IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v32y2012i3p416-432.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Utilization Survey of a Rural Creek Fishery in Central Alabama

Author

Listed:
  • Ellen S. Ebert
  • Natalie Wilson
  • Mitch Wacksman
  • John R. Loper
  • John D. Schell
  • Alan Fowler

Abstract

A one‐year angler intercept survey was conducted on Choccolocco Creek, a rural, limited access tributary to the Coosa River in northeastern Alabama. The purpose of the survey was to collect data and information about the behaviors and fish consumption habits of the recreational anglers who fish there. Nine survey locations were included in the stratified sampling plan, and sampling occurred throughout daylight hours, on weekdays and weekends/holidays, during all four seasons of the year. Surveys were completed on a total of 101 survey days between June 28, 2008 and June 27, 2009.6 Seventy‐two anglers were observed fishing during the survey period, and 52 (72%) of those individuals agreed to participate in the survey. Based on the information collected by the survey clerks, the angler population fishes the Creek between 1 and 54 times per year, with an average frequency of seven trips per year. The average number of months fished was three months per year, with a range of one to nine months. Only 15% of the anglers who participated in the survey (eight individuals) had succeeded in catching fish by the end of their trips, and only four of those individuals (8%) had retained any of the fish they had caught for consumption. Reasons provided for not retaining fish were that they either only fished for sport, did not catch enough fish to eat, or the fish they caught were too small to keep. Because so few anglers used and harvested fish from the resource, fish consumption rates could not be determined with a high degree of confidence. However, from these limited data it was estimated that the three anglers for whom consumption rates could be estimated had annualized average daily fish consumption rates of 0.14, 0.44, and 7.9 grams per day (g/day). The majority of anglers traveled less than 10 miles to fish the Creek. It was estimated that a total population of 173 anglers use the Creek each year. The results of this survey indicated that Choccolocco Creek is a local fishery that is not heavily used by area residents.

Suggested Citation

  • Ellen S. Ebert & Natalie Wilson & Mitch Wacksman & John R. Loper & John D. Schell & Alan Fowler, 2012. "Utilization Survey of a Rural Creek Fishery in Central Alabama," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(3), pages 416-432, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:32:y:2012:i:3:p:416-432
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01678.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01678.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01678.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paul S. Price & James Sample & Robert Strieter, 1992. "Determination of Less‐Than‐Lifetime Exposures to Point Source Emissions," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(3), pages 367-382, September.
    2. Miron Israeli & Christopher B. Nelson, 1992. "Distribution and Expected Time of Residence for U.S. Households," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(1), pages 65-72, March.
    3. Paul S. Price & Paul K. Scott & Natalie D. Wilson & Dennis J. Paustenbach, 1998. "An Empirical Approach for Deriving Information on Total Duration of Exposure from Information on Historical Exposure," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(5), pages 611-619, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Brent Finley & Deborah Proctor & Paul Scott & Natalie Harrington & Dennis Paustenbach & Paul Price, 1994. "Recommended Distributions for Exposure Factors Frequently Used in Health Risk Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(4), pages 533-553, August.
    2. Lisa M. Funk & Richard Sedman & Jill A. J. Beals & Robert Fountain, 1998. "Quantifying the Distribution of Inhalation Exposure in Human Populations: 2. Distributions of Time Spent by Adults, Adolescents, and Children at Home, at Work, and at School," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(1), pages 47-56, February.
    3. Paul S. Price & Paul K. Scott & Natalie D. Wilson & Dennis J. Paustenbach, 1998. "An Empirical Approach for Deriving Information on Total Duration of Exposure from Information on Historical Exposure," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(5), pages 611-619, October.
    4. Guido Sassi & Bernardo Ruggeri, 2008. "Uncertainty Evaluation of Human Risk Analysis (HRA) of Chemicals by Multiple Exposure Routes," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(5), pages 1343-1356, October.
    5. Paul S. Price & Steave H. Su & Jeff R. Harrington & Russell E. Keenan, 1996. "Uncertainty and Variation in Indirect Exposure Assessments: An Analysis of Exposure to Tetrachlorodibenzo‐p‐Dioxin from a Beef Consumption Pathway," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(2), pages 263-277, April.
    6. Randy L. Maddalena & Thomas E. McKone & Michael D. Sohn, 2004. "Standardized Approach for Developing Probabilistic Exposure Factor Distributions," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(5), pages 1185-1199, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:32:y:2012:i:3:p:416-432. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.