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.
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 鈥渞ough fish鈥 is pejorative and degrading to native fish.
鈥淭hat has bothered me for a long time,鈥 said lead author , co-director of the Center for Watershed Sciences and the Peter B. Moyle and California Trout Chair in Coldwater Fish Ecology at 嘿嘿视频. He and others have been disturbed by images of 鈥済lory killings鈥 of native fish that periodically pop up on the internet, as well as the lump categorization of less preferred species as 鈥渞ough鈥 or 鈥渢rash鈥 fish.
鈥淲hen you trace the history of the problem, you quickly realize it鈥檚 because the field was shaped by white men, excluding other points of view,鈥 Rypel said. 鈥淪ometimes you have to look at that history honestly to figure out what to do.鈥
The study offers several recommendations for how anglers and fisheries managers can shift to a new paradigm that鈥檚 more inclusive and beneficial to all fish and people.
A 鈥榬ough鈥 start
The term 鈥渞ough fish鈥 dates to commercial riverboat fishing in the mid-late 1800s. Slow, heavy boats would lighten their loads by 鈥渞ough-dressing鈥 鈥 removing organs but not filleting 鈥 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 鈥渨olf among fishes,鈥 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, to describe gar as a 鈥済ame fish鈥 rather than a 鈥渞ough fish.鈥
Co-author 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.
鈥淓uropean colonists heavily influenced what fishes were more valuable, often the species that looked more similar to what they鈥檙e used to,鈥 David said. 鈥淪o trout, bass and salmon got their value while many other native species got pushed to the wayside.鈥
Limited view
The study authors conducted a survey of fishing regulations across the United States to compare policies and bag limits on 鈥渞ough fish鈥 with those of largemouth bass, a ubiquitous sport fish.
鈥淲hen I was a kid fishing, you might go to the river with a worm and catch all these interesting species,鈥 Rypel said. 鈥淭he guidebook would just say 鈥榬ough fish, bag unlimited.鈥 Not much has changed since I was kid.鈥
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 鈥渞ewrite鈥 in managing them.
Recommendations
The study鈥檚 recommendations for that rewrite include:
- Stop saying 鈥渞ough fish.鈥 They suggest 鈥渘ative fish鈥 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 鈥渞ough fish.鈥 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 education through outreach and education for all ages.
鈥淲e have a chance to redirect fisheries science and conservation and expand it with respect for biodiversity and diversity,鈥 David said. 鈥淚t鈥檚 been a long time coming. Change is slow, but we have an opportunity here, and we should take advantage of it.鈥
Additional co-authors include Parsa Saffarinia, Christine Parisek, Peter Moyle, Nann Fangue, Miranda Bell-Tilcock, and David Ayers of 嘿嘿视频; Caryn Vaughn of University of Oklahoma; Larry Nesper of University of Wisconsin-Madison; Katherine O鈥橰eilly at University of Notre Dame; and Matthew L. Miller with The Nature Conservancy.
The study was funded by the Peter B. Moyle & California Trout Endowment for Coldwater Fish Conservation and by the California Agricultural Experimental Station of 嘿嘿视频.
Media Resources
Media Contacts:
- Andrew Rypel, 嘿嘿视频 Wildlife, Fish and Conservation Biology, rypel@ucdavis.edu
- Solomon David, Nicholls State University, solomon.david@nicholls.edu
- Kat Kerlin, 嘿嘿视频 News and Media Relations, kekerlin@ucdavis.edu