|
I have a question about ethics that I encountered yesterday on the Fraser. A guy hooked a spring around 20 lbs. It was obvious by the way his rod was moving that it was foul hooked. After a 25 minute tussle, he actually got it to shore, and I helped him net it. Sure enough, after seeing the fish being dragged in backwards, the hook was firmly lodged in a hole that was meant to have things coming out of it, not in. Then, I quickly proceeded to take the fish out of the net and put in back in the water to try to revive it, as it had taken a terrible beating. The guy who caught it asked me what I was doing, and I explained that the fish was badly foul hooked, and he could not keep it. He did not have a problem with that,(I don't know if he knew the regs) but I wonder, did I do the right thing? We all know that keeping foul hooked fish is wrong, but is was the decision for him to keep it up to me, or between him and his scruples? I want to know what the proper course of action is, as I am sure I will run into this situation again.
|
|
<15223>
I think you did the right thing Mark by noting the regulations and encouraging him to release the fish. Its a tough choice to release a badly stressed fish only to know that it will not likely make it to spawning. I guess what we also have to consider is what would have the least impact on the fish (and I know that someone will jump all over me for this). What would be better for the fishery? To harvest a fish that we are pretty confident will not make it to the spawning grounds and then quit fishing for the day, or release it and continue to fish and hook many sockeye looking for that elusive fair hooked spring. Its a tough question that I am not sure I could honestly take the high road on. Cheers
|
|
<15238>
Slippery slope indeed !!! I think the only choice is to follow the regs. As soon as we start trying to make judgement calls on our own then every ding-dong on the river is going to start keeping everything they hook.
|
|
<15274>
Yes, sometimes you wonder seeing someone fight a foul hooked fish for 20 minutes, then trying to release the very tired fish. You wonder if that fish will make it now. But, if foul fish can be kept, I think it will turn into an animal show just like Fishdaddy said. One should be careful when bottom bouncing for springs now that the sockeye are closed. If there are too many sockeye seen caught, perhaps handled poorly at the same time from people trying to catch a spring I could see the whole Fraser closed down during the sockeye run. Why not bar fish for the springs? In 10 years of barfishing, I have seen perhaps half a dozen sockeye caught on a 0 spin glo, compared to hundreds of chinook. Probably should target what you can keep, especially if there is the risk of loosing all salmon fishing oppurtunities if DFO decides that too many sockeye are being caught. Our impact isnt very much either way, but we all know it doesnt take much for us to get the short end of the stick. Just my 2 cents.
|
|
<15299>
You must release the fish. If hooked in the tail break it off quickly. It seems that the officers out there don't care that the fish might not make it. A buddy was fishing up from Ferry Island last week and hooked a sockeye. When he got it in he realized that it was fouled hooked and bleeding. He could of let it go because he always catches his fish but made a judgement call and decided to keep it due to it wouldn't survive. It was his second fish and he quit. A guy (Officer) five rods up set his rod down and wrote him up for keeping a fouled hooked fish. $150. Too bad it happened to a nice guy and not one of the idiots that are always doing it. OH Well, He looked at it as a donation to the cause. So don't make judgement calls and do as the regs say. Cheers, Mars
|
|
<15301>
The right thing to do was to release the fish as the regulations say that you have to. By helping the guy land the fish you automatically became responsible (an accessory)to its subsequent treatment. Steve, you raise an interesting question as to what is in the best interest for the fish. The fraser sockeye fishery (and spring for that matter) is unique in that most of the fishing takes place in the section of the fraser close to the ocean. Most of the fish must travel long distances to their native streams and of course through some of the toughest sections of river that any fish will ever encounter (hells gate etc..) Essentially they need every ounce of strength and energy just to make it back. A coho hooked and released on the vedder has a much better chance at surviving to spawn than a fraser fish does. Since mortalities could become quite high, maybe reducing the amount of releasing and adopting other rules would be better. i.e. like, - Allowing a three fish daily limit with a one day possession limit (all species combined.) - Once you get your limit, you must stop fishing (no handing off to your grandma, etc...) - During periods when sockeye are closed, allow only one spring (of any size) and eliminate the "i'm fishing for my mythical jack spring" that seems to go on I consider the Fraser Sockeye and spring fishery not really as "sportsfishing" in the truest sense. It should really be called a "recreational fishery" providing anglers a chance to harvest some tasty fish. any thoughts?
|
|
<15328>
I think a foul hooked fish that is in rough shape and to exhausted to make it should be kept, but I also think the salmon season on the Bowron river should be longer. So basically, Whatever the regs tell me, I'm gonna do. It is a tough call, but we basically have no say in the matter so I guess all you can do is give the fish lots of time to get it's steam back, handle it carefully, and hope for the best. Tight Lines Dan
|
|
<15337>
The truth is, it is a meat fishery, but we don't want to let ourselves call it that. To be honest, as much as I don't like it, I think maybe a special exemption could be made for the Fraser sockeye fishery (all 12 days of it). The point that if a fish is stressed, released and dies and the angler goes on to keep his limit anyways, an extra fish has died needlessly. If the focus of conservational efforts is to protect the fish species, then it would seem like the sensible approach would be to keep the foul hooked fish and save one fishes life.(I can almost feel the flogging already) Of course this will open the doors wide open for intentional snagging, which at all costs should not be promoted. I just feel that in the event that such an occurance should happen, the interest of the fish should be considered before our pride. I like the ideas that Duane brought up, especially having to stop fishing after keeping your limit. Also, if fines for things like intentional snagging were increased to be a big deterance, possibly the activity would taper. How do we define intentional though?
|
|
<15341>
"slip Sliding Away ......." "Slip Slidding Away......." How many inches were in the mile you're all suggesting to take ?
|