While sometimes difficult to admit, perspectives of European and white males have overwhelmingly dominated fisheries science and management in the USA. This dynamic is exemplified by bias against “rough fish”—a pejorative ascribing low-to-zero value for countless native fishes. One product of this bias is that biologists have ironically worked against conservation of diverse fishes for over a century, and these problems persist today. Nearly all U.S. states retain bag limits and other policies that are regressive and encourage overfishing and decline of native species. Multiple lines of evidence point towards the need for a paradigm shift. These include: (1) native species deliver critical ecosystem services; (2) little demonstration that native fish removals deliver intended benefits; (3) many native fishes are long-lived and vulnerable to overfishing and decline; and (4) fisher values and demographics shifting towards native fish conservation. Overall, existing native fish policies are unacceptable and run counter to the public trust doctrine where government agencies manage natural resources for public use. We encourage agencies to revisit their policies regarding native fishes and provide suggestions for developing more holistic, protective, and inclusive conservation policy.

中文翻译：

---

告别“粗鱼”：本土鱼类保护的范式转变

虽然有时难以承认，但欧洲和白人男性的观点在美国的渔业科学和管理中占主导地位。这种动态体现在对“粗鱼”的偏见——一种贬义的将无数本土鱼类的价值归为低到零的说法。这种偏见的一个产物是，一个多世纪以来，生物学家一直在反对保护多种鱼类，而这些问题今天仍然存在。几乎所有美国州都保留了捕捞限制和其他倒退的政策，这些政策鼓励过度捕捞和本地物种的减少。多条证据表明需要进行范式转变。其中包括：(1) 本地物种提供关键的生态系统服务；(2) 很少证明本地鱼类清除能带来预期收益；(3) 许多本土鱼类寿命长，容易过度捕捞和衰退；(4) 渔民价值观和人口统计转向本地鱼类保护。总体而言，现有的本地鱼类政策是不可接受的，并且与政府机构管理供公众使用的自然资源的公共信任原则背道而驰。我们鼓励各机构重新审视其有关本地鱼类的政策，并为制定更全面、保护性和包容性的保护政策提供建议。