Fishing with Rod Discussion Forum
Fishing in British Columbia => Fishing-related Issues & News => Topic started by: Driller on November 14, 2010, 10:34:48 AM
-
While fishing the Vedder earlier in the season, my friend and I were amazed at how many people use a 10 ft leader. Not going to say exactly what we saw, but it seems that a large number of anglers are using really long leaders to hook fish. He says, unless they impose a maximum leader length we're going to have to put up with the gong show. I agree. I think that a leader longer than 3 feet is not required, to catch fish. In fact most times, once you exceed the 3 foot length you are more less flossing. I personally use a leader 16-20 inches.
Do people mostly agree? Or should I simmer down?
-
A leader length restriction is no good without proper education on now to fish. Fishing is a form of hunting and there is a course needed before you're issued a hunting license, it should be the same for a fishing license. If you ever fish near cement slab or other areas with pocket water look for the anglers who are always fighting fish, they're using leaders 8-16" long in the pockets so what good would a 3' leader restriction be then for that?
-
I don't understand your question. They are using an 8-16 inch leader and what good would a 3' leader restriction do? It wouldn't affect anyone who fishes with a leader less than 3 feet long. A mandatory course would be good. Just like hunters have to take.
-
I'm saying that a long leader isn't needed to floss or snag fish. In the lower or mid where there's flat wide runs a long leader would be better as you "sweep" it across the run like bottom bouncing for sockeye in the fraser. A short leader of 8-16" is better in fast pocket water as it gets down in the face of the fish faster where it can then be flossed or snagged. So a 3' leader restriction will do nothing to fix the pocket rippers at all, if anything all the snaggers from the lower and mid will now become pocket rippers. The only good thing to fix the problem of snagging and flossing would be education and enforcement. How about the fly fishers with a 3' leader restriction? Sure their leader could be 2 1/2' long but their fly line could still be used to floss fish still. You could make all sorts of tackle restrictions and none will fix the actions of anglers, the only one that will is a training course and enforcement.
-
Very interesting. Thanks for clarifying.
-
--agree leader length is not the problem as can floss or snag with no leader.
--I guess over all a kill quota by geographic location... kill quota would include reasonable % of catch and release as we know some released fish die... also depending on how hooked and released.
--again any method which does not have a reliable method for enforcement will not work.
--for those who cannot stomach it... maybe snag kill quota different time of day or portion of the selective harvest season
-
I don't see much of a problem with it..... The vedder gets large if not the largest runs of all the rivers in the lower-mainland so who cares. It's a harvest for some and for others it's a sport. The sorties seem to think that what they enjoy should be what other must do and I don't agree with that. Under the exact same argument the PETA group says the fishermen are barbaric and they are right... We don't need the meat as we can get protein from else wheres... And the C&R guys are doing nothing more than torturing fish for their own amusement.... and they seem to like to do so on runs that are not hatchery and wild and in reality should be left alone... But they seem to think they are special. ::)
And people seem to keep implying that hunting is sporting and, blah, blah, blah,.... they shoot the animal from large distances as it is a harvest. Now if a guy went out with a knife and took an animal on then I would call that sporting, but all other mean is no different than flossing... Even bow hunters sometimes sit and wait to take a "sucker shot" with out the animal not even having a chance.... And I have no problem with that as it is a harvest, NO C&R there.
The fact is those who preach that it is unethical are hypocrites and nothing more!
Now I personally don't floss much any more as I enjoy knowing that they bite and I do fairly well, but the odd time when it is called for I'll also floss. I won't however floss unless there is a decent sized run and most likely I'll be keeping the fish and usually it is a last resort as conditions may be difficult for what ever reason.
Flossing on small flows is unfortunate but that is the human nature. :-\ But if there were lots of fish it'd be no problem...
Snagging is not flossing and is wrong!
It blows me away when people, and I won't name names, but think that flossing is so unethical and choose to bait fish (which I find can result in death due to deep hooking of wild fish) preach how bad flossing is yet go and hunt??? ::) ::) ::) I'm sure they would be up in arms if some one tried to shoot a fish for food, LOL. Now if they went out with a rod and bait (bark, leafs, what ever land creatures eat) then they would have a leg to stand on... but they don't. ::)
Rec fisher have little impact on the numbers VS the commercial guys who are far less "ethical" than the people who floss.
The real problems here is over fishing and usually this is the result of commercial fisheries. Flossers are consuming a local food source, but commercial/some FN guys are exploiting our local foods source for greedy cash!!!
And we also have a government that is putting less and less money into our resources (look at hatchery numbers from the 80's to now, it is declining on some rivers) as I believe they have an opposite agenda.... no fish in the rivers would mean that it would be far easier to dam them which would result in more hydro electricity they could produce in which would grow the economy and put money into the hands of the social elite (the ones who run the show).
