1. 1

2. 2 A Case History of Fishing Regulations in Great Smoky Mountains National Park: 1934 - 2004 Matt A. Kulp and Steve E. Moore Great Smoky Mountains National Park

3. 3 Background Study began as case history and summary of GRSM fishing regulations Original three objectives: 1)What is the fishing regulation history of GRSM? 2)Did regulations meet management goals for each time period? 3)Were various regulations effective in enhancing or influencing salmonid age structure, size structure, growth, and population dynamics over 70 years (1934-2004)? Rainbow trout (non-native) used in all analysis >1.4 million rainbow trout stocked in GRSM from 1934-1975 Mostly fingerlings up to 1945; then switched to catchables Part of broader study: Kulp, M.A. and S.E. Moore. 2004. A Case History in Fishing Regulations in Great Smoky Mountains National Park: 1934-2004. North American Journal of Fisheries Management. In press.

4. 4

5. 5

6. 6

7. 7 Methods Analyzed similar types of data from different regulatory periods Population abundance  variety of time series analysis used to evaluate time trend  pre- and post-1960 groups compared with ANOVA Length frequency data analyzed using customized RSD’s  rainbow >150mm used as “stock size”; RSD’s calculated for subsequent 25mm size groups (i.e. RSD178, RSD 203, RSD229…RSD305, etc.)  years or periods compared using Chi 2 analysis Age structure – delineated using scales collected Parkwide  years compared using Chi 2 analysis Annual Mortality – Catch Curves Annual Growth – Visual Implant tags

8. 8 General Regulations

9. 9

10. 10 Population Dynamics – East Prong Little River No Significant Trend Detected Time Series Linear Regression, Exponential Smoothing, ARIMA (x,y)

11. 11 Population Dynamics – East Prong Little River No Significant Difference p = 0.73, df = 15 Pre-1960Post-1960

12. 12 Size Structure (RSD’s) – East Prong Little River Only 1940’s Significantly Greater Than 1990’s df=3, F=11.92

13. 13 Size Structure (RSD’s) – Abrams Creek 1999 Significantly Greater Than 1985 df=5, F=20.87 205mm Creel Limit 178mm Creel Limit

14. 14 Age Structure – Parkwide NO Significant Difference df=3, F=4.04 * Injured fish

15. 15 Length at Capture – East Prong Little River

16. 16 Annual Mortality – Abrams Creek Regulations similar among two periods  regulations very liberal up to 1954

17. 17 Annual Mortality – Parkwide

18. 18 Limiting Factors – Food Limitation * Visual Implant (VI) tag data from Little River (May 1991 to Sept. 1996) N=64

19. 19 Limiting Factors – Annual Net Production Historical Stream Salmonid Literature Review Annual Net Production Productivity Range (g/m 2 ) Study Area Specific Conduct. (MS/cm) Species Net Production (g/m 2 ) Authors Low (Infertile)< 6.0 GA QUE GRSM MN/WI N/A 10-11 10 N/A BKT BKT/RBT 0.31-0.72 1.5-6.6 0.45-0.62 1.3-5.8 Michaels 1974 O’Connor & Power 1976 Ensign et al. 1990 Waters et al. 1990 Medium6.0-25.0 PA ID WI MN 27 N/A 273 620 BKT RBT/STL BKT BNT 6.4 11.8-12.5 8.2-25.8 10.4-19.5 Cooper & Scherer 1967 Goodnight & Bjornn 1971 Hunt 1974 Newman and Waters 1989 High (Fertile) > 25.0NZ PA N/A 374 BNT BKT 54.7 33.1 Allen 1951 Cooper & Scherer 1967

20. 20 Angler Attitudes – Changes on the Horizon... Long-term involvement with sampling provided an understanding of natural variation (>12-40 people per year) Angler involvement in annual monitoring opened their eyes to actual size structures and densities (1 or 2 people) Angler understanding of regulations dispelled myths Once educated about regulation realities: 1.anglers policed their own ranks concerning regulation criticism 2.focused energies on more productive projects

21. 21 Unable to detect any significant changes due to regulations during any period Droughts and floods account for major changes Heavy stocking may explain short-term differences observed in East Prong Little River Results mirror those of populations outside GRSM Summary Stocking of fingerling/catchable trout temporarily augmented wild population 61-90% caught in first three months Acid deposition impacts not apparent in low elevation streams (<875m) in this study Current GRSM fishing regulations more closely tied to social beliefs rather than biological data Food limitations and subsequent lack of productivity main limiting factor in all GRSM populations Angler understanding allowed to focus energies on productive partnership efforts

22. 22 Questions... ? Moral of the regulation story in GRSM...

23. 23