Fishing with Rod Discussion Forum
Fishing in British Columbia => General Discussion => Topic started by: nosey on September 05, 2015, 09:30:01 AM
-
Even after the DFO has opened the river with the specific request that people refrain from bottom bouncing ( this time they named it not just by calling it a non-selective method) when you drive to Hope and look across the river at snaggy bar (aptly named btw) it looks like there is a full blown sockeye opening on. The other day a friend of mine walked down there to see what was going on and witnessed one person killing a sockeye, when he confronted him the guy pretended he couldn't speak English so he phoned the RAPP line and they told him they were very happy he reported this, however he waited for 2 hours and no CO showed up >:(, I guess they're pretty thinly spread right now.
The other day when walking back from my bar fishing spot I stood on the bank and watched a couple of bottom bouncers beach a sockeye and skid it about 20 ft up the gravel bank and I'm sure that one was destined for the bush too however just as the guy started to bend over the fish I saw his girlfriend point up the bank to where I was standing watching them and they quickly put the fish back in the water.
The DFO has absolutely no mandate whatsoever to keep salmon openings there for the sports fishermen, they are doing us a large favor by allowing us to fish in the river at all with the sockeye in so much danger this year I just do not understand the mentality of the people out there bottom bouncing and actually trying to get the river shut down for those who chose to fish responsibly.
I think it would be a really good move by the guiding association to get there guides together and park rows of boats bar fishing in front of the popular snagging bars to try to prevent this bull ****.
-
Lot's of entitled people thinking only of themselves. They think that a fishing license, is a license to kill(cause they paid for that right, how sad)
-
Personally unless there is a sockeye opening I think bottom bouncing should be banned and a ticket able offense. We would never have problems with run sizes again.
-
I think that all the tackle shops should in good conscience pull all their bottom bouncing gear of the shelves when we are faced with such dire conditions as we are now. There are many others who have back yard tackle manufacturing of bb gear should also start thinking twice about the resource that is putting undeclared income into their pockets.
You know who you are as I've seen your tail gate store fronts at many walk in bars.
-
Some of these (the smarter ones) become politicians. There is nothing new about it. These are the same people that cut you off on the road ,just regular sociopaths.
-
I think the issue remains with the ethics among all anglers and not the method employed. We all should know by now that the biological and economic/political impacts are the biggest threat to our salmon populations and not some rabble tossing weights n wool...
To decipher this rabble from the honest men and women who practice this method properly and the knobs who abuse every damn parameter including the fishing regulations is negligible when considering the broader aspects of this issue entirely.
-
Personally unless there is a sockeye opening I think bottom bouncing should be banned and a ticket able offense. We would never have problems with run sizes again.
Hilarious! Thanks for the laugh
-
Personally unless there is a sockeye opening I think bottom bouncing should be banned and a ticket able offense
Seeing harsher punishments would be great but shouldn't be necessary. We've been given an opening with certain parameters and it's ridiculous that everyone can't just be adults about it. Harvesting is not a right (to most of us). We're sportfishmen, so fish within the regs and recommendations or GTFO.
-
one solution is for anglers who can actually read the regs and understand them to communicate it forcefully to those who won't or can't. Plus say I have a phone and camera and if you kill that fish, your photo will be on the net before you can say boo...
-
The simple fact is that some people (regardless of ethnicity) don't give a damn and don't care.
-
Exactly. The DFO has been requesting 'selective' fishing methods for over ten years now, for all the good it's done. I honestly believe most people will respect the guidelines, but some will do whatever the heck they can as long as its technically legal.
-
Seeing harsher punishments would be great but shouldn't be necessary. We've been given an opening with certain parameters and it's ridiculous that everyone can't just be adults about it. Harvesting is not a right (to most of us). We're sportfishmen, so fish within the regs and recommendations or GTFO.
