Fishing with Rod Discussion Forum
Fishing in British Columbia => General Discussion => Topic started by: bmynbr on November 21, 2008, 06:31:15 PM
-
I have a question about foul hooking, I thought that anything other than in the mouth going out was a foul hook, but I had a guy at the river today tell me that anything in front of the gills is legal. Didn't seem right to me, but maybe I'm wrong.
Thanks, Dave
-
i was told by a DFO officer that anything forward the gills is legal :-\ Im not sure whether to believe it or not though. so i just use the anywhere in the mouth "area" to be fair hooked. I have had fish mis-strike flies and get hooked into the skin above their nose or in the side of the face while fishing chronomids, so there is no way i pulled the fly into the fish constituting a foul hook.
I have also hooked a couple in the tail and one in the back fishing the exact same way. These foul hooks are cause when the fish goes to "stun" its prey before circling back to EAT IT!!! so just because you see your indicator twitch dont jerk it unless it goes completely under as it just may be a stun shot and you will end up missing the strike if you move the fly.
-
Cool, thanks. Thats what I thought. It doesn't seem right otherwise. All you would have to do is have a long leader, and give a good yank at the end of every drift and sooner or later you'd get lucky :-\
Dave
-
i was told by a DFO officer that anything forward the gills is legal :-\
I need to go read the synopsis, because if a dfo says it is right it should be or he shouldn't be doing his job. Not that I will be keeping one unless it is hooked legally. I don't like fish, so unless it is hooked right and clean my mom can just buy it.
Dave
-
fishforever, thanks for saving me from going and finding my synopsis
Dave
-
FF - I know this rule out of the book thats why it didnt make sense to me the officer would tell me what he did :-\ I dont keep as many fish as i used to now and will probably keep even less in the future. I only keep what me or my friends will consume and i always make sure the fish is spoken for before i kill it.
Thanks for putting up the bit from the Synopsis also ;)
-
Anywhere other than the mouth is foul hooked.
-
You know come to think of it I wonder if he new and didn't care or if he just didn't know. Because if he did knew and told me false info and I believed him I could get myself a fine. If I see him again I am going to let him know, and hopefully he will stop keeping fish that are snagged.
Dave
-
have had a talk with the same guy on one river on the lowermainland and talked to a co and he said he was wrong have to be in the mouth. watched this person foul hook coho until one close to the head then he left right a way called co but the time he arrived this guy was long gone.
-
fishing becoming more and more like hunting^^ just like when you shoot a deer
trying to get an accurate precision to the mouth instead of offering baits and wait for a bite
-
It's hard to believe that in the year 2008 we are still discussing this. If you cannot get a fish to bite fairly and must resort to hooking them elsewhere willfully or accidentally then you need to really change your tactics. What ever happened to sportsmanship and sense of fair play?
-
he could have been from south of the boarder. i think thats what their rules are. in washington.
-
is it not specified in the regs? why is this such a huge debate?
-
It can't be clearer, if you think about it.
If the fish is not hooked inside the mouth it's not legal.
Why, you ask?
Because there is no proof that it willingly took the bait, if it was hooked anywhere other than in the mouth.
You can foul hook a fish inside the mouth too, but the odds are against you.
Sport fishing is all about enticing the fish to bite.
So the intention is what matters.
I once hooked a dead 10 lb spring ithat was on the bottom of the river in the mouth.
Believe it or not.
-
Again, what do the regs say? Often times fish will strike and miss a bait, however, they're stung by the hook in the face. But, if the regs say "inside the mouth only", which I seriously doubt they do, then it is "inside the mouth only". The reason I doubt the regs say it is because people would be getting out the magnifying glass to see if the hook on the top of the gums is closer to the inside of the mouth then the outside of the mouth.
-
The most common and widely accepted (AL, CO, MA, TX, Canada, UK, the International Gamefish Association, and virtually all popular glossaries and “Dictionary of Ichthyology”)definition of foul hooking is:
"hooking a fish in a part of the body other than the mouth"
Notice that the definition does not specify "inside" the mouth. Otherwise, almost every sockeye fisherman/woman on the Fraser would be ticketed. :o
-
Freshwater Fishing Regulations Synopsis 2008-2009
Page 96
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.
-
fishforever, It was only on the thread once prior to my last posting. These posts are in chronological order, hence the once not twice. Also, I know its symantics, but there's a big difference between in the mouth and on the mouth. And as the regs say (twice on this thread) on the mouth.
-
I guess on the mouth would make sense, because if you were using gear, the fish could take the lure and tug on it only to have the hook on the outside of it's mouth. In that case the fish took your offering, and may not actually be hooked in the mouth.
