Deep hooking,landing success and gear loss using inline and offset circle and J hooks when bait fishing for white sturgeon

The issue of deep hooking is of concern in white sturgeon, Acipenser transmontanus Richardson, fisheries because nearly all anglers use bait with a stationary presentation on the river bottom to catch them, and bait fishing is often associated with higher instances of deep hooking and hooking mortality. Deep hooking rates, landing success and catch rates were investigated for anglers bait fishing for white sturgeon using circle and J hooks with inline and offset alignments fished with both active and passive hook‐setting methods. Anglers hooked 578 white sturgeon and landed 508 fish, ranging in size from 60 to 316 cm total length (mean = 137 cm). Deep hooking rates averaged 0.6% and did not differ between hook types, hook alignments or hook‐setting methods. Landing success (the proportion of hooked sturgeon that were successfully landed) and catch rates were also equivalent between hook types, hook alignments and hook‐setting methods; landing success averaged 88% and catch rates averaged 0.27 fish/hr. Results of this study indicate that deep hooking is rare when angling for white sturgeon using standard bait‐fishing gear regardless of hook‐setting method or whether circle or J hooks were used; regulations restricting hook type in sturgeon bait fisheries are therefore unwarranted.     

Are circle hooks an effective tool for conserving marine and freshwater recreational catch‐and‐release fisheries?

• 1. Circle hooks have rapidly become popular among recreational anglers, based largely on the assumption that their use aids in the conservation of fisheries resources by reducing gut hooking, and hence mortality. In addition, circle hooks are intended to facilitate jaw hooking. Unfortunately, these assumptions have been perpetuated by anecdotal reports with very little rigorous scientific information to support these assertions.
• 2. A number of recently published, forthcoming, and grey literature reports provide an opportunity to review briefly and synthesize research conducted on circle hooks. We surveyed literature databases and also used questionnaires to solicit information from unpublished or in‐progress circle hook research.
• 3. Although among studies the results have been quite disparate, overall the mortality rates were consistently lower for circle hooks than J‐style hooks. In addition, circle hooks were more frequently hooked in the jaw, and less frequently hooked in the gut than conventional hook types. There is no doubt that in some marine fisheries, such as tuna, billfish, and striped bass, capture efficiency remains high and injury and mortality rates are drastically reduced. However, in other species (e.g. bluegill), injury can actually be more severe from circle hooks relative to some other hook types. In other species, such as largemouth bass, circle hooks have minimal conservation benefit, but have reduced capture efficiency relative to conventional hook designs.
• 4. Factors such as hook size, fishing style, fish feeding mode, and mouth morphology all appear to affect the effectiveness of circle hooks. For these reasons, it is difficult to promote the adoption of the use of circle hooks as a panacea for all fish and fisheries. Instead, we recommend that management agencies focus on recommending circle hooks only for instances for which appropriate scientific data exist.
• 5. The recent interest in circle hooks has been beneficial for stimulating interest and research on the role of hook designs in reducing hooking‐related injury and mortality. We encourage tackle manufacturers to continue to develop new hook designs that have the potential to provide conservation benefit to caught and released fish. This paper provides direction to management agencies and outdoor media for disseminating responsible information to anglers regarding the application of circle hooks for conserving fisheries resources.

Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Effect of hook type and hook setting method on deep-hooking rates when bait fishing for trout in lentic waters

Fishing with circle hooks along with prescribed hook-setting methods can reduce deep-hooking rates in some fisheries, but baited circle hooks have not been evaluated in stillwater trout fisheries. Deep-hooking rates and catch probabilities were compared for cutthroat trout Oncorhynchus clarkii​ (Richardson), rainbow trout Oncorhyncus mykiss (Walbaum), cutthroat × rainbow trout hybrids, and brook trout Salvelinus fontinalis (MItchill) caught using three types of baited hooks (circle, intermediate circle and traditional J) and two hook-setting methods (active and passive) in several lakes containing naturally reared trout. Hook type had a negligible effect on deep-hooking rates, which averaged 20%. Actively setting the hook and fishing with a bobber both reduced deep-hooking rates, regardless of hook type. Larger fish were deeply hooked more frequently regardless of hook type. Catch probabilities were higher when active rather than passive hook-setting was used, particularly in combination with intermediate circle hooks. The present results, which indicate that circle hook use did not reduce deep hooking in lentic settings, contrast earlier studies done in lotic waters. Therefore, before proposing hook-type regulations intended to reduce deep hooking, fisheries managers should consider waterbody type in addition to fishing methods, fish size and species.     