No fish = no fishermen = no one to speak up when they want to dam and destroy rivers...
Fishery's are a management nightmare and don't add much to the over Canadian economy. In fact, I "think" that fish farms actually add more to the over all economy than natural runs... no enforcement, more stuff purchased (tax paid), etc....
I say simmer down.... enjoy what you have... as our government will soon destroy it....
-
Very thoughfull post Doja,good on you for putting it out there.
-
it's a slippery slope. by labelling any fishery a "harvest fishery" imo gives the wrong impression.
we have laws and regulations for a reason, unless you are following the laws as written, you are poaching imo....
I don't know, there's just something about the word "harvest" that seems...unstustainable to me and it opens the door to excusing and allowing ANY fishing methods. i can see it now "I'm harvesting these cohos, so why can't I keep this one that's hooked in the tail"?
-
it's a slippery slope. by labelling any fishery a "harvest fishery" imo gives the wrong impression.
Then should we eliminate all quotas if it's not a harvest... wait then there will be no hatchery fish.....so only a few wild are present.... now are you going to molest these "few" wild fish just for kicks, LOL.
we have laws and regulations for a reason, unless you are following the laws as written, you are poaching imo....
Well duh, breaking the law is breaking the law. A little history lesson though... The nazis while killing jews were following their masters "law". Were they right in doing so... of course not but they were following the law, so just because it's a law doesn't make it right.... Just saying. ;)
Making more rules is not going to change the situation. More fish makes fishing easier. Less fish makes the fishing harder in which people probably will just floss more... And I don't see where you got from my post that harvesting leads to poaching. But in any event poachers are a drop in the bucket compared to commercial boats. I still don't think poaching is right but I don't think it is the main problem the fishery faces
I don't know, there's just something about the word "harvest" that seems...unsustainable to me and it opens the door to excusing and allowing ANY fishing methods. i can see it now "I'm harvesting these cohos, so why can't I keep this one that's hooked in the tail"?
Umm, Netting the river from side to side is exactly what you describe but is completely legal. During sockeye season I have never seen so many boats in such a small river ( the Fraser look small with all the boats LOL) and do you have any idea how many more fish they took VS rec fishers.....sure a few fish were snagged and coho/steel-head were accidentally and probably purposely keep but I wonder how many found their way into a drift net
It is a harvest if their is a quota. But how a fishing boat is allowed such a large number of fish is insane. I think they should have to follow the same rules as us... 4 fish a day but as a commercial guy you can sell them. But that is not the case and is why we have less fish than in the past. Now keep fish at the minimal level.... kinda like having a credit card and paying the minimum.... not wise!!!!
A well respected member of another site said it best.... I'd rather see a river full of fish and people flossing and enjoying them self's than a river void of fish and fishermen...
I personally think that the fishing community is a joke!!! They bicker amongst them self about how the other is fishing while the commercial guys rape and pillage "un-ethically". ::)
Thanks ribolovac02
-
Flossing on the vedder spills over to other flows all to rapidly, that is the problem doja. Uneducated anglers find it as an effective way to fish as they're into multiple fish easily and consistently. Yes the hatchery production levels have dropped in the last 10-20 years, does that now mean that we can turn a blind eye to the law now? Flossing is snagging, snagging is illegal. Simple as that we are not out hunting Jews like brain washed Nazis. There is plenty of info out there to read and learn from about fishing and we are not cut off from society to create different thoughts like back in the early 1900's. Did you know that Americans signed up to go to war against the Nazis with the thoughts that they were actual monsters? Upon confronting the enemy only then did they realize they were fighting other humans.
-
Flossing on the vedder spills over to other flows all to rapidly, that is the problem doja. Uneducated anglers find it as an effective way to fish as they're into multiple fish easily and consistently. Yes the hatchery production levels have dropped in the last 10-20 years, does that now mean that we can turn a blind eye to the law now? Flossing is snagging, snagging is illegal. Simple as that we are not out hunting Jews like brain washed Nazis. There is plenty of info out there to read and learn from about fishing and we are not cut off from society to create different thoughts like back in the early 1900's. Did you know that Americans signed up to go to war against the Nazis with the thoughts that they were actual monsters? Upon confronting the enemy only then did they realize they were fighting other humans.
Care to show me this "documented" fact on paper. I've yet to see someone provide a single piece of evidence proving this. You may "think" so but if what you say is true then how did the sockeye fishery take place as all sockeye are flossed. LOL. Why does DFO ask that people fish selectively when they closed it down. Why didn't they say no flossing.
You spout BS
And please show me how flossing has caused a decline in fish stocks.... You can't!!!