-
(http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc90/fishingwithrod/2008/081024-03.jpg)
(http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc90/fishingwithrod/2008/081015-02.jpg)
(http://www.fishingwithrod.com/albums/photoblog/080828_1.jpg)
-
is it not specified in the regs? why is this such a huge debate?
It really shouldn't be a huge debate, the regs say "mouth area" . Looking at rods picture, fish have lips just like we do. The lips are pretty much the limit as to where the mouth area is. If the hook goes inside and through the mouth or if the hook penetrates any part of the lips then it should be legal according to the regs. It doesn't matter whether its from inside out or outside in because the regs do not state how the hook should penetrate.
If the fish is hooked in the eye - not legal
If the fish is hooked in the cheek - not legal
Seems pretty simple to me.
-
Seems like a funny time of year for this discussion, but I guess if people are talking about foul hooking just as the steelhead are due to arrive in the Vedder this time of year is as good as any.
-
It says "foul hook" at the top of everyone's post. Maybe my I-phone is leaving something out, but I don't see Where Rodney says those fish are foul hooked. I can say that I have also been told by a DF O that he would not ticket for a fish hooked in the face. I have a couple of under water videos showing fish striking. Many times they'll strike and miss, but still get hit in the face by the swinging hook.
-
I don't see where Rodney says foul hooked either ??? ;) ;D
-
actually go back to Rodney's post and read it again across the top it actually says NOT foul hooked ;) unless im more tired then i thought LOL
-
Taken from Freshwater Regulation Not from salmon supplement. It states "on" the mouth not "in" the mouth.
(http://www.fishingwithrod.com/albums/bwibwi/fish_synopsis_2008_09.jpg)
-
From the words I see here, it says neither "in" nor "on"... Just "the mouth"
I'll be writing a letter to the government to correct this - there is no excuse for keeping snagged fish...
It's hard to believe that people are acutally fighting over this definition, a pretty sad state of affairs...
Cheers,
Nicole
-
Pretty much mouth parts is all government should put in. Otherwise gear fisherman would not be able to keep a good portion of their catch.
-
When all that matters is getting a fish on the bank, at any cost, then COMPLETE IGNORANCE and TOTAL DISREGARD FOR REGULATIONS rule. And it's usually both!!!
-
A fish that has been hooked on the outside of the mouth, and the hook is facing inward at the hinge indicates foul hooking.
This is particularly the case if that hook has penetrated in the opposite side from where the angler is standing.
That indicates lining or flossing. Same goes for fly fishers.
The hook should originate from the inside of the mouth with the point facing out, or completely inside. It's still possible the fish did not bite, but it's alot more probable that it did bite.
That is what sportfishing is all about, letting those fish go that do not want to play.
It's all pretty cut and dry to me... It's not sporting to keep foul hooked fish. Nor is it legal.
Cheers,
Nicole
-
A fish that has been hooked on the outside of the mouth, and the hook is facing inward at the hinge indicates foul hooking.
This is particularly the case if that hook has penetrated in the opposite side from where the angler is standing.
That indicates lining or flossing. Same goes for fly fishers.
The hook should originate from the inside of the mouth with the point facing out, or completely inside. It's still possible the fish did not bite, but it's alot more probable that it did bite.
so would the below pic be fair or foul?
(http://www.fishingwithrod.com/albums/photoblog/080828_1.jpg)
-
I'd let that fish go.
Cheers,
Nicole
-
I get a lot of "foul" hooks fishing streamers for cutthroat, and by foul hooks I mean hooked on the outside of the mouth, sometimes further up the head as well. They tend to slash and its inevitable that some will not be hooked perfectly. Nicole I'm sure you've witnessed your fair share as well. Do I consider it unethical? Not in the least. In fact, although it isn't legal, I'd feel better about keeping one hooked in the eye that was bleeding profusely than one hooked clean in the mouth. Of course, we all obey every law out there, so that wouldn't happen... Ethics are great until they override common sense.
-
Hey Marmot, yes cutts are caught that way on occasion, Tomas got one last weekend this way... The fish was let go, as we release all cutties anyways...
:)
Nicole
-
Apparently by your arguement you are thinking fishing streams/rivers mostly. Unfortunately many of us also fish other water bodies. Rodney's case his fishing tidal in a bay, those fish can not be 'flossed' or whatever you like to call it, and also when you jig in the chuck at 100+ft most of the times the hook is just around the mouth area not inside out. When you fish with Rapala topwater lure or similar hardware looking on the outside of the mouth is pretty much all the time.