A cross‐taxa assessment of pelagic longline by‐catch mitigation measures: conflicts and mutual benefits to elasmobranchs

Elasmobranch mortality in pelagic longline fisheries poses a risk to some populations, alters the distribution of abundance between sympatric competitors, changing ecosystem structure, processes and stability. Individual and synergistic effects on elasmobranch catch and survival from pelagic longline gear factors, including methods prescribed to mitigate bycatch of other vulnerable taxa, were determined. Overall relative risk of higher circle vs. J‐shaped hook shark catch rates conditioned on potentially informative moderators, from 30 studies, was estimated using an inverse‐precision weighted mixed‐effects meta‐regression modelling approach. Sharks had a 1.20 times (95% CI: 1.03–1.39) significantly higher pooled relative risk of capture on circle hooks, with two significant moderators. The pooled relative risk estimate of ray circle hook catch from 15 studies was not significant (RR = 1.22, 95% CI: 0.89–1.66) with no significant moderators. From a literature review, wire leaders had higher shark catch and haulback mortality than monofilament. Interacting effects of hook, bait and leader affect shark catch rates: hook shape and width and bait type determine hooking position and ability to sever monofilament leaders. Circle hooks increased elasmobranch catch, but reduced haulback mortality and deep hooking relative to J‐shaped hooks of the same or narrower width. Using fish vs. squid for bait increased shark catch and deep hooking. Pelagic stingray (Pteroplatytrygon violacea) catch and mortality were lower on wider hooks. Using circle instead of J‐shaped hooks and fish instead of squid for bait, while benefitting sea turtles, odontocetes and possibly seabirds, exacerbates elasmobranch catch and injury, therefore warranting fishery‐specific assessments to determine relative risks.     

Influence of terminal rig configuration on the anatomical hooking location of line-caught yellowfin bream, Acanthopagrus australis

Abstract  Experiments were carried out to test the dependence of anatomical hooking location on terminal rig configuration, and identify strategies by which hook ingestion can be minimised to reduce post-release mortality of angled yellowfin bream, Acanthopagrus australis (Günther). Eighty-five anglers targeted yellowfin bream using different designs and sizes of circle and J hooks and recorded technical, environmental and biological data for each landed fish. Considerably fewer fish (16.6 and 8.5%, respectively) ingested hooks than those hooked in the mouth (82.1 and 88.6%), and a greater percentage of J hooks were ingested than circle hooks or a J hook modified with a 15-mm horizontal bar. Irrespective of hook type, the rate of ingestion also declined with increasing hook weight and decreasing fish size. In cage experiments, significantly more hooks baited with natural soft baits (e.g. intestines and cephalopods) were ingested than those baited with artificial baits, crustaceans or teleosts, while in the field fewer hooks were ingested using artificial bait (e.g. bread and pellets) than terrestrial animals, teleosts, crustaceans, teleost or terrestrial animal intestines, cephalopods or polychaetes. Similarly, rigs with floats, short traces or a sinker only on the hook, along with angling in environments with at least some current reduced ingestion. Based on this study, anglers targeting yellowfin bream should be encouraged to use circle or modified J hooks and, regardless of the hook design, the largest hook size possible attached to short traces or a sinker only and hard baits.     

