Our results indicate that consistency in methodology and relevance with respect to mimicking actual fishing stresses for the RAMP approach increases the flexibility of RAMP. It is therefore important, when creating a RAMP, to create repeatable methods that are well documented when publishing. RAMP reflexes should be assessed in a specified order to prevent bias from reflexes that are physiologically linked. If there is a reflex that influences the determination of other reflexes it should be assessed last or not at all. Reflexes that are difficult to determine presence or absence should not be used, and it should be clear in the methods what constitutes an “absent” reflex and how immediate mortalities are treated (are they given a Score or classified separately?). In addition, when a RAMP is being created, data should be recorded on all possible stressors, including injury, and evaluated for their contribution to mortality. Moreover, effort should be made (within the logistical constraints of field and laboratory research) to minimize additional stressors that are unrelated to the fishing stressors of interest.
Despite the incomplete flexibility that we discovered when comparing RAMPs for the Discard- and Unobserved-mortality studies, we feel RAMP is a powerful and effective methodology for estimating and evaluating bycatch mortality. With improved understanding of this methodology, RAMP will be increasingly useful as a tool for quantifying discard mortality and consequently promoting fisheries sustainability.