|
Research & Education
Pilot Telephone Diary Survey to Develop Ways of Estimating Victorian Recreational Fishing Catches |
FN0587
|
Karina Ryan, Primary Industries Research Victoria Queenscliff
Updated: August 2007
To view the Adobe Acrobat file, you will need the Adobe Acrobat Reader (external link). | 
(PDF 118kb) |
With over half a million recreational fishers in Victoria just how can you efficiently and reliably estimate the number of fish these anglers catch?
Determining the total recreational catch of a particular species or in a particular area is important for:
- gauging the effect of recreational fishing on key target fish stocks,
- sharing/allocating fish resources among competing user groups, and
- developing, implementing, and reviewing fishery management plans.
Fisheries scientists from DPI’s research arm, Primary Industries Research Victoria (PIRVic), set about evaluating three alternative methods used to estimate recreational catches.
The project team, led by PIRVic’s Mr Sandy Morison, used computer simulations and existing scientific information to compare and contrast the accuracy and reliability of two on-site and one off-site fishing survey methods.
The first on-site method is termed a ‘bus route’ survey. For this researchers follow a prescribed route and timetable (hence the name ‘bus route’) and stop at each boat ramp to count boat trailers and interview anglers returning from fishing trips. The second on-site method is the creel survey, where researchers interview anglers to obtain details of their catch (a creel being the term used for the bag anglers use to keep their catch in).
The off-site method uses phone interviews of randomly chosen anglers who have volunteered to keep a diary to record details of their fishing activities to obtain catch information.
Sandy and his team began by weighing up the pros and cons of each survey method (see table).
Pros and cons of different survey methods
This preliminary analysis revealed that the on-site methods (creel and bus route surveys), where face- to- face interviews are conducted with fishers when they are on or next to fishing waters, have the advantage that interviewers can see, count and measure exactly what has been caught. However, making contact with a sufficiently large number of fishers required to make the information representative of all those who participate in the fishery can be very difficult and expensive.
Conducting off-site telephone diary surveys is relatively less expensive once volunteer diarists have been identified and recruited, and repeated telephone interviews after each fishing trip minimise biases such as fishers not remembering exactly what they caught, or recording only the successful days of fishing. However, identifying and recruiting enough volunteer diarists to provide good estimates of total catch can be costly, particularly if the total number of participants in the fishery is small.
The study team found that the accuracy and reliability of all three survey methods increased as more data were collected, but they differed in the costs of gaining these benefits. As might be expected, the more days scientists were in the field for the on-site methods or the more anglers included in the off-site telephone diary survey the better the estimates of total catch.
But when costs were factored in to the comparisons, the methods showed substantial differences.
The study team found that
- for small surveys the reliability and cost-effectiveness of the off-site telephone survey was less than that of both the on-site methods (the bus route and creel surveys),
- for medium -sized surveys the reliability and cost effectiveness of all three surveys was similar, and
- for large surveys the reliability and cost-effectiveness of the off-site telephone diary survey out-performed that of both of the on-site survey methods.
Sandy and his team concluded that the off-site telephone diary survey was the best method to estimate total catches for fisheries that are large and/or are widely scattered across the State. The off-site method was even more cost-effective when anglers could be rapidly identified, such as through records from an angler specific database.
To ensure that the off-site telephone survey will actually deliver the goods, Sandy and the team will trial the technique in 2006/ 2007.
Commencing in April 2006, anglers across Victoria will be randomly contacted by PIRVic scientists and asked a series of questions about their fishing habits in Victoria’s coastal marine waters (including Western Port and Port Phillip Bay).
On the basis of the screening survey, selected anglers will be asked to participate in a year-long survey to provide information about their fishing activities.
These anglers will be issued with a fishing diary and asked to record the details of each and every fishing trip undertaken. This is to aid their memory, as interviewers will ring regularly to get the details of their fishing activities.
This project is funded by the Fisheries Research and Development Corporation and Fisheries Victoria.
Further Information
For more information about this project please contact Karina Ryan at Primary Industries Research Victoria Queenscliff on 03 5258 0111.
Fisheries Research and Education Notes are available on the DPI website. Follow the prompts to Fishing and Aquaculture and then to Publications and Fisheries Notes. The notes are listed under the heading Research and Education.
This Information Note was originally developed by Sandy Morison and was published in May 2006.
The advice provided in this publication is intended as a source of information only. Always read the label before using any of the products mentioned. The State of Victoria and its employees do not guarantee that the publication is without flaw of any kind or is wholly appropriate for your particular purposes and therefore disclaims all liability for any error, loss or other consequence which may arise from you relying on any information in this publication.
|