The effect of hook/bait size and angling technique on the hooking location and the catch of recreationally caught black bream Acanthopagrus butcheri

The black bream Acanthopagrus butcheri recreational fishery is the largest estuarine fishery in Victoria. This fishery is managed through legal-minimum length and daily bag limits. The success of this management strategy requires a high survival rate for released fish. Deep-hooking is known to reduce the chance of fish survival after recreational capture and release. This study investigated the potential to reduce deep-hooking and the number of under-size A. butcheri caught by varying angling gear and techniques. Three sizes of long shank hook (small [size 8], medium [size 4] and large [size 1/0]) and two angling techniques (slack line and tight line) were tested for their deep-hooking rates and selectivity characteristics. Increasing the hook size from small to large decreased the likelihood of deep-hooking by 6.6 times (95% CI 2.3–16.3 times). Fishing with a tight line instead of a slack line decreased the chance of deep-hooking by almost 100% (95% CI 0.8–3.6). Fishing with a large hook instead of a small hook significantly (F = 6.71, df = 2, P = <0.001) increased the mean A. butcheri length, although this mean size increase was less than 1 cm. This study was able to identify angling gear and angling technique manipulations that reduced the rate of deep-hooking when targeting A. butcheri in Victorian estuaries.     

Short-term hooking mortality of three marine fish species (Sparidae) caught by recreational angling in the south Portugal

Short-term hooking mortality was evaluated for three sparid species [Diplodus vulgaris (Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire), Sparus aurata L. and Spondyliosoma cantharus (L.)] in the Algarve, south Portugal. Fishes were caught from the shore during October 2009 at a fish farm reservoir (Ria Formosa), using three different hook sizes. The relationships between hooking mortality and seven independent variables were analyzed using logistic regression models. In all, 384 fishes representing the three target species were caught during the angling sessions. The most caught species was S. cantharus (n = 181; 100% undersized), followed by S. aurata (n = 137; 89% undersized) and D. vulgaris (n = 66; 97% undersized). Mortalities ranged between 0% for D. vulgaris and 12% for S. aurata (S. cantharus, 3%). For S. aurata, anatomical hooking location was the main predictor of mortality, with 63% of the fishes that died being deeply hooked. Our results support the current mandatory practices of releasing undersized fish for the studied species, given the low post-release mortality rates observed.     

Effect of changes in hook pattern and size on catch rate, hooking location, injury and bleeding for a number of tropical reef fish species

The Queensland Great Barrier Reef line fishery in Australia is regulated via a range of input and output controls including minimum size limits, daily catch limits and commercial catch quotas. As a result of these measures a substantial proportion of the catch is released or discarded. The fate of these released fish is uncertain, but hook-related mortality can potentially be decreased by using hooks that reduce the rates of injury, bleeding and deep hooking. There is also the potential to reduce the capture of non-target species though gear selectivity. A total of 1053 individual fish representing five target species and three non-target species were caught using six hook types including three hook patterns (non-offset circle, J and offset circle), each in two sizes (small 4/0 or 5/0 and large 8/0). Catch rates for each of the hook patterns and sizes varied between species with no consistent results for target or non-target species. When data for all of the fish species were aggregated there was a trend for larger hooks, J hooks and offset circle hooks to cause a greater number of injuries. Using larger hooks was more likely to result in bleeding, although this trend was not statistically significant. Larger hooks were also more likely to foul-hook fish or hook fish in the eye. There was a reduction in the rates of injuries and bleeding for both target and non-target species when using the smaller hook sizes. For a number of species included in our study the incidence of deep hooking decreased when using non-offset circle hooks, however, these results were not consistent for all species. Our results highlight the variability in hook performance across a range of tropical demersal finfish species. The most obvious conservation benefits for both target and non-target species arise from using smaller sized hooks and non-offset circle hooks. Fishers should be encouraged to use these hook configurations to reduce the potential for post-release mortality of released fish.     

A comparison of circle hook and J hook performance in a western equatorial Atlantic Ocean pelagic longline fishery

Catch composition, catch rates, hooking location, and status at release at haulback were monitored during 81 experimental sets (launches and hauling fishing per day) in a commercial pelagic longline fishery targeting tuna in the equatorial South Atlantic Ocean. Circle hooks (size 18/0, 0° offset) and J-style hooks (size 9/0, 10° offset) with squid baits were deployed in an alternating fashion. The catch composition was not significantly different for most species between the two types of hooks, except for bigeye tuna, which showed a significantly higher proportion of catches on the circle hook (p ? 0.001) and for sailfish, pelagic stingray, and leatherback sea turtle, which had higher catch rates on the J-style hook (p = 0.018, p ? 0.001, and p = 0.044, respectively). Bigeye and yellowfin tuna showed significantly higher rates of survival at the time of gear retrieval with circle hooks, and circle hooks hooked bigeye tuna, yellowfin tuna, swordfish, and sailfish significantly more often externally than internally. Our results suggest that the use of size 18/0, 0° offset circle hooks in the equatorial pelagic longline fishery may increase the survival of bycatch species at the time of gear retrieval with minimal effects on the catches of target species.     

