Release wild-caught captive-reared eels to re-establish or boost native populations ('head-starting')
-
Overall effectiveness category Evidence not assessed
-
Number of studies: 5
View assessment score
Hide assessment score
How is the evidence assessed?
-
Effectiveness
not assessed -
Certainty
not assessed -
Harms
not assessed
Study locations
Supporting evidence from individual studies
A study in 1980–1994 at two lakes in southeast Sweden (Wickström et al. 1996) reported that 2–11% of wild-caught captive-reared European eels Anguilla anguilla were recaptured over 13 years after release. In one of the two lakes (399 ha, 1.5 m deep), 5,959 of 52,945 translocated eels (11%) were recaptured, most of which were migrating silver eels. In the other lake (299 ha, 18 m deep), 619 of 31,134 translocated eels (2%) were recaptured, most of which were yellow eels. In January–February 1980, European glass eels were imported from a French island and captive-reared for seven months before being released in two previously eel-free lakes (124–156 elvers/ha). In 1980–1994, eels were recaptured in mesh traps at the lake outlets and in 3–8 fyke nets (each 10-m long with two traps) at 2–4 sites/lake (frequency of monitoring not reported).
Study and other actions testedA replicated study in 2005–2010 at five lakes in Brandenburg, Germany (Simon & Dörner 2014) found that 8–17% of released wild-caught captive-reared European eels Anguilla anguilla survived after 3–6 years and were a similar size to translocated wild glass eels after 5–6 years. After 3–6 years, the percentage of eels surviving in each lake was estimated to be 8–17% for wild-caught captive-reared eels and 5–45% for translocated wild eels (difference not statistically tested). Five and six years after release, wild-caught captive-reared eels had similar average lengths (179–347 mm) to translocated wild glass eels (186–311 mm) in four of five lakes, despite being released at significantly larger sizes (average length: captive-reared = 165 mm; wild = 72 mm). In the other lake, too few eels were recaptured for analysis. Between 2004 and 2007, wild-caught captive-reared eels (55 eels/ha, average 7 g/eel) and translocated wild glass eels (200 eels/ha, average 0.3 g/eel) were released into each of five lakes (<20 ha) on two occasions in April–June. Eels were tagged and marked before release. Captive-reared eels were wild-caught in France as glass eels and reared at commercial eel farms. Wild glass eels were obtained from commercial fisheries in England. The lakes were previously stocked with farmed eels until 1997–2004. In May 2005–2009, each lake was sampled three times by electrofishing from a boat along the shoreline. Captured eels were identified, measured and weighed before being released. Survival rates were estimated from a mark and recapture experiment in April–June 2010.
Study and other actions testedA study in 2001–2011 at a fjord in Denmark (Pedersen & Rasmussen 2016) found that wild-caught captive-reared European eels Anguilla anguilla released at two different sizes had similar mortality rates, and small eels grew faster than large eels. During 3–8 years after release, average annual mortality rates did not differ significantly between captive-reared and released large (64%) and small eels (52%). Released small eels had greater average annual growth rates (52 mm) than large eels (44 mm). During 2–13 years after release, recapture rates of captive-reared and released eels were estimated to be 13% for small eels and 9% for large eels (difference not statistically tested). In July–September 1998 and June–July 1999, European eels of two sizes (large: 8–9 g, total 50,000 eels; small: 3 g, total 274,000 eels) were tagged and released into a brackish fjord (water depths of 1–3 m over vegetation or soft bottom). All eels had been imported as glass eels from France and reared in an aquaculture facility for 3–6 months before release. In 2001–2006, a proportion of commercial fisheries catches (15%) were checked for tagged eels. Recaptured eels were weighed and measured in length. Recapture rates for 2007–2011 were estimated using growth and mortality rates.
Study and other actions testedA replicated study in 2011–2012 at seven ponds in Denmark (Pedersen et al. 2017) found that wild-caught captive-reared European eels Anguilla anguilla were recaptured in greater numbers and grew faster than translocated wild eels, 12 months after release. In each of two experiments, average recapture rates after five months did not differ significantly between translocated wild-caught captive-reared eels (61–73%) and translocated wild eels (53–61%). However, after 12 months, in two ponds in one experiment, wild-caught captive-reared eels had greater recapture rates (66%) than wild eels (52%). Average increases in length over two growing seasons were greater for wild-caught captive-reared eels (1.1–12 cm) than wild eels (0.3–7 cm). In June 2011 and 2012, European eels (50 wild-caught and captive-reared; 50 wild) were tagged and released into each of 6–7 freshwater ponds (192–204 m2). Captive-reared eels (each 3–6 g) were captured in France during the winter before release and reared at a commercial eel farm. Wild eels (each 2–5 g) were captured in a trap at a hydropower station in Denmark. In one experiment, four ponds were drained after five months, and two ponds after 12 months. In the other experiment, all seven ponds were drained after five months. Eels were captured in nets as ponds were drained and weighed and measured in length.
Study and other actions testedA controlled study in 2016–2019 in four rivers in Japan (Wakiya et al. 2022) found that wild-caught captive-reared Japanese eels Anguilla japonica decreased in density, grew less and travelled more than naturally occurring wild eels during two years after release. Overall, average density of wild-caught captive-reared eels declined from 251 eels/ha (average biomass: 7,449 g/ha) at the time of release to 86 eels/ha (average biomass: 2,993 g/ha) three months after release, and 13–14 eels/ha (average biomass: 671–919 g/ha) 6–24 months after release. For wild eels, average density and biomass did not differ significantly over the same two years (overall 0–112 eels/ha, biomass data not reported). Captive-reared eels had lower average daily growth rates (0.04 g/day) and travelled further from release points (500 m upstream to 3,400 m downstream) than captured and tagged wild eels (0.13 g/day, 200 m upstream to 200 m downstream). In June 2017, a total of 1,940 captive-reared eels (wild-caught and reared at an eel farm for six months) were tagged and released at 10 sites in each of four rivers. Wild eels were captured and tagged at the same sites. Captive-reared (total 34 eels) and wild eels (total 26 eels) were recaptured by electrofishing three, six and 24 months after release. Fishing efficiency was used to estimate eel density and biomass.
Study and other actions tested
Where has this evidence come from?
List of journals searched by synopsis
All the journals searched for all synopses

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:
Eel Conservation in Inland Habitats