We summarized advancements in Flathead Catfish Pylodictis olivaris biology, fisheries, and management published from 1999 to 2021. Our goal was to highlight recent advancements in Flathead Catfish research and address information needs for this species to encourage future research. We identified and reviewed 140 papers from 33 peer‐reviewed journals, 27 theses/dissertations, and 13 technical reports on Flathead Catfish over the 23‐year period. Most studies focused on introduced Flathead Catfish populations, age and growth, movements, diet, sampling methods, and human dimensions of Flathead Catfish fisheries. The number of studies published on riverine Flathead Catfish populations was greater than the number published on reservoir populations, and many studied negative effects of populations introduced outside of the species’ native range. Flathead Catfish are most commonly found in shallow (<3‐m) locations with large woody debris or riprap and substrates with a hard bottom. Flathead Catfish movement studies identified three distinct migration periods: overwintering, prespawn/spawn, and late summer/fall, with little movement between these migrations. Flathead Catfish are typically lightly exploited (0–19% annual exploitation) and have typical (for a long‐lived species) annual total mortality rates of 11–37%, ranging as high as 62%. Flathead Catfish are most commonly sampled using low‐frequency electrofishing. Despite an increase in published literature on Flathead Catfish, information remains inadequate such that most state agencies do not follow a standardized protocol for sampling Flathead Catfish and information to guide management approaches for the species is limited. Minimal research on Flathead Catfish reproduction and spawning has occurred since 1999. Additional research is needed on these and other topics to provide information critical to managing this important species.

Flathead Catfish Pylodictis olivaris are popular among anglers; however, information about their sampling is limited. Low‐frequency electrofishing (LFE) is the most used method for sampling Flathead Catfish, but LFE data quality (precision and accuracy) has not been previously studied. Therefore, we evaluated accuracy, precision, and optimal sampling duration for maximizing precision of LFE sampling for Flathead Catfish. To quantify accuracy, we created known populations by tagging Flathead Catfish in Lake Carl Blackwell, Lake McMurtry, and Boomer Lake, Oklahoma, with numbered modified Carlin dangler tags and calculated their capture probabilities from recapture data with a Cormack–Jolly–Seber model, with water temperature as an environmental covariate and fish size as an individual covariate. Capture probability was negatively correlated with increases in fish length for Lake Carl Blackwell and Lake McMurtry but was positively correlated with increases in fish length for Boomer Lake. Capture probability was highest at warmer temperatures at Lake Carl Blackwell and Lake McMurtry but was highest at lower water temperatures at Boomer Lake. Therefore, catch rate and size bias varied by system, but size bias was still relatively consistent at all temperatures within lakes (i.e., lake‐specific differences in slopes were subtle even though significantly different), indicating that LFE could be used to detect relative changes in size structure if temperatures were standardized. Catch rates were highest and most consistent from June to September when water temperatures were ≥24°C. The number of 5‐min LFE efforts needed to achieve a relative standard error ≤25% was lowest when water temperature was ≥20°C from months between May and September. Catch rates and size structure did not differ between LFE efforts (5, 10, or 15 min), suggesting that any LFE effort would produce similar relative abundance estimates.

ObjectiveAlthough bowfishing is legal in all 50 states in the USA, the practice of releasing shot fish is only legal in 8 states. An argument favoring this practice has been that survival of fish after shoot‐and‐release fishing is high. Bowfishing mortality trials were conducted in 2021–2022 in Lake Texoma, Oklahoma, to quantify shoot‐and‐release mortality and characterize the mortality via the location of the wound associated with the release of fish shot by bowfishing.MethodsA total of 240 nongame fish were shot by experienced bowfishers with conventional bowfishing equipment and held in convalescent pools, with control fish captured by electrofishing to document short‐term mortality up to 5 days.ResultOverall mortality of bowfished fish was 87% versus 0% for control fish. Fish shot in critical areas (head, internal organs, or spine; 78% of total) suffered 96% mortality, whereas fish shot in noncritical areas (dorsal musculature, tail, or fins) experienced 52% mortality. In addition, 13.7% of fish shot were not successfully retrieved. Shot fish were generally older (mean = 19.4 years, range = 3–54) and contained more females (62%) than control fish (mean = 12.5 years, range = 2–39; 37% female), providing evidence that bowfishing can remove individuals of great recruitment value. The shoot‐and‐release mortality rates in this study, for fish shot in both critical and noncritical areas, exceeded mortality from a wide range of angler catch and release in other studies.ConclusionThe high mortality rate associated with shoot and release observed in this study and as practiced by recreational bowfisheries renders shoot and release inconsistent with scientifically regulated and sustainable bowfisheries for native nongame species. These results provide evidence that the bow and arrow, when aimed at animals, is a weapon that is intended to kill. Bowfishing should realistically be managed as a 100% consumptive (i.e., kill) pursuit in which shoot and release is prohibited and nonretrieval of shot fish is accounted for.

Increasingly, management efforts are being directed at Blue Catfish Ictalurus furcatus native and invasive populations; however, a lack of standardized sampling procedures using low-frequency electrofishing (LFE) has hampered the ability to collect comparable data across temporal and spatial scales. Therefore, we conducted wetlab LFE trials to determine optimal power densities that elicit a capture-prone surfacing response by Blue Catfish. We tested power density applied to the fish (D m) from 4.69 × 10 −6 to 3.65 μW/cm 3 and trials with at least one surfacing fish occurred between D m values of 2.144 × 10 −5 and 0.854 μW/cm 3 . Trials in which ≥50% of fish surfaced all occurred at D m values between 9.29 × 10 −5 and 0.2084 μW/cm 3 . Even within this narrower range, responses were variable and included trials where no fish surfaced, indicating a wide range of response rates across all power levels tested. Our results suggest that a power density applied to the fish (D m ) between 9.29 × 10 −5 and 0.2084 μW/cm 3 is most likely to elicit a surfacing response in Blue Catfish, thus exposing them for capture. Further research is needed to map power densities over a range of distances from the electrode (i.e., relating power at the electrode [P a ] with power density in the water [D a ]) before standard power tables can be produced. Until this information becomes available, we recommend using the power tables from Bonar et al. ( 2009) because these allow effective capture of catfishes and will standardize the effectiveness until a better power table could be produced for LFE. Additional research is needed to better understand the Blue Catfish's unique electroreceptive mechanism that drives variability in the response to LFE and whether the proportion of fish surfacing is consistent enough to use catch per unit effort as an index of abundance.Blue Catfish Ictalurus furcatus are a large, popular sport fish natively inhabiting North American river drainages of the Gulf of Mexico, with introductions expanding their ranges throughout the United States from California to the Atlantic coast states (Graham 1999). Blue Catfish are one of three ictalurid species in North America that reach a