Effects of circle versus J-style hooks on target and non-target species in a pelagic longline fishery

The U.S. Atlantic coastal pelagic longline fishery that targets tunas and swordfish also interacts with a wide range of non-target species including billfishes and sea turtles. Preliminary studies indicate that a change in terminal gear from J-style hooks to circle hooks may reduce bycatch mortality, but the effects of this change on catch rates of target species are unclear. To evaluate this, we monitored catch composition, catch rates, hooking location, and number of fish alive at haulback during 85 sets in the fall and spring seasonal fisheries from a commercial vessel operating in the western North Atlantic. Circle (size 16/0, 0° offset) and J-style (size 9/0, 10° offset) hooks were deployed in an alternating fashion. Hook–time recorders were used to assess time at hooking and temperature–depth recorders to measure gear behavior. Catch rates for most species categories were not significantly different between hook types (P < 0.05), although circle hooks generally had higher tuna catch rates in the fall and lower swordfish catch rates in the spring. In the fall, both total catches and catches of pelagic rays were significantly higher on J-style hooks. Yellowfin tuna in the fall and dolphinfish in the spring caught on circle hooks were significantly larger than those caught on J-style hooks. In both seasonal fisheries, circle hooks caught fishes in the mouth more frequently than J-style hooks, which hooked more often in the throat or gut, although these differences between hook types were not statistically significant. Yellowfin tuna in the fall fishery were over four times more likely to be hooked in the mouth with circle hooks than with J-style hooks. Several target and bycatch species showed higher rates of survival at haulback with circle hooks, although only for dolphinfish in the fall fishery was this difference statistically significant. Our results suggest that the use of 0° offset circle hooks in the coastal pelagic longline fishery will increase the survival of bycatch species at haulback with minimal effects on the catches of target species.     

Can circle hook use benefit billfishes?

We performed a quantitative review to evaluate circle hook use in recreational and commercial hook-and-line fisheries that interact with billfishes (Family: Istiophoridae). Specifically, we scrutinized the findings of 11 recent empirical studies that reported, on a species-specific basis, side-by-side measures of circle vs. J-hook fishing performance: catch, mortality, deep-hooking and bleeding rates. Of the 30 total comparisons extracted from the literature that satisfied our inclusion criteria, 13 indicated significant differences between hook types for the specific metric compared. No study reported significant billfish catch rate differences between hook types. However, when significant differences between hook types were found, higher mortality rates and higher rates of deep-hooking and bleeding were associated with J-hooks relative to circle hooks. We conclude that empirical evidence is sufficient to promote circle hook use in almost all hook-and-line fishery sectors that typically interact with istiophorids. However, billfish conservation benefits will only be realized if fishers use unmodified circle hooks, commit to releasing live fish and take other appropriate measures which maximize post-release survival. While there may be fishing modes where circle hook effects are negative, for billfish conservation, we recommend managers grant exceptions to circle hook use only when experimental results support such a practice.     

Reflections on the influence of a synthesis of circle‐hook evidence on the angling community and conservation policy and practice

1. Understanding how different forms of environmental evidence inform the actions of different stakeholders is useful to improve how we share knowledge with knowledge users. Reflections on a literature review that we published in 2004 on circle hooks as a tool for fish conservation in the recreational fishing sector identified a number of ways in which that synthesis was influential.
2. The article has had direct influence on policy and regulations in a number of countries, but there were even more examples of where the article has been used to influence voluntary guidelines. The article also contributed to formally defining circle hooks, which was necessary from a regulatory and enforcement perspective.
3. The recreational fishing community has also embraced the work, with numerous angling articles based on the literature review appearing in the media and with some angler organizations pushing for the adoption of circle hooks. The fishing tackle industry has also responded with evidence that circle hooks are now more widely available in stores with more hook design options to suit diverse recreational fisheries. In addition, the influence of the article has extended beyond the recreational sector to commercial fishery issues that span several taxa. The research agenda from the article helped to direct research for more than a decade and has since been updated.
4. Overall, this review was timely in that it provided various knowledge users with credible information synthesized in a thoughtful manner at a time when there was interest and need in exploring circle hooks as a tool to enhance the conservation of angled fish. Although this was not a systematic review, it still served as a form of evidence synthesis that gave diverse knowledge users information to guide them in their decisions.

