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.

Conservation physiology has great potential to help us understand how migratory animals interact with current and future anthropogenic threats. Migration is inherently challenging such that additional stressors derived from altered environments or interaction with human infrastructure or activities could lead to long-term changes to migratory phenotypes.

No abstract

The effective and appropriate bridging of Western science with traditional or Indigenous knowledge is an ongoing discussion in the literature and in practice. The discourse transitioned from separate knowledge system to knowledge integration and most recently to knowledge co-production. We argue it is the moral and ethical responsibility of Western scientists working in and with Indigenous communities to make a concerted effort to collectively create mutually advantageous new knowledge while strengthening traditional knowledge and considering the normative impacts of Western science methods. Our knowledge coevolution framework provides guidance for achieving this in a flexible manner that can be applied to an array of research programs. Project governance structure, steps for implementation, checks and balances, and challenges are presented within the context of research project execution. We then illustrate application of the model throughout a harvest study conducted in

Although it is assumed that the outcomes from scientific research inform management and policy, the so‐called knowledge–action gap (i.e., the disconnect between scientific knowledge and its application) is a recognition that there are many reasons why new knowledge is not always embraced by knowledge users. The concept of knowledge co‐production has gained popularity within the environmental and conservation research communities as a mechanism of bridging the gap between knowledge and action, but has yet to be fully embraced in fisheries research. Here we describe what co‐production is, outline its benefits (relative to other approaches to research) and challenges, and provide practical guidance on how to embrace and enact knowledge co‐production within fisheries research. Because co‐production is an iterative and context‐dependent process, there is no single way to do it, but there are best practices that can facilitate the generation of actionable research through respectful and inclusive partnerships. We present several brief case studies where we describe examples of where co‐production has worked in practice and the benefits it has accrued. As more members of the fisheries science and management community effectively engage in co‐production, it will be important to reflect on the processes and share lessons with others. We submit that co‐production has manifold benefits for applied science and should lead to meaningful improvements in fisheries management, conservation, and governance.

No abstract

No abstract

Discarding non‐target fish from commercial fisheries is controversial and has been a persistent concern for fisheries managers globally. Discard management strategies typically begin by understanding mortality rates among discarded fish, a challenging task given the dynamic, highly context‐specific nature of fisheries. An alternative is to develop our knowledge of how stressors operate by first understanding the causes of mortality that drive this context dependence. Particularly relevant to mitigation efforts is an understanding of how fish respond to the physical factors of fishing, such as the gear itself and methods of fishing and handling the gear. We provide a synthesis of how commercial fishing methods may influence discard mortality and outline means by which capture‐induced stress and injury can be mitigated for common commercial gear types, emphasizing method variants or alternatives during capture, handling, and release that could improve survival. This synthesis identifies exhaustion and injury as the most detrimental and ubiquitous stressors experienced by discarded fish, with few options for mitigating their effects. Trawls and hanging net fisheries are identified as the most harmful gears for by‐catch, characterized by high stress regardless of method variants and limited options for mitigation. Irrespective of gear type and type of stressor, minimizing durations of capture and handling and encouragement of good handling behaviour (e.g., during landing and sorting) will reduce the magnitude of stress and injury in fish, and ultimately increase survival.