There are many fishing methods and water conditions all has to be considered not just think in one fishing method and water type. ;)
-
Ok so by Nicole and Fishforever's logic only a fish hooked from the inside of the mouth towards the outside is a legal/ethically hooked fish. However as already stated fish when attempting to bite a lure, fly, or bait may be hooked in the face area. And is not the purpose of fishing to "entice a fish to bite." And in these instances the fish has been enticed to bite. So why would it be unethical to catch a fish in this way? Why would it be illegal to keep a fish hooked this way (if hooked on the mouth)?
Here is the direct quote from the freshwater synopsis.
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.
-
I have caught fish in the mouth only to have them jump and the hook come out and bite them on the bum. :-\ I let them go even though I knew it was in their mouth at one point.
-
Also, have you not had a fish rise for your fly and miss it in the mouth. Clearly, that fish was enticed to bite but did not get the fly inside the mouth. One other thing...I fish bass tournaments a lot in the spring and summer. I rarely catch a fish that had both sets of trebles on a crank bait or stick bait get hooked inside the mouth. Yet, all of these fish are determined to be legally caught and weighed in and released.
-
Of course this topic has been debated to death the last number of years but the bottom line is so many people work the water in a manner with the sole intention of just foul hooking their fish.
We all know that every method of fishing in a way to actually try and make your fish bite will still result in some foul hooked fish, it is unavoidable as some of the pictures and remarks above show.
-
Ok so by Nicole and Fishforever's logic only a fish hooked from the inside of the mouth towards the outside is a legal/ethically hooked fish.
Basically, yes!
But I also agree with marmot, that I've got a fish bleeding all over the place, I'm not going to let it go, because it won't make it. So if I must make a kill, I'll keep that one, rather than one that's hooked in the mouth and would survive.
However, I wouldn't trust everyone out there with making that decision.
Chris is also right on. The intention is to get the fish to bite.
I think there should be a monthly news flash here from Roderick Haig-Brown's books so that people can really get a chance to understand what sportfishing is all about.
What we did to the sport and what we can do for it.
The good, the bad and the ugly.
(note to Rodney)
-
Regarding the pics that Rod posted. It originally had "Re: Foul Hook" just like everyones post but now has "Not Foul Hooked" if you look at the bottom of his post you will see « Last Edit: November 24, 2008, 03:20:42 PM by DionJL »" I think Rod has posted these pics as examples of foul hooked fish - my .02, maybe he'll add a reply when he has time. Also think that Dion was just having some fun ;) Yes , I consider a fish hooked inside the mouth as a legally caught fish, ones I have landed hooked as in Rods pics I let go - ethics are up to the individual as whether to keep or release a fish hooked as in the pics. As far as how some interpret the regs we can agree to disagree on how one takes the wording of the regs. For myself, hooking a fishin any other part of the body other than the mouth, means the hook should be in the mouth.
You are right. I was fooling around. Your noting that the post title is just a reply to the original post really means nothing but you were trying to make it mean something. Rodney knows i changed his post, and he was not posting examples of foul hooked fish. He was posting examples of exactly what this debate is about. A fish that attempts to bite but gets hooked in an unusual way.
By the way my questions in my second post were directed at you and nicole.
-
(http://i144.photobucket.com/albums/r163/jetboatjimmy/bored.gif)
-
if I feel a fish strike, I really could care less if the hook is in inside the mouth or outside the mouth. This seems to be a matter of personal ethics, some feel comfortable with this, some don't, the fact is that no law is being broken. If I feel a fish agressively hammer my blade, I am not very concerned with where the hook ends up, inside/or out, this fish willingly "took it". What about fishing with a gooey bob on your line, above your hook? In many cases I've had fish take the gooey bob and when I set the hook, it ends up being right under the chin. that's my 2 cents
-
In the fall of 2007 I landed over 40 coho on blades in medium flows and every one of them were inside the mouth and bright fish.
My firm belief is that salmon very rarely miss thier mark when they're actually fresh and on the bite. What some claim is a fish missing the take and then getting hooked in the chin etc. is instead the common case of stagnant fish that gets a line/hook swiped into it's face and then being spooked bolts into the hook.
Who are we trying to kid here? Why do you think people fish the fast water when all the fish in the slower water have lock jaw? You really think that suddenly the fish that decides to move up to the higher pool all of a sudden gets a huge hunger on for your wool? ::)
It's simply not the case.
Personally with the state of salmon stocks being what they are I beleive this idea of expanding what a legitimate hook up is will only dramatically accelerate thier demise. When it's inside the mouth your almost certain it's legit and when it's outside it's most likely not.
Considering our persistent problems of such absence of enforcement why aren't we supposed "real fishermen" doing at least what we can for promoting ethics that give our salmon the best chance they can have. I'm more than willing to set an example by releasing one fish hooked outside the mouth that possibly might have been legit in order that another 20 fish that were flossed also get released.