     

Capture time,size and hooking mortality of bottom longline-caught sharks

The primary gear type used to harvest coastal sharks in the U.S. Atlantic shark fishery is bottom longline. Recent stock assessments have found several species of coastal sharks in U.S. Atlantic Ocean waters have declined from 60% to 80% of virgin levels. To aid in stock rebuilding, alternative gear restriction measures such as reduced soak time, restrictions on the length of gear, and fishing depth restrictions have been considered but not implemented. In order to evaluate the effectiveness of some of these management measures, controlled experiments were performed using hook timers and time depth recorders, assessing the factors affecting mortality during longline capture for the four most abundant species that incurred at-vessel mortality: sandbar (Carcharhinus plumbeus), blacktip (Carcharhinus limbatus), bull (Carcharhinus leucas), and blacknose (Carcharhinus acronotus). Our results indicate that as hook time and shark size increased mortality rates for the sandbar and blacktip sharks increased. Predicted models indicated mortality rates increased steadily for the three species but appeared to increase the most after 10, 6, and 1 h on the hook for sandbar, blacktip and blacknose shark, respectively. Sandbar sharks larger than approximately 170 cm FL are more susceptible to hooking mortality. Blacknose shark mortality rates increased as hook time increased but bull shark mortality rates were not affected by any factor. The probability of a hook being bitten increased the most between 5 and 12 h after the fishing gear had been set and the mean amount of time hooks were in the water prior to being bitten was 4, 5 and 9 h for sandbar and blacknose sharks, blacktip, and bull sharks, respectively. A significant difference was found between these means for sandbar and bull sharks and between blacknose and bull sharks. Shark species were commonly caught at different temperature and depth ranges. These results could be used by fisheries management to implement restrictions of fishing depth and soak time to aid in the recovery of coastal sharks species.     

Mortality of Diplodus annularis and Lithognathus mormyrus released by recreational anglers: implications for recreational fisheries management

Abstract  The factors affecting mortality in Diplodus annularis (L.) and Lithognathus mormyrus (L.) caught and released in a recreational fishery in the Balearic Islands (NW Mediterranean) were examined. A total of 194 and 214 specimens of each species, respectively, were caught and individually monitored in containment tanks for 10 days. The circumstances of the catch, such as capture depth, water temperature, fish size, hook type, hook location, bleeding, unhooking time and cutting the hook line were tested with a logistic regression model. Diplodus annularis experienced moderate rates of mortality (15%), and only deep-hooking was a significant predictor of death. The incidence of undersized fish for this species was 48%. By contrast, L. mormyrus exhibited higher mortality rates (33%) with over 90% of the catch under the minimum legal size. Deep-hooking was the strongest predictor of mortality. When circle hooks were used, or if the line was cut when the fish were deep-hooked, mortality was considerably reduced. Strategies, such as promoting the use of more selective gears that reduce the capture of undersized fish and implementing gentler release techniques, should be considered in managing these species.     

