Do protected areas mitigate the effects of fisheries-induced evolution on parental care behaviour of a recreationally-important teleost fish?

Human-induced selection on animals and plants has been highly influential throughout our history and resulted in both intentional benefits and unintended detriments. Fisheries-induced evolution (FIE) describes the unintended selection on wild fish populations by fishing that has resulted in the evolution of exploited populations. While the use of aquatic protected areas that exclude angling might be considered an evolutionarily-enlightened management approach to dealing with issues arising from FIE little is known about the effectiveness of this approach for maintaining the phenotypic diversity of traits in protected areas versus those outside of their boundaries. In species that exhibit parental care, including the largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides), active nest guarding and aggression towards potential brood predators by males increases the survival of offspring. This aggression may render these individuals particularly vulnerable to capture via angling as a result of increased propensity to attack fishing lures near their nests. Relative levels of aggression by these males during the parental care period correlate with their vulnerability to angling year round. Inasmuch as this parental behavior is heritable, this selective removal of more aggressive individuals by anglers should drive population-average phenotypes towards lower levels of aggression. To assess the effectiveness of protected areas at mitigating FIE, I compared the nest guarding behaviours of wild, free-swimming male bass during the early nesting period for bass within and outside protected areas. I found that nesting males within long-standing fishing sanctuaries (>70 yrs) were more aggressive towards captive bluegill sunfish (Lepomis macrochirus) placed directly on their nests, and patrolled larger areas around their nests compared to bass outside of sanctuaries. Males within protected areas were more likely to strike at artificial fishing lures and more prone to capture during experimental angling events. Collectively, my findings suggest that recreational angling selects for individual bass with lower levels of parental care and aggression, and that the establishment of protected areas may mitigate potential FIE. The extent to which this phenomenon occurs in other species and systems likely depends on the reproductive strategies of the fishes being considered, their spatial ecology relative to sanctuary boundaries, and habitat quality within protected areas.

Biological Impacts and Uses of Black Bass Competitive Fishing Tournaments on Large Lake Systems

Recreational fisheries in North America are valued between $47.3 billion and $56.8 billion. Fisheries managers must make strategic decisions based on sound science and knowledge of population ecology, to effectively conserve populations. Competitive fishing, in the form of tournaments, has become an important part of recreational fisheries, and is common on large waterbodies including the Great Lakes. Black Bass, Micropterus spp., are top predators and among the most sought after species in competitive catch-and-release tournaments. This study investigated catch-and-release tournaments as an assessment tool through mark-recapture for Largemouth Bass (>305mm) populations in the Tri Lakes, and Bay of Quinte, part of the eastern basin of Lake Ontario. The population in the Tri Lakes (1999-2002) was estimated to be stable between 21,928-29,780, and the population in the Bay of Quinte (2012-2015) was estimated to be between 31,825-54,029 fish. Survival in the Tri Lakes varied throughout the study period, from 31%-54%; while survival in the Bay of Quinte remained stable at 63%. Differences in survival may be due to differences in fishing pressure, as 34-46% of the Largemouth Bass population on the Tri Lakes is harvested annually and only 19% of catch was attributed to tournament angling. Many biological issues still surround catch-and-release tournaments, particularly concerning displacement from initial capture sites. In the past, the majority of studies have focused on small inland lakes and coastal areas, displacing bass relatively short distances. My study displaced Largemouth and Smallmouth Bass up to 100km, and found very low rates of return; only 1 of 18 Largemouth Bass returned 15 km and 1 of 18 Smallmouth Bass returned 135 km. Both species remained near the release sites for an average of approximately 2 weeks prior to dispersing. Tournament organizers should consider the use of satellite release locations to facilitate dispersal and prevent stockpiling at the release site. Catch-and-release tournaments proved to be a valuable tool in assessing population variables and the effects of long distance displacement through the use of mark recapture and acoustic telemetry on large lake systems.