But it is well documented that the commercial fishery has!!!
And just like the yanks, you are lead to believe that other fisher men are the enemy when they are not the real threat. ::) But I've stated my opinion on the fishing community.
And I've yet to hear or see prof that flossing has resulted in lower numbers of fish on smaller flows.... Just a bunch of fishermen getting their panties in a bunch because there are more people on "their" piece of water, LOL.
And did you know that Americans think that when they signed up to fight terror they were really just pawns and sent to fight a political agenda, not terror, LOL tpyical yaks...
And I've taken some political science courses and it is safe to say the general public is not too bright in regards to a lot of things...( this is based on document provided by my teacher on studies done in north America. This is a fact, not my opinion!)
Look at how the government has destroyed, well, everything that nature has to offer, and "we" have done nothing but bicker about petty things!!! ::)
-
Care to show me this "documented" fact on paper. I've yet to see someone provide a single piece of evidence proving this. You may "think" so but if what you say is true then how did the sockeye fishery take place as all sockeye are flossed. LOL. Why does DFO ask that people fish selectively when they closed it down. Why didn't they say no flossing.
You spout BS
And please show me how flossing has caused a decline in fish stocks.... You can't!!!
But it is well documented that the commercial fishery has!!!
And just like the yanks, you are lead to believe that other fisher men are the enemy when they are not the real threat. ::) But I've stated my opinion on the fishing community.
And I've yet to hear or see prof that flossing has resulted in lower numbers of fish on smaller flows.... Just a bunch of fishermen getting their panties in a bunch because there are more people on "their" piece of water, LOL.
And did you know that Americans think that when they signed up to fight terror they were really just pawns and sent to fight a political agenda, not terror, LOL unintelligent yaks...
And I've taken some political science courses and it is safe to say the general public is not too bright...
How about you show us these well documented facts you refer too that commercial fishing and some native guys has caused the decline in OUR fish stocks???
As for your comment on the American military .. Those men have some nards unlike......
Bluesteele
PS I am all for shortening leaders. ;D ;D ;D
-
How about you show us these well documented facts you refer too that commercial fishing and some native guys has caused the decline in OUR fish stocks???
As for your comment on the American military .. Those men have some nards unlike...... CANADIANS HAVE BIGGER NARD'S , me included. ;D
seriously I grew up around Canadian vets from the WW and Canadians are very well respected, more so than Americans... And FYI military (ours and Americans) are in other country's imposing "our will" on their way of life, killing children, women and any one who get in the way. Not a whole lot different than the Nazis... Just a much smaller scale... Who's the "monster" now, LOL.
Bluesteele
PS I am all for shortening leaders. ;D ;D ;D
http://www.sfu.ca/cstudies/science/resources/1273783937.pdf
There's more but you can find these your self.... not hard to do.... try looking at local streams.... it some times very shocking...
Now it would be more correct to say that the government is ultimately responsible but the commercial guys play a bigger part...well... then us.
EDIT: Now your turn.... show me documents that state flossing is destroying ours fish stocks, LOL..... good luck!
-
While I do agree that you can floss with shorter leader lengths in different types of waters, I think another more easily enforced change to the regulation is to perhaps have a maximum hook size?
-
-kokanee bite so I don't see why sockeye wouldn't bite? I expect it would be much more difficult and much more work to actually catch one that bit a lure.
--the harvest is selective as catch and release kills some fish so whatever regulation is in place it is just a way to regulate what is killed vs what gets away. Regulations simply manage escapement.
--we do many things to provide different experiences.... these could be regulated geographically... similar to crosscountry ski trails and snowmobile trails... there are some areas where skiers are banned and some areas where snowmobiles are banned... doesn't mean they can't use the same parking lot.... one heads north one heads south... There will always be people who could not tollorate this and would insist they could not enjoy skiing if they can hear a snowmobile and there will be snowmobilers who will insist they have the right to roar up hills that skiers are coming down.
-
I have no problem with a maximum leader length - but it should not apply to fly fishing since we'll often require a leader longer than 3 feet. ;)
-
I have no problem with a maximum leader length - but it should not apply to fly fishing since we'll often require a leader longer than 3 feet. ;)
I don't know.... On the stave this year I saw lots of people fishing (more so snagging but they probably didn't know it) with single and double hand rods. A leader restriction may have prevented that shameful act from happening...
But on the flip side I saw a lady (who was spey casting very, very well and much better than me) spey fishing with the exact same set up and getting them all in the mouth (not back, fins).
This "rule" would not fly as it doesn't really do much and is too broad to ever be implemented or be effective. :-\
I'm curious, is there any where in the world that has a leader restriction?
