Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[mike123]

The following are probably stupid questions and ones that have been answered before but I am curious:

 Why is Fraser style bottom bouncing considered recreational fishing? How does sweeping a hook through water differ from other forms of commercial fishing? It isn't by any means selective, and fish are certainly being abused. As such, why a slot limit, let guys keep everything. This leads into the second question.

 Last year, I read an article that fish caught on the Fraser (using said method) survived some 90%. How is it possible that fish in the summer time would have an equal or better rate of survival then those hooked in the winter and caught using far more sporting methods. This makes little sense.

Cheers

[Every Day]

1) Considered rec fishing because it uses a rod and reel, hook and line. People from shore can easily do it and all it is really is a meat fishery.

2) First of all I m not 100% confident in the study. They only held fish for 48 hours I believe, and then released them. This year they radio tagged a bunch in the ocean and will be tracking them, and I also believe will be tagging some of the C and R fish from this study as well.

If it is indeed a 90% survival rate there could be a few reasons. First of all, when bottom bouncing the fish is generally hooked on the outside of the mouth (Maxillary), therefore doing less damage (such as tearing, bleeding, gut hooking, etc) to the fish' mouth. This method has started to be used in fly fishing as well using a slider fly and a trailer hook to get the fish on the side of the mouth, rather than inside. Also, the gear used by bottom bouncers on the Fraser is generally quite heavy, so fish can be brought in quickly without being played out.

Fish taken by a more "sporting method" are generally taken on things like bait, spinners, spoons, etc. In these cases the fish attack or grab the bait deeply and can become bleeders. Often smaller hooks would be used as well to get the "stealth approach" so it is easier for the fish to swallow the hook and get injured.

[funfisher]

Here comes another can of worms. Seems like every year we go through the same debate. Ethical/non ethical. All I can say is legal until told otherwise.

[Fish Assassin]

The following are probably stupid questions and ones that have been answered before but I am curious:

Do you expect different responses this year ? Flossing debate all over again.

[bluesteele]

Hey Mike..Hope all is well 

The study is garbage. It is based on 24hrs. and controlled handling of the fish. The whole problem with flossing is the way these meat fishers
yard the fish up the gravel kick it around and decide whether a rock shower is needed. Poor handling of fish will result in a high mortality rate.

It's why I get upset when I see guys using gloves on steelies. Wrong wrong wrong.

Bluesteele

[chris gadsden]

This will make me popular, but does it matter to a pensioner unless the government cuts my pension off. It is good to be back on the forum after 9 days away with part of it on the ocean. I should write a journal along with the pictures of the trip. 

A note I sent to FOC today about the study after I received the notice of the details of year 3 of this so called study.
 My  e - mail

Thanks for the information even though as you know I feel very strongly against this as this type of activity as it is a blight on the angling community to be taking fish by snagging them which as we all know is how they are taken.

A couple of questions, is there results from last years radio tagging? Maybe it was circulated and I missed it, if so could you send me the information.

Also a couple of us were talking about this study today and we would like to suggest that some chinook are also radio tagged as the stress on these bigger fish must be severe as it so very difficult to land these strong fish with the long leaders that are used to floss the fish, thanks for your consideration to this suggestion.

Kindest regards and thanks for your reply,

Chris

[skaha]

If it is indeed a 90% survival rate there could be a few reasons. First of all, when bottom bouncing the fish is generally hooked on the outside of the mouth (Maxillary), therefore doing less damage (such as tearing, bleeding, gut hooking, etc) to the fish' mouth. This method has started to be used in fly fishing as well using a slider fly and a trailer hook to get the fish on the side of the mouth, rather than inside. Also, the gear used by bottom bouncers on the Fraser is generally quite heavy, so fish can be brought in quickly without being played out.

---one fly method (Moffit).. trailer circle hook.. the hook is only a few inches from the fly that is tied without a hook. the intent is the willful take of the fly resulting in the fish being hooked on the outside of the mouth.