Why not? Make it a REGULATION. Not a suggestion. Not a request. A rule. Because it would take work to regulate it, but at least then they have a leg to stand on vs this "some anglers didn't follow our requests, so shut down the whole fishery" non sense
-
Why not? Make it a REGULATION. Not a suggestion. Not a request. A rule. Because it would take work to regulate it, but at least then they have a leg to stand on vs this "some anglers didn't follow our requests, so shut down the whole fishery" non sense
DanJohn is right we all know that bottom bouncing leads too higher mortality rates in fish cause they are just being ripped apart and tired out. There are plenty of other ways too fish for springs, pinks, coho, chum. The impact on all the species would be great relieved if people could just be punished for chucking lead at fish. If you think the people bottom bouncing for pinks right now are not snagging sockeye then your crazy. Make it a rule that bottom bouncing is not aloud unless there is a sockeye opening. Hell I don't mind not bouncing at all.
-
DanJohn is right we all know that bottom bouncing leads too higher mortality rates in fish
No what studies have been done on sockeye caught and then released by bottom bouncing have indicated moralities are actually quite low, just 2 % or so
for example to quote from this study:http://www.thinksalmon.com/reports/FraserSockeyeHookReleaseMortality08FSWP175.pdf
The study was conducted using volunteer anglers over 15 days between August 5
and September 2, 2008 at Grassy Bar in the Fraser River. In total, the study
collected and analyzed data from 173 hooked and landed sockeye and 103 sockeye
captured by beach seine as a reference (“control”) group. All sockeye were tagged
and held in net pens for 24-h observation prior to release back into the river. Net
pens were situated in a side channel close to the angling site.
Primary hooking locations were observed to be on the outside of the mouth or body
(88% of all landed sockeye). Of this group, most were specifically hooked in the left
maxillary
bone (75%). Some fish exhibited bleeding at the time of capture (18%).
However, all the fish that were released alive after 24-h showed no signs of bleeding
and all but two fish were released in vigorous condition.
Total mortality was calculated using a simple adjusted (additive finite) method where
the hooking mortality is computed as the difference between the total mortality rate
observed in the hooked group of sockeye and the mortality rate observed in the
reference group. Only two mortalities were witnessed in the study and catch-and-
release mortality was estimated to be 1.2% (95% confidence interval of 0%-4.1%).
The two fish that died were hooked in the dorsal and ventral surface of the body
posterior to the head, respectively. No mortalities were observed in the reference
group.
-
Good to see the study but a 24 hr study period is too short IMO. What matters is spawning success of previously hooked fish. Difficult to study, but whether a fish dies while resting in a holding pen is much different than surviving the stress of migrating and spawning successfully.
-
The study previously mentioned only held fish in a holding area for a short time. I remember reading about another study that indicated that sockeye catches/snags depleted the fish of so much reserve energy that most of them (80% I think it was) didn't have enough energy left to make it to the spawning grounds. I think whether they survive or not in a holding area for 24 hours or so after being caught is irrelevant if most of those fish then can't make it to the spawning grounds afterwards.
-
In addition the short 24 hour hold time, unless the anglers catching these study fish were granted exemptions, these fish were given much gentler treatment than the problem fishers do. The 20 foot drag up the beach is definitely not improving their chances of survival. I'm not saying all by-catch salmon are abused, but I would suggest that the anglers that only know bottom bouncing to catch fish are at the heart of the problem. And like anything else in life, it is usually a small group of people that ruin something for the majority.
This comedy routine by Jim Jefferies comes to mind and if you don't agree with my point, well you might still just have a laugh.
NSFW language
https://youtu.be/zBOk1SnQ8uU?t=11m22s
-
No the radio telemetry study indicated that 70 to 80% were still alive at the farthest radio receiver point which was well up in the canyon. That study compared release techniques - immediate release, release with after 1 minute of air exposure and release after 1 minute of air exposure and then revival. Surprisingly the fish released after 1 minute of air exposure and no revival had the highest survival rate which is counter intuitive. It should note there was no control - ie what is the average mortality of fish that weren't caught and released. We know depending on conditions lots of fish perish on the way... they may just die or be caught by anglers or by 1st nation's fisheries.
here's the link check page 9 (700). http://www.fecpl.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Robinson-et-al-2015-TAFS-paper.pdf
24 hours has been the standard hold period in such studies for about 40 years and studies that held fish (usually trout) longer didn't find any significant mortality after 24 hours.