-kokanee bite so I don't see why sockeye wouldn't bite? I expect it would be much more difficult and much more work to actually catch one that bit a lure.
--the harvest is selective as catch and release kills some fish so whatever regulation is in place it is just a way to regulate what is killed vs what gets away. Regulations simply manage escapement.
The vedder has seen a 3x increase in returns to the hatchery since 2005. Clearly flossing is not harming the coho stock. NOTE: this only apply s to the vedder
--we do many things to provide different experiences.... these could be regulated geographically... similar to crosscountry ski trails and snowmobile trails... there are some areas where skiers are banned and some areas where snowmobiles are banned... doesn't mean they can't use the same parking lot.... one heads north one heads south... There will always be people who could not tollorate this and would insist they could not enjoy skiing if they can hear a snowmobile and there will be snowmobilers who will insist they have the right to roar up hills that skiers are coming down.
You are so right, skaha. It's more about not wanting to share with other user groups that they don't agree with. This happens in almost every sport. Surfers don't like kayakers, snowboarders don't like skiers, ethical fishermen don't like floss fishermen.
Now it would be kinda alright to see areas designed for a particular style of fishing as different styles don't usually mix well, but in reality that is sorta of happening, tamahi-flossing, KWB-flossing/snagging, etc. The spots I fish I rarely see this stuff (except the vedder) and usually have a spot to my self or just a couple people (also including the vedder). If you don't like the gong show don't fish there...
And the OP stated "unless they impose a maximum leader length we're going to have to put up with the gong show". It appears he is more concerned about sharing spots then saving the fish, LOL.
-
Sometimes, when a run is choked full of fish (e.g. chum), the fly is not the best because the presentation will go right through the fish. One thing I would do is lighten my tip and this should result in less foul hooked fish. Also, I do not strike on every hesitation. The key is learning to tell the difference between a fish taking the fly, as opposed to brushing up against the fly. However, even when doing these things - you can still inadvertently snag fish - particularly when picking up the line to cast if you're not careful. This has happened to me many times and I switched up to a drift rod and foul hooked less fish.
Problem with the fly is that the leader is part of the presentation. It needs to be tapered or the line will not cast properly. The leader is an extention of the fly line. Sure - very short leaders will work on certain occasions, but for the most practical purposes, leaders will be longer than 3 feet. :)
-
Imposing short leader (<18") with small hooks (size 1 or greater) would greatly minimize the snagging or at least reduce damages of body snags.
BTW: A short (9") leader with a small hook is a deadly combination in the skilled hands.
doja> Excellent points. Only ethical sport is hiking on a vegetarian diet; rest is barbaric in someone's eye. The collapse of the Atlantic cod fishery is proof of the damages of Commercial over harvesting that now gives power to DFO to protect the Pacific fishery by shutting down commercial Salmon harvest whenever stock abundance is a concern.
Doubt the fish cares whether you floss or bait. Anyone see the video of cows with guns, if fish had guns all the anglers would be shot.
-
how is long leader (4 feet) and different from a flyrod line?
I adjust my leader baseed on water clarity - not to floss fish (which I think would be really hard on the vedder).
-
sorry for the bad spelling above. My main point is: longer leader is ok if your not snagging (or intending to) and ripping through pools.
-
When i use cheaper jigs I am able to bend the hook inwards. I can then jig through hundreds of fish without snagging one. If I drift the jig occasionally I will snag but not usually.
So....how about some kind of hook restriction where the point has to be inwards? You can still floss and snag fish but it is a lot more difficult.
-
--If DFO or whomever believes it is appropriate for a section or river and species to harvest via snagging... It should be a separate permit... and the quota should not be counted against the recreational sport harvest numbers.
--I do care but if there are enough fish for a harvest and it is sanctioned then the harvested fish should be assigned a quota with its own set of regulations, fees and those that want this harvest can get in line with the rest of us when the quota is dished out, or not.
--If we don't want to witness this harvest then we can stay away from the designated areas when it is occuring.
--similar to hunting license.. I have one but cannot shoot a whitetale deer without a tag and there are specific regulations to that harvest which have different times and locations from the harvest of other species.
-
--If DFO or whomever believes it is appropriate for a section or river and species to harvest via snagging... It should be a separate permit... and the quota should not be counted against the recreational sport harvest numbers.
--I do care but if there are enough fish for a harvest and it is sanctioned then the harvested fish should be assigned a quota with its own set of regulations, fees and those that want this harvest can get in line with the rest of us when the quota is dished out, or not.
--If we don't want to witness this harvest then we can stay away from the designated areas when it is occuring.