--spey swing of wet fly or swing of bottom bounce.. I don't see the willful take
--I don't see why one cant bottom bounce with short leader and less swing thus allowing the fish to willfully take the lure.

[andychan]

The following are probably stupid questions and ones that have been answered before but I am curious:

That's not nearly as stupid as asking what damage do trucks make when parked in the middle of a salmon stream.

 

[Morty]

The whole problem with flossing is the way these meat fishers yard the fish up the gravel kick it around and decide whether a rock shower is needed. Poor handling of fish will result in a high mortality rate.

With this I totally agree.  It's the fisher's treatment of the fish and not the method of hooking them that's the problem.

When sockeye is open, take your two fish and get off the bar - NO C&R,  NO saying "I'm trying for a Spring" .....  There's plenty of days to fish Springs.

[RA40]

The survival rate according to the study so far is 98.2 %, not 90%.
Just want to clariify.

[chris gadsden]

The survival rate according to the study so far is 98.2 %, not 90%.
Just want to clariify.

The radio tagged results were not as good. (See report. for full details) 45% of all groups combined the report says made it to the Qualark recording station, 66 km upstream. Also other info was, 52.2% of beach seined sockeye tagged and released made it to ? Not sure from the report how far they made it. (Maybe I missed it)
Angled, tagged and released 36.3%  Angled and held in pens for 24 hours then tagged only 2.9% made it to? So these totals are not as rosy as we are made out to believe. I know some would be lost to nets etc. but I also think some donot recover from being played out on such long leaders but that statement is only based on my unscientific thoughts. Thankfully this is supposed to be the last year of the study and I only wished the money paid out to the consultant and other helpers on site could have been used for habitat restoration projects instead.

[alwaysfishn]

The radio tagged results were not as good. (See report. for full details) 45% of all groups combined the report says made it to the Qualark recording station, 66 km upstream. Also other info was, 52.2% of beach seined sockeye tagged and released made it to ? Not sure from the report how far they made it. (Maybe I missed it)
Angled, tagged and released 36.3%  Angled and held in pens for 24 hours then tagged only 2.9% made it to? So these totals are not as rosy as we are made out to believe. I know some would be lost to nets etc. but I also think some donot recover from being played out on such long leaders but that statement is only based on my unscientific thoughts. Thankfully this is supposed to be the last year of the study and I only wished the money paid out to the consultant and other helpers on site could have been used for habitat restoration projects instead.

Can you post a link to the report?

[chris gadsden]

Can you post a link to the report?

Just caught this, have sent to you now. Sorry for the delay.

[alwaysfishn]

Just caught this, have sent to you now. Sorry for the delay.

Thanks Chris.  I guess they plan on putting it on to the web site shortly.  I'll read it over later today.

[liketofish]

The radio tagged results were not as good. (See report. for full details) 45% of all groups combined the report says made it to the Qualark recording station, 66 km upstream. Also other info was, 52.2% of beach seined sockeye tagged and released made it to ? Not sure from the report how far they made it. (Maybe I missed it)
Angled, tagged and released 36.3%  Angled and held in pens for 24 hours then tagged only 2.9% made it to? So these totals are not as rosy as we are made out to believe. I know some would be lost to nets etc. but I also think some donot recover from being played out on such long leaders but that statement is only based on my unscientific thoughts. Thankfully this is supposed to be the last year of the study and I only wished the money paid out to the consultant and other helpers on site could have been used for habitat restoration projects instead.

Sockeyes don't fight as hard as springs. In fact sockeyes usually made a few head shakes, then they simply follow the pull of the line until they are near shore. Most of us experienced in bouncing can tell within seconds if the hooked fish is a sockeye or a spring, even a small spring. Sockeyes don't dispense lots of energy until they are pulled in for the hook release. They will make a few short runs or leaps, and then they can be tamed enough for release. I don't know how you can justify a long leader being harmful to sockeye compared to a sockeye hooked by bar fishing having to pull that lb of lead during the fight. It is always other people's ways are the wrong ways while your own is beyond reproach.