Urban and Community Fisheries Programs: Development, Management, and Evaluation

Status of Urban and Community Fishing Programs Nationwide

Kevin M. Hunt, Harold L. Schramm, Jr., Thomas J. Lang, J. Wesley Neal, and Clifford P. Hutt

doi: https://doi.org/10.47886/9781934874042.ch14

Abstract.—We conducted an Internet-based survey of fisheries administrators of each inland fisheries agency (N = 51) in the United States to determine current programmatic status of urban fisheries programs, and to determine more in-depth information in eight areas from those with programs. Results indicated that 24 agencies had designated urban and community fishing programs coordinated at a regional or statewide level, or in pilot phase. Of the remaining 27 agencies, all indicated they managed urban and community resources as part of their overall fisheries management activities. In terms of programmatic development, most agencies with programs implemented them after the last status survey in 1991. Over 70% of agencies with programs had a pilot phase prior to program designation that lasted an average of six years. All agencies with programs managed an average of nearly 23 small ponds less than 20 acres as part of the program, and smaller percentages managed lakes, streams, and larger rivers as well. Primary goals of programs were identified as increasing fishing opportunities, recruiting and retaining anglers, and educating people about fisheries and fishing. Most agencies thought that their programs generated public support for their agency, and that their programs provided individual and societal benefits in addition to increased fishing opportunities. All agencies with programs stocked fish as part of the program, with channel catfish Ictalurus punctatus and rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss being the most widely stocked species. Collectively, states with programs stocked about 1.9 million fish annually. More than 80% of agencies targeted youth with their programs, and all had an aquatic education component to their programs directed primarily at youth. Fisheries administrators thought both small and large events with a formal aquatic education component were most effective in achieving education goals, which included increasing stewardship and teaching people how to fish. Administrators indicated that they were receiving needed support from cooperators for their programs, but cooperation was greater at the local than statewide level. Most states have evaluated program effectiveness in terms of number of anglers and youth served and catch and effort, but few states have conducted more thorough analyses required to justify long-term program existence such as the effectiveness of programs in recruiting and retaining anglers and cost/ benefit studies. Inadequate staffing and funding levels and insufficient law enforcement presence were the most frequently cited constraints to making improvements in their programs.