--similar to hunting license.. I have one but cannot shoot a whitetale deer without a tag and there are specific regulations to that harvest which have different times and locations from the harvest of other species.
and what would this accomplish? legalize poaching? just because there's lots of people who poach doesn't mean they should be allowed to in certain areas. this would cause lots of problems, people would just poach other systems and say, "oh I thought we're allowed to snag anywhere now", or "oh...i thought the whole river was open to snagging". I compare your proposed scenario to retention of sturgeon. if they allowed retention of sturgeon it would lead to a whole lot more sturgeon being killed then what would legally be accounted for. it would be feeding the fire if it were.
why are people so intent on fishing for fish that won't bite their presentations.? how hard is it to just walk away and fish for something that will actually bite?
-
and what would this accomplish? legalize poaching? just because there's lots of people who poach doesn't mean they should be allowed to in certain areas. this would cause lots of problems, people would just poach other systems and say, "oh I thought we're allowed to snag anywhere now", or "oh...i thought the whole river was open to snagging". I compare your proposed scenario to retention of sturgeon. if they allowed retention of sturgeon it would lead to a whole lot more sturgeon being killed then what would legally be accounted for. it would be feeding the fire if it were.
why are people so intent on fishing for fish that won't bite their presentations.? how hard is it to just walk away and fish for something that will actually bite?
Yes I have wondered for a long time why people need a fish so bad they have to take it by flossing, sweeping, ripping, snagging or Tow ing. Unfortunately I don't think it will change in the near future for many people. Saying that some people have stopped doing it after reading posts on this and other forums when they acknowledge to themselves it is not a very sporting way to take a fish. It appears these days a very high percentage of people thinks it OK and have many reasons as are stated on this thread to justify it. I guess it is just a sign of the times we live in.
-
--I'm not proposing to legislate people into compliance... My suggestion is that IF there is an area that is proposed and accepted for harvest that it be assigned a harvest quota and not come out of the quota of sport recreational fishery but be assigned a quota.
--If there are people who want to harvest fish by snagging they should form their own group and lobby for a legitimate opportunity. I do not appreciate people fishing illegally under the guise of sport fishing and using up a portion of the quota assigned to and fought for by the sport fishing community.
-
Keep in mind that the readers of this and other forums are a very small percentage of fishers. I fished in BC for 40 years, including a bit of river fishing, and had never heard the term flossing prior to starting to read this forum a few years back. I doubt there are 10% of my fishing associates who have ever heard of flossing. Mostly they don't river fish so why should they but they are capable of looking to see what works and copying.
This past summer I introduced a young fellow from the prairies to the joys of flossing sockeye on the Fraser. He opined that the method would probably work on the Chilliwack. When I advised that the technique was not used on most other rivers, being a bright fellow, after a short consideration he observed that there must be some unwritten rules. That is a key observation, you are expecting people to observe unwritten rules.
-
--Funny thing: I learned how..not to floss while fly fishing on the Adams.. several years ago.. On the Adams the target fish is rainbow trout... either resident rainbows in the river or larger lake rainbows that gather at the mouth. One of the methods is to drift a single egg pattern... often when the river is stacked with sockeye..
--It is a real pain in the butt if you floss a sockeye as it reduces your fishing time for trout and if you only have a few egg pattern fly's you don't want to have to break them off and loose them.
--Rather than cheering you for flossing a sockeye most anglers there laugh as you loose your spot on the trout fishing run while trying to retrieve your fly. We mostly thought a flossed sockeye was a sign of lack of fishing experience or momentary loss of concentration and never considered it as a method to catch fish.
--Same deal when trying to catch whitefish or trout with egg patterns on the Thompson either with fly rod or bottom bouncing with a bait caster... again you are trying to avoid salmon by-catch.
-
Yes I have wondered for a long time why people need a fish so bad they have to take it by flossing, sweeping, ripping, snagging or Tow ing. Unfortunately I don't think it will change in the near future for many people. Saying that some people have stopped doing it after reading posts on this and other forums when they acknowledge to themselves it is not a very sporting way to take a fish. It appears these days a very high percentage of people thinks it OK and have many reasons as are stated on this thread to justify it. I guess it is just a sign of the times we live in.
The reason is the same as why native and commercial fishermen use their nets...... People need to eat, they like the taste of salmon and they have figured out an effective, and efficient way to catch them. This isn't just a sign of the times, this has gone on for generations.
I have a problem with fishermen that break the law, however I disagree with labeling fishermen as non-sporting when they are using legal techniques to catch fish. Implementing new rules like regulating leader lengths and types of gear without more CO's to enforce those regulations would be pointless.
