Catch-and-release angling is an increasingly popular conservation strategy employed by anglers voluntarily or to comply with management regulations, but associated injuries, stress and behavioural impairment can cause post-release mortality or fitness impairments. Because the fate of released fish is primarily determined by angler behaviour, employing ‗best angling practices' is critical for sustainable recreational fisheries. While basic tenants of best practices are well established, anglers employ a diversity of tactics for a range of fish species, thus it is important to balance science-based best practices with the realities of dynamic angler behaviour. Here we describe how certain tools and tactics can be integrated into recreational fishing practices to marry best angling practices with the realities of angling. While the effects of angling practices vary considerably across contexts and conditions, we also outline available methods for assessing fish condition by examining physical injuries and reflexes, which enable recreational anglers to make educated real-time decisions related to angling practices, as well as when, where, and whether to release captured fish based on their probability of survival. In cases where fish are poor condition, there are recovery tactics available that can improve survival, although this is among the most understudied aspects of angling practices.

Over the past 20 years, there has been a dramatic increase in the use of physiological tools and experimental approaches for the study of the biological consequences of catch‐and‐release angling practices for fishes. Beyond simply documenting problems, physiological data are also being used to test and refine different strategies for handling fish such that stress is minimised and survival probability maximised, and in some cases, even for assessing and facilitating recovery post‐release. The inherent sensitivity of physiological processes means that nearly every study conducted has found some level of – unavoidable – physiological disturbance arising from recreational capture and subsequent release. An underlying tenet of catch‐and‐release studies that incorporate physiological tools is that a link exists between physiological status and fitness. In reality, finding such relationships has been elusive, with further extensions of individual‐level impacts to fish populations even more dubious. A focus of this article is to describe some of the challenges related to experimental design and interpretation that arise when using physiological tools for the study of the biological consequences of catch‐and‐release angling. Means of overcoming these challenges and the extrapolation of physiological data from individuals to the population level are discussed. The argument is presented that even if it is difficult to demonstrate strong links to mortality or other fitness measures, let alone population‐level impacts of catch‐and‐release, there remains merit in using physiological tools as objective indicators of fish welfare, which is an increasing concern in recreational fisheries. The overarching objective of this paper is to provide a balanced critique of the use of physiological approaches in catch‐and‐release science and of their role in providing meaningful information for anglers and managers.

No abstract

No abstract

The assumption that animals released from fishing gears survive has frequently been scrutinized by researchers in recent years. Mortality estimates from these research efforts can be incorporated into management models to ensure the sustainability of fisheries and the conservation of threatened species. Post‐release mortality estimates are typically made by holding the catch in a tank, pen or cage for short‐term monitoring (e.g. 48 h). These estimates may be inaccurate in some cases because they fail to integrate the challenges of the wild environment. Most obvious among these challenges is predator evasion. Stress and injury from a capture experience can temporarily impair physiological capacity and alter behaviour in released animals, a period during which predation risk is likely elevated. In large‐scale commercial fisheries, predators have adapted their behaviour to capitalize on impaired fishes being discarded, while in recreational catch‐and‐release fisheries, exercise and air exposure can similarly impede the capacity for released fish to evade opportunistic predators. Owing to the indirect and often cryptic nature of this source of mortality, very few studies have attempted to document it. A survey of the literature demonstrated that <2% of the papers in the combined realms of bycatch and catch‐and‐release have directly addressed or considered post‐release predation. Future research should combine field telemetry and laboratory studies using both natural and simulated predation encounters and incorporate physiological and behavioural endpoints. Quite simply, predation is an understudied and underappreciated contributor to the mortality of animals released from fishing gears.