MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389038096 · doi:10.1002/pan3.10553

Recreational anglers in Norway report widespread dislike of invasive pink salmon

2023· article· en· W4389038096 on OpenAlexaff
Jessika D. Guay, Robert J. Lennox, Eva B. Thorstad, Knut Wiik Vollset, Stian Stensland, Jaakko Erkinaro, Vivian M. Nguyen

Bibliographic record

VenuePeople and Nature · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFishingFisheryRecreational fishingNorwegianCatch and releaseRecreationGeographyWildlifeEcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Pink salmon have returned to Norwegian rivers at high abundance in recent odd‐numbered years (2017, 2019, 2021, 2023), presenting potential threats to native biodiversity and ecosystem services, including major sport fishing tourism for Atlantic salmon and sea‐run brown trout in Norway. Presently, there exists a knowledge gap on angler perceptions and attitudes towards the presence of pink salmon in Norwegian rivers, resulting in difficulty assessing the socioeconomic repercussions of their invasion. We distributed an online questionnaire to anglers who purchased the national salmon fishing licence in Norway in 2020 to assess their perceptions of pink salmon and the intentions of anglers to modify their fishing practices. There were widespread negative perceptions of pink salmon in Norway. Perceptions were matched with intentions to modify fishing behaviour among some of the anglers, with 41% saying that they would modify fishing to increase the catch of pink salmon to help remove them before they spawned in the rivers. However, anglers were more prone to say they would decrease fishing effort if both pink salmon catches and fishing licence costs were to increase or if pink salmon were to dominate their catch. Salmon anglers in Norway were strongly oriented towards their chosen recreational activity and do not plan to stop fishing their preferred rivers. They also do not want pink salmon to become established in Norway and are prepared to volunteer for stewardship roles that intervene against pink salmon. However, they overwhelmingly reported not wanting to eat pink salmon. Fisheries managers must take into account the widespread desire for management intervention against pink salmon, even though eradication is not likely no matter how intensive removal efforts become. Efforts to change narratives about pink salmon to encourage fishers to harvest pink salmon from the fjords and rivers for consumption might lead to effective population control, relieving native salmon, trout and charr from potential negative impacts of this prolific colonizer. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.220 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePeople and NatureSame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207