-
doja there will not be any studies done on the effects of flossing on fish in rivers such as the chilliwack. However clearly you like to go get your floss on at the nearest pocket with the way you support it. I'm sure a wild fish (let's say a wild coho which has to be released) that is SNAGGED 3 times while trying to run up a set of white water rapids will surely survive to spawn after being dragged in sideway right? I highly doubt it, no need for a study to prove that just common sense. Yes I fully agree that the drift nets and commercial guys do WAY more harm to our fish stocks than any recreational anglers could, however why have snaggers out there doing additional damage. Why is it so hard for anglers to entice the fish to bite? Why do people need to go out and snag fish for 30+lbs of roe? You're the one who brought up the fact that apparently flossing does no harm to fish stocks, where is your proof of such an accusation?
-
--for the number of fish that are designated for harvest in a geographic area...snagging and keeping the harvest quota would put less stress on the escapement fish than netting them all and trying to release escapement fish.
--some river systems have geographic sections or designated times for a first fish caught retention limit... that is first fish landed you take it and go home... no culling or catch and release. these are managed similar to commercial harvest areas with a total catch area quotas. The harvest is restricted by time, geographic location and monitored total catch for the area.
--we have an idea of the number of fish that can be killed by humans and that kill is managed by allocation to various groups.
--when it is determined there are not enough fish the entire fishery is shut down.. when fish are available they are allocated according to negotiated quotas.
--if you wish to kill fish by dropping rocks off a bridge...fill your boots... form a group and try to get a quota allocated...if you are not successful getting your allocation then don't come into the area that is allocated to other groups and drop rocks off a bridge just because you don't agree with not having been successful in getting an allocation of quota.
--if on the other hand.. a drop rock off a bridge quota is allocated for a one week period I suggest that you don't try drift boat fishing under the bridged during the drop rock quota period.
-
The reason is the same as why native and commercial fishermen use their nets...... People need to eat, they like the taste of salmon and they have figured out an effective, and efficient way to catch them. This isn't just a sign of the times, this has gone on for generations.
I have a problem with fishermen that break the law, however I disagree with labeling fishermen as non-sporting when they are using legal techniques to catch fish. Implementing new rules like regulating leader lengths and types of gear without more CO's to enforce those regulations would be pointless.
From the BC fishing regulations booklet. "snagging (foul hooking)… hooking a fish
in any other part of its body other than
the mouth. Attempting to snag fish of any
species is prohibited. Any fish willfully
or accidently snagged must be released
immediately".
Wouldn't you agree when people are out flossing, sweeping, dipping etc. they know they are just attempting to snag the fish as one would have to be a real newby to not know the fish are not biting as such a high percentage of fish are hooked in the hinge part of the mouth area?
-
From the BC fishing regulations booklet. "snagging (foul hooking)… hooking a fish
in any other part of its body other than
the mouth. Attempting to snag fish of any
species is prohibited. Any fish willfully
or accidently snagged must be released
immediately".
Wouldn't you agree when people are out flossing, sweeping, dipping etc. they know they are just attempting to snag the fish as one would have to be a real newby to not know the fish are not biting as such a high percentage of fish are hooked in the hinge part of the mouth area?
I know what you are saying Chris but playing the devil's advocate I could argue that as long as the hook is in the mouth area and not in the body it is a legal catch according to the wording in the regs. As far as attempting to snag, it could be argued that unless a fisherman is yanking back then he is not attempting to snag. The challenge in rewriting the regs to make flossing illegal would be that flyfishing would become illegal by default. (long leader) As has been discussed far too often on this forum, "flossing", or "long lining" is not illegal as no one that I am aware of has ever gotten a ticket for doing it.
However even if they tightened up the wording in the regs, without enforcement on the rivers it would be a pointless exercise ...
-
doja there will not be any studies done on the effects of flossing on fish in rivers such as the chilliwack. However clearly you like to go get your floss on at the nearest pocket with the way you support it. I'm sure a wild fish (let's say a wild coho which has to be released) that is SNAGGED 3 times while trying to run up a set of white water rapids will surely survive to spawn after being dragged in sideway right? I highly doubt it, no need for a study to prove that just common sense. Yes I fully agree that the drift nets and commercial guys do WAY more harm to our fish stocks than any recreational anglers could, however why have snaggers out there doing additional damage. Why is it so hard for anglers to entice the fish to bite? Why do people need to go out and snag fish for 30+lbs of roe? You're the one who brought up the fact that apparently flossing does no harm to fish stocks, where is your proof of such an accusation?
Look up the number of coho that have made it to the hatchery this year..... then the numbers from 2005. http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/sep-pmvs/projects-projets/chilliwack/production-eng.htm (http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/sep-pmvs/projects-projets/chilliwack/production-eng.htm) Do you see the upward trend.... Not decline. ::)
And if flossing was a issue their would be studies.... wait.... there are some that have been done on sockeye.