Reducing sea turtle by-catch in pelagic longline fisheries

Reducing by‐catch of sea turtles in pelagic longline fisheries, in concert with activities to reduce other anthropogenic sources of mortality, may contribute to the recovery of marine turtle populations. Here, we review research on strategies to reduce sea turtle by‐catch. Due to the state of management regimes in most longline fisheries, strategies to reduce turtle interactions must not only be effective but also must be commercially viable. Because most research has been initiated only recently, many results are not yet peer‐reviewed, published or readily accessible. Moreover, most experiments have small sample sizes and have been conducted over only a few seasons in a small number of fisheries; many study designs preclude drawing conclusions about the independent effect of single factors on turtle by‐catch and target catch rates; and few studies consider effects on other by‐catch species. In the US North Atlantic longline swordfish fishery, 4.9‐cm wide circle hooks with fish bait significantly reduced sea turtle by‐catch rates and the proportion of hard‐shell turtles that swallowed hooks vs. being hooked in the mouth compared to 4.0‐cm wide J hooks with squid bait without compromising commercial viability for some target species. But these large circle hooks might not be effective or economically viable in other longline fisheries. The effectiveness and commercial viability of a turtle avoidance strategy may be fishery‐specific, depending on the size and species of turtles and target fish and other differences between fleets. Testing of turtle avoidance methods in individual fleets may therefore be necessary. It is a priority to conduct trials in longline fleets that set gear shallow, those overlapping the most threatened turtle populations and fleets overlapping high densities of turtles such as those fishing near breeding colonies. In addition to trials using large 4.9‐cm wide circle hooks in place of smaller J and Japan tuna hooks, other fishing strategies are under assessment. These include: (i) using small circle hooks (≤ 4.6‐cm narrowest width) in place of smaller J and Japan tuna hooks; (ii) setting gear below turtle‐abundant depths; (iii) single hooking fish bait vs. multiple hook threading; (iv) reducing gear soak time and retrieval during daytime; and (v) avoiding by‐catch hotspots through fleet communication programmes and area and seasonal closures.     

Comparing the effects of offset and non‐offset circle hooks on catch rates of fish and sea turtles in a shallow longline fishery

• 1. This study compared the catch rates of targeted dolphinfish or mahimahi (Coryphaena hippurus), and sea turtles and other fish bycatch in a shallow‐set Costa Rican longline fishery using 14/0 circle hooks with and without a 10° offset. The effect of hook offset on hooking location and injury in captured sea turtles, specifically if the hooking was external, in the mouth, or in the esophagus was also evaluated.
• 2. Results were compared from six trips totalling 33 876 hooks with squid (Dosidicus gigas) used as bait. In total, mahimahi catch‐per‐unit‐effort (CPUE, expressed as number caught per 1000 hooks) was similar between hook types (CPUE～52).
• 3. Olive ridley sea turtles (Lepidochelys olivacea) were caught on all 42 sets. In total, 640 olive ridley turtles were caught and released alive. There were no significant differences in the number of sea turtles caught between hooks with and without an offset (CPUE～19) nor between hook type and anatomical hooking location, suggesting similar levels of injury for turtles caught on each hook type.
• 4. These data suggest that a 10° offset on 14/0 circle hooks does not confer any selective advantages over hooks with no offset with respect to capture rates of mahimahi, sea turtles, sharks, or pelagic stingrays in a shallow set pelagic longline fishery. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

     

Catch rate and at‐vessel mortality of circle hooks versus J‐hooks in pelagic longline fisheries: A global meta‐analysis

We conducted a meta‐analysis of literature reporting on the use of circle hooks and J‐hooks in pelagic longline fisheries. Our study included more data than previous meta‐analyses of the effects of hook type, due to both a larger number of relevant studies available in recent years and a more general modelling approach. Data from 42 empirical studies were analysed using a random effects model to compare the effects of circle hooks and J‐hooks on catch rate (43 species) and at‐vessel mortality (31 species) of target and bycatch species. Catch rates with circle hooks were greater for 11 species, including four tuna species, six shark species and one Istiophorid billfish. Catch rates on circle hooks were lower for seven species, including two Istiophorid billfishes and two species of sea turtle. At‐vessel mortality was significantly lower with circle hooks in 12 species, including three tuna species, three Istiophorid billfishes, swordfish (Xiphias gladius) and three shark species. No species had significantly greater at‐vessel mortality when captured with a circle hook rather than a J‐hook. While our general approach increased model variability compared to more detailed studies, results were consistent with trends identified in previous studies that compared the catch rates and at‐vessel mortality (between hook types) for a number of species. Our results suggest that circle hooks can be a promising tool to reduce mortality of some bycatch species in pelagic longline fisheries, although the effects depend on the species and the metric (catch rate or at‐vessel mortality), emphasizing the need for fishery‐specific data in conservation and management decisions.     