As I've said before, until stocks improve I feel the only effective solution is to have a daily limit of 1 fish per day and zero after a certain date when the majority of fish in the system are stagnant and most proned to being snagged by desperate fishermen.
Tight lines! :)
-
Not sure why I posted those photos earlier really, I was just bored. ;D This type of discussion in my opinion achieves nothing except resulting in more division among anglers, but that doesn't mean it's not a problem. It could be a problem during the salmon season and the only way to fix it is at the regulatory level, where I focus my energy and time on to get changes done.
cohoOn!'s observation on the coho hook-ups (great season last year wasn't it ;) ) reminded me something that I wrote a month ago:
http://www.fishingwithrod.com/blog/?p=57
Coho salmon are typically followers. Targeting them on hardwares is an exciting fishery where you can watch them following your spoon or spinner (also flies) in clear water condition and either turn around or commit in the last minute. It's no surprise that they are always hooked in the mouth since the strike always coming from the hook end of the lure.
With drifting a floated presentation for salmon and steelhead, I prefer to adjust my depth so that whatever I am drifting (wool, bait, rubber bait, etc) is suspended a couple of feet above the fish (fish are typically swimming just above the bottom). Since the fish are striking by swimming upward to grab the presentation, the tendency of not hooking the fish inside the mouth decreases significantly. If the depth is adjusted so that the presentation is drifting by just inches from the bottom, then it is not unusual to see fish being hooked on the gill plate, outside of the lip, under the chin, on the eyes, etc. Surely the fish would bite in these instances, but many are being foul hooked as the presentation drifted through the school of fish instead of above it.
Lastly, hooking fish inside the mouth doesn't always make me feel better about myself as an angler. Some might even argue that it is a damaging method in sportfishing. Since bait is so effective on certain salmonid species, they have a tendency to ingest it too deeply. This causes severe bleeding when removing the hook or cutting the line if the fish is being released, which leads to higher released mortality. Due to this, I prefer to restrict myself by not using bait in certain catch and release fisheries when bait is allowed. Several good examples are bull trout in the tidal portion of Fraser River, cutthroat trout in the Fraser Valley tributaries. When bait fishing in fisheries where I intend to keep fish, I also prefer to cease fishing when the quota is met or when I decide not to keep more fish. Unnecessary catch and release mortality does not make me feel better about myself, plus the roe is too precious to be wasted on fish I intend to release. ;)
-
If PETA had it's say we all are foul for hooking.......whatever......we hook.
-
A fish that has been hooked on the outside of the mouth, and the hook is facing inward at the hinge indicates foul hooking.
Cheers,
Nicole
are you kidding?
I have never onced looked to see which way my hook was pointing.
the pics Rod posted are NOT foul hooked
-
When using "proper" fishing methods and getting proper bites, I still believe you can come up with 100 reasons/theories why a fish has been hooked outside its mouth. In my opinion, if a fish is hooked in or around the mouth, then that's fine. It if is hooked in any other part of the body, then it is foul hooked. We all have our opinions on what is fair game and what is not. I really do think though, that we do not want legislation on this matter, especially when it is drafted by some bureaucrat who is not even an angler. Best solution is to have an angler's code of ethics and better education.
-
Best solution is to have an angler's code of ethics and better education.
Only problem with that is that the guy that I had seen at the river said he had a rubbermaid full of fillets, and yet he was still taking fish he hooked in the gills. There is no ethics there, just trying to save a buck on his next meal. No education would change him :-\...My opinion
-
For someone like that. More regulation wouldn't help. What he needs is a streak of bad luck getting caught a few times in a row, then MAYBE he'll learn his lesson.
-
It's obvious there's no hope of any "angler code of ethics" nor any hope for enforcement of one if there was. Anywhere in the face/head allows any hack to go floss their four fish a day any time there's stacked fish to be had in a river.
One fish per day and lose your vehicle for 90days if you're caught with more would solve this issue immediately. Land them any old way you please and spare the debate because most people these days are doing what ever they please anyway. It's really sad.
But will the majority of us "brave hunter warriors" be willing to make the personal sacrifice today so that our kids and grand kids have a chance to catch a salmon? :-\
Yes there's commercial,Native and environmental issues at play as well but that doesn't mean we can't do our part as well.
-
Ya and you'll also loose most of the funding that's in fishery right now. :-\
-
We're discussing fish hooked in a river drift fishing situation, not fishing at Garry Point in Saltwater...
And no I'm not kidding, not one bit.
Cheers,
Nicole
are you kidding?
I have never onced looked to see which way my hook was pointing.
the pics Rod posted are NOT foul hooked