More and more are making it past the flossers..... Your flossing theory has no leg too stand on in regards to this river.... I don't have available info to speak of other rivers but flossing is not a new experience and had been going on for many years, ever since I started. Just a lot more fishermen on the river, that's all.
And thanks for reading my first post ::) I said that very few times I will floss....If any. The only time I did this year was 1 day fishing for sockeye. But I'm no opposed to it.
As for foul hooking a fish, it happens with fly guys as well. I caught a little steelhead smolt that eat my bait and became deeped hooked.... I don't think it faired to well, at best. A foul hooked salmon will probably not die and is at the end of it life. Have you seen the way chum treat other fish. :o
Oh and your last sentience, now flossing is snagging and every flosser is a poacher... You argumentative skills are weak at best and you seem to suffer from "confusing one with another". I highly doubt that these guys are using wool while poaching that many fish....
From the BC fishing regulations booklet. "snagging (foul hooking)… hooking a fish
in any other part of its body other than
the mouth. Attempting to snag fish of any
species is prohibited. Any fish willfully
or accidently snagged must be released
immediately".
Wouldn't you agree when people are out flossing, sweeping, dipping etc. they know they are just attempting to snag the fish as one would have to be a real newby to not know the fish are not biting as such a high percentage of fish are hooked in the hinge part of the mouth area?
No, I could agree that you or anyone else could not provide a form of document that showed someone getting penalized for flossing.
I could agree that flossing is not nearly as effective as blatant snagging by far....
I could agree that flossing is an acceptable harvesting technique.
I could also agree that the reason the rule was written was to deter "real snaggers" from becoming legal. You know treble hook, snagging lures ( I won't say what kind), multiple hooks on a line, etc....
Now from what I understand is that bait/lure fishermen don't like to fish around flossers. I can understand this as I don't like fishing around fly guys. Not that I don't like them but the styles don't mix. Maybe we need to create "zones" so people will enjoy them self's with methods they enjoy???
The vedder river has only so much water that is best suited for bait/lure. Flossing can be implement on a much wider scale there for expanding the available fishing ground.
And could you imagine.... everyone using the same thing that you would be using. :o good luck getting a bite then...lol
And chris don't you hunt? How would you feel if I took my rifle/bow down to the river and started shooting fish? You would be up in arms saying it is not sporting, yet you will shoot ducks.... Why not use a fishing line with hook and bread and have them"take" your offering instead of taking a "body shot". This is a clear double standard.
-
And chris don't you hunt? How would you feel if I took my rifle/bow down to the river and started shooting fish? You would be up in arms saying it is not sporting, yet you will shoot ducks.... Why not use a fishing line with hook and bread and have them"take" your offering instead of taking a "body shot". This is a clear double standard.
it's more of a double standard on your point...you say how bad commercial fishery is for over fishing, and poor method standards, yet you advocate that recreational fishery become more like them adopting the same "harvest" mentality which ultimately/inevidably leads to widespread abuse.
as well, you mentioned in an earlier post that sports fishing could be interpreted as inhumane because it causes stress to released fish and what not, well what happens when a flosser hooks a fish that has to be let go (wild coho/steelhead) is that not causing stress as well, maybe you should put your rod down as well incase of causing harm to a fish that you might have to let go.
the only real argument I've heard from pro snaggers/flossers is, "It's a harvesting technique and commercials do much worse" THAT is a double standard in itself.
whatever it comes down to, this issue will never go away and there will always be two sides to the fence ::)
-
it's more of a double standard on your point...you say how bad commercial fishery is for over fishing, and poor method standards, yet you advocate that recreational fishery become more like them adopting the same "harvest" mentality which ultimately/inevidably leads to widespread abuse.
as well, you mentioned in an earlier post that sports fishing could be interpreted as inhumane because it causes stress to released fish and what not, well what happens when a flosser hooks a fish that has to be let go (wild coho/steelhead) is that not causing stress as well, maybe you should put your rod down as well incase of causing harm to a fish that you might have to let go.
the only real argument I've heard from pro snaggers/flossers is, "It's a harvesting technique and commercials do much worse" THAT is a double standard in itself.
whatever it comes down to, this issue will never go away and there will always be two sides to the fence ::)
I agree....... now can we talk about something else? ;D ;D
-
doja, why the " WAR and PEACE " post's everytime, it's getting old.
Commercial fishers feed a large part of the world, and are just trying to make a living in doing so. Even mentioning their methods in a " Impose a Maximum Leader Length" discussion is way off topic, redundant, and done so by whiners , just whining, nothing more.
Flossing a fish with any length of leader might be ::) "legal" ::) , but sure is a poor choice IMO.
-
doja, why the " WAR and PEACE " post's everytime, it's getting old.
