
form of decline, and 83 percent of native California fish species are declining. Native fishes help ecosystems in many ways, including nutrient cycling and food chain support for other native species. The authors
pointedly call for a "rewrite" in managing them.

Recommendations The study's recommendations for that rewrite include:
* Stop saying "rough fish." They suggest "native fish" as a simple
alternative.

* Integrate Indigenous perspectives into fisheries management.

* Revisit species bag limits. Lower bag limits for native species
until the
science is conducted to confirm they could be higher. The study
takes particular note of the fast-growing bowfishing market that
has contributed to removing native species.

* Support science on native fishes. Game fish receive 11 times more
research and management attention in American Fisheries Society
journals than do "rough fish." To learn the true value of native
fishes, more research is required.

* Co-manage species that have co-evolved, such as freshwater
mussels and
fish that host them.

* Correct misinformation and enhance science educationthrough
outreach and
education for all ages.

"We have a chance to redirect fisheries science and conservation and
expand it with respect for biodiversity and diversity," David said. "It's
been a long time coming. Change is slow, but we have an opportunity here,
and we should take advantage of it." The study was funded by the Peter
B. Moyle & California Trout Endowment for Coldwater Fish Conservation
and by the California Agricultural Experimental Station of UC Davis.

========================================================================== Story Source: Materials provided by
University_of_California_-_Davis. Original written by Kat Kerlin. Note:
Content may be edited for style and length.


========================================================================== Journal Reference:
1. Andrew L. Rypel, Parsa Saffarinia, Caryn C. Vaughn, Larry Nesper,
Katherine O'Reilly, Christine A. Parisek, Matthew L. Miller,
Peter B.

Moyle, Nann A. Fangue, Miranda Bell‐Tilcock, David Ayers,
Solomon R. David. Goodbye to "Rough Fish": Paradigm Shift
in the Conservation of Native Fishes. Fisheries, 2021; DOI:
10.1002/fsh.10660 ==========================================================================

Link to news story: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/07/210727121256.htm

--- up 11 weeks, 4 days, 22 hours, 45 minutes
* Origin: -=> Castle Rock BBS <=- Now Husky HPT Powered! (1:317/3)