Catch-and-release (C&R), whether via regulations or voluntary actions, is typically employed with the intent of reducing ­fishing mortality while maintaining recreational angling opportunities (Isermann & Paukert, 2010), but there has been significant discourse about the relative importance of individual-level (see Cooke et al., 2025) vs. population-level (see Corsi et al., 2025) effects of C&R. We hope to offer the angling, scientific, and management communities some points of consensus from which this multifaceted dialogue on C&R can productively build. We preface this by noting that our collective views were informed by this process and the opportunity to share and learn from each other. What is apparent from this exercise is the value of embracing a holistic, cooperative approach.

From a regulatory perspective, C&R is typically implemented in high-effort fisheries that are popular due to the quality of the fishing. Catch-and-release regulations are also applied in fisheries where populations have declined and fishing mortality is thought or, most appropriately, known to be a limiting factor for the population. When practiced voluntarily, anglers engaging in C&R can be characterized by high avidity and specialization, and angling is often a central component of their identity (e.g., Fisher, 1997). Due to their passion, avid anglers tend to spotlight the ethical, scientific, and regulatory considerations of C&R. As such, there is a need in fisheries management and science to understand in what situations these considerations transcend biological scales and how to navigate the gamut of voluntary actions and regulatory mandates. In this essay, we offer a distillation of the emergent consensus concepts that we hope managers and researchers will consider at both individual and population scales for legal, ethical, and scientific deliberations.