Then walk away, LOL
Commercial fishers feed a large part of the world, and are just trying to make a living in doing so. Even mentioning their methods in a " Impose a Maximum Leader Length" discussion is way off topic, redundant, and done so by whiners , just whining, nothing more.
I mention their methods to see if it is about conservation or just preference.
Flossing a fish with any length of leader might be ::) "legal" ::) , but sure is a poor choice IMO.
-
Not wanting to sound like a broken record but ..... even with shorter leader lengths (which I certainly agree to and no doubt most fishermen would too) sadly the arguements keep coming back to enforcement - for without it we all just venting.
The Vedder is an easy river to police too as we all know how accessible it is.
-
PS. Why not impose a maximum hook size also? This is done to good effect elsewhere and tends to put off poachers! ::)
-
doja, why the " WAR and PEACE " post's everytime, it's getting old.
Commercial fishers feed a large part of the world, and are just trying to make a living in doing so. Even mentioning their methods in a " Impose a Maximum Leader Length" discussion is way off topic, redundant, and done so by whiners , just whining, nothing more.
Flossing a fish with any length of leader might be ::) "legal" ::) , but sure is a poor choice IMO.
The same could be said about your chum harvest this year too. Targeting chum at their lowest, shame on you!!!....LOL
PS, I let my chum go this year (even though I had really nice ones and people were a little surprised).... especially with the abundance of coho in the rivers (and my freezer ;D), but that is my choice and I would not slander someone for doing something legal and in the end is not going to do much harm.
-
it's more of a double standard on your point...you say how bad commercial fishery is for over fishing, and poor method standards, yet you advocate that recreational fishery become more like them adopting the same "harvest" mentality which ultimately/inevidably leads to widespread abuse.
When did I say we should use drift nets for rec fishing, ::) Did I say we should increase quotas ::) I advocate the commercial fishery becomes more like us... no nets and lower quotas! Look at how many sockeye they kept and how many rec fishers kept
as well, you mentioned in an earlier post that sports fishing could be interpreted as inhumane because it causes stress to released fish and what not, well what happens when a flosser hooks a fish that has to be let go (wild coho/steelhead) is that not causing stress as well, maybe you should put your rod down as well incase of causing harm to a fish that you might have to let go.
WOW!, You read my posts but your brain fails to absorb the content....I said earlier that bait fishing can result in deep hooking/death of fish, flossing cannot and gives the fish a far better chance at survival. In fact I have never flossed a fish in the eyeball but on many times had the lure hook go threw their eye. Ever wonder why rivers have a bait ban but no flossing ban, LOL. PS, I almost exclusively fish spinners as to avoid this. (rare I fish bait)
the only real argument I've heard from pro snaggers/flossers is, "It's a harvesting technique and commercials do much worse" THAT is a double standard in itself.
Wrong! However the answer to this lays in following post. I suggest you re-read them.... Here's a hint, bait, hunting, etc....
whatever it comes down to, this issue will never go away and there will always be two sides to the fence ::)
And that's what keeps this world an interesting place ;D
-
Agree with the leader max length is 12"/300cm and hook size max is 2. Chance of snagging fish is way lower and size 2 straightens out easily on accidental body snags. All the ethical fly fishing anglers who proudly get the fish to bite should fully support this.
-
What problem, the hook straighten out or it doesn't?
A small fish snagged on a large hook won't straighten out forcing you to land the fish as happens with sock fishing.
Straighten out size 2 hooks? I dont know what kind you are using but I have never had that problem... even on large snagged fish 25lbs +
-
Yes doja I did read your first post where you posted "Now I don't floss much anymore as I enjoy knowing that they bite and I do fairly well, but the odd time when it is called for I'll also floss. I won't however floss unless there is a decent sized run and most likely I'll be keeping the fish and usually it is a last resort as conditions may be difficult for what ever the reason." so no you didn't say "very few times" you will floss but you said you will floss when you see fit. Basically if the water is too clear, colored or high, if the fish are spooked and turned off or if you just can't entice a biting fish it's then ok for you to snag away. All your expertise of snagging/flossing yet you "rarely" do it , if anything you're the one spouting BS. Any flosser who kills a flossed fish IS a poacher as that fish was snagged. Any fish which is flossed is snagged as it did not bite the hook intentionally. The joke of a study conducted on the fraser sockeye snaggery is a poor example of how snagging fish is fine. There is no evidence of these fish fully making it to spawn and finish their life cycle. I suppose a higher survival rate in the ocean wouldn't create a larger return to the hatchery and more to make it past the snaggers. The ocean is in the start of a cooling cycle however I'm sure you were aware of that already. Why do you want snagging only areas on the river? You typed already your trophy case of a deep freezer is already full of coho, what is the need for so many fish?