Mortality associated with catch and release of striped bass in the Hudson River

Catch‐and‐release fishing has increased in many fisheries, but its contribution to fishing mortality is rarely estimated. This study estimated catch and release mortality rates of striped bass, Morone saxatilis (Walbaum), for the spring recreational fishery in the Hudson River. Treatment fish (caught with live bait on spinning gear) and control fish (captured by electric fishing) were placed in in situ holding pens for 5 days. Mortality rates were estimated using conditional instantaneous mortality rates and additive finite mortality rates. Influences of variables (playing and handling time, hook location, degree of bleeding and fish length) on hooking mortality rates were examined by logistic regression. Conditional instantaneous mortality rates and additive finite mortality rates were 31 and 28%, respectively. Hook location significantly affected the survival of striped bass. Angling catch, effort, and release rates must be integrated with associated hooking mortality rates before this component of overall population mortality can be incorporated into management decisions.     

What makes fish vulnerable to capture by hooks? A conceptual framework and a review of key determinants

Considerable time and money are expended in the pursuit of catching fish with hooks (e.g., handlining, angling, longlining, trolling, drumlining) across the recreational, commercial and subsistence fishing sectors. The fish and other aquatic organisms (e.g., squid) that are captured are not a random sample of the population because external (e.g., turbidity) and underlying internal variables (e.g., morphology) contribute to variation in vulnerability to hooks. Vulnerability is the probability of capture for any given fish in a given location at a given time and mechanistically explains the population‐level catchability coefficient, which is a fundamental and usually time‐varying (i.e., dynamic) variable in fisheries science and stock assessment. The mechanistic drivers of individual vulnerability to capture are thus of interest to fishers by affecting catch rates, but are also of considerable importance to fisheries managers whenever hook‐and‐line‐generated data contribute to stock assessments. In this paper, individual vulnerability to hooks is conceptualized as a dynamic state, in which individual fish switch between vulnerable and invulnerable states as a function of three interdependent key processes: an individual fish's internal state, its encounter with the gear, and the characteristics of the encountered gear. We develop a new conceptual framework of “vulnerability,” summarize the major drivers of fish vulnerability, and conclude that fish vulnerability involves complex processes. To understand vulnerability, a shift to interdisciplinary research and the integration of ecophysiology, fish ecology, fisheries ecology and human movement ecology, facilitated by new technological developments, is required.     

Are circle hooks effective management measures in the pelagic longline fishery for sharks in the Gulf of Gabès?

1. This study evaluated the circle hook use as a tool for shark management in the pelagic longline fishery in the Gulf of Gabès.
2. The usual J‐hook No. 2 with 10° offset, which has been traditionally used by the fishery, was compared to the 18/0 non‐offset circle hook in an alternating fashion along the main line. In total, 22 experimental longline sets were deployed through the shark fishing seasons of 2016 and 2017 to examine the effects of hook types on the catch composition, the catch rates, the hooking location, and the status at haulback.
3. The catch composition differed significantly among hook types. Moreover, an overall increase in catch rates for the main species, the sandbar shark Carcharhinus plumbeus, and the shortfin mako shark Isurus oxyrinchus, was observed when using circle hooks.
4. There was no size‐selective effect of circle hooks for the common species. The circle hooks were not effective at reducing at‐haulback mortality of sandbar shark. Conversely, shortfin mako and smooth‐hound shark Mustelus mustelus showed significantly lower relative mortality at haulback with circle hooks than with J‐hooks. Furthermore, circle hooks were more frequently hooked externally than the J‐hooks for the three shark species.
5. Results demonstrated that the use of 18/0 non‐offset circle hooks in the pelagic shark longline fishery can reduce mortality at haulback for some species without any benefit for the dominant species, the sandbar shark.
6. Overall, it is difficult to promote the adoption of the use of circle hooks as a management measure in this specialized fishery. Management measures focusing on fishing effort controls, fishing closures in critical habitats, and size limits could have significant benefits for the conservation of shark species and may help to improve the sustainability of the shark fishery in the Gulf of Gabès.