Fishing with Rod Discussion Forum

Fishing in British Columbia => General Discussion => Topic started by: Spoonman on November 09, 2019, 10:21:12 AM

Title: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: Spoonman on November 09, 2019, 10:21:12 AM
.....was holding off but time to rant...two different threads that end up bashing the use of roe...calls for roe bans on hatchery harvest rivers....descriptions of  roe fishers that paint a picture of  unskilled unibrow knuckledraggers.....all self righteous drivel that smells of eliteism ...new laws to address the lack of compliance or enforcement of existing ones only impact those that follow the existing rules....a good example would be the closing of parking areas because of garbage dumping or break ins......if you don't like roe,don't use it....your game,your rules..... curing and presenting roe is just as satisfying as tying and fishing a fly ,building a spinner etc....roe does work but is not like using a net or dynamite...washed a lot of roe only to have it ignored....its  only one tool in a box full of others that are needed to be a successful angler.....even if it was the silver bullet and was used to fill somebody's freezer, as long as its within the existing rules that's their busines ,mind your own.....time and effort would be better spent elsewhere on things that benefit the fishery  and all users.......
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: Fish Assassin on November 09, 2019, 11:23:21 AM
Well said
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: ae_9 on November 09, 2019, 12:37:07 PM
I've never even caught a fish on roe  :(
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: RalphH on November 09, 2019, 12:43:40 PM
Quote
....l hate your guts...
I have about 3lbs in the fridge, but now that I know you are not interested...
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: avid angler on November 09, 2019, 01:36:05 PM
A roe ban wouldnít change salmon and steelhead populations for better or worse. Look how good the Thompson river bait ban worked to save those fish... You hit the nail on the head on this.
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: milo on November 09, 2019, 03:25:48 PM
A roe ban wouldnít change salmon and steelhead populations for better or worse. Look how good the Thompson river bait ban worked to save those fish... You hit the nail on the head on this.

Roe ban on the Thompson came too late. Had it been implemented some 20 years ago, it may have made a difference.
Either way, the writing is on the wall...the last wild salmon and steelhead are to be caught in the next decade, after that it will only be hatchery fish followed by farmed fish.
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: avid angler on November 09, 2019, 03:47:52 PM
I would love to hear about your first hand experience and Thompson steelhead lmao
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: milo on November 09, 2019, 04:15:54 PM
I would love to hear about your first hand experience and Thompson steelhead lmao
Sadly, I came to Canada when T. Steelhead we're already severely compromised. I made a deliberate choice not to fish for them at all due to conservation issues. As I evolve as an angler,  I'm extending that philosophy to all fisheries. If I can't keep any because they are closed to retention, I'd rather not target them at all. I fish only when there's a reasonable chance to catch something I can kill. That's why I gave up sturgeon fishing altogether even though it was a lot of fun. Times change...and I try to adapt to them while minimizing my impact.
LMAO back!
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: Blood_Orange on November 09, 2019, 04:26:15 PM
As I evolve as an angler,  I'm extending that philosophy to all fisheries. If I can't keep any because they are closed to retention, I'd rather not target them at all.

That's a viewpoint that is only earned through experience. It's a good place to be, philosophically speaking, and I hope others find the same path.
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: 96XJ on November 09, 2019, 06:24:07 PM
That's a viewpoint that is only earned through experience. It's a good place to be, philosophically speaking, and I hope others find the same path.

I agree with this philosophy as well , not living in the lower mainland I had time booked to head to the Stave for some Chum fishing a couple of weeks ago , I did it last year and had a couple of good days , but with the state of the Chum this year I decided to stay home and leave them alone
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: avid angler on November 09, 2019, 06:35:09 PM
Sadly, I came to Canada when T. Steelhead we're already severely compromised. I made a deliberate choice not to fish for them at all due to conservation issues. As I evolve as an angler,  I'm extending that philosophy to all fisheries. If I can't keep any because they are closed to retention, I'd rather not target them at all. I fish only when there's a reasonable chance to catch something I can kill. That's why I gave up sturgeon fishing altogether even though it was a lot of fun. Times change...and I try to adapt to them while minimizing my impact.
LMAO back!

I respect your but your personal philosophy and ethics but Iím sorry I donít feel you have the first hand experience with those fish or that fishery to say that a tackle restriction could make a difference. The ministry regularly hands out bait permits for stock assessment, brood stock collecting, fish relocation etc. If bait was killing them it wouldnít be a thing. Not to mention if bait killed adult steelhead there wouldnít be a Chilliwack River steelhead population. The Thompson river bait ban was spearheaded by people with their own personal agenda and it wasnít the well being of the fish. They believed getting bait out of the water would make it easier for them to catch more fish. That didnít exactly go as planned...
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: psd1179 on November 09, 2019, 06:50:25 PM
Bait ban will offer various fishing opportunity. probably not so many congregated fisherman.
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: RalphH on November 09, 2019, 06:55:17 PM
when folks talk about bait, roe and mortality rates there is a lot of mixing of apples & oranges. Trying to equate brood stock and similar collections, mort rates for Chilliwack steelhead and Thompson steelhead (let alone coho etc) is trying to equate things that just don't match. Brood stock collections invariably involve the best of the best as far as fish handling practices. Nobody is holding those fish up for hero shots etc.  Likewise there is a big fish for effort concern. It involves public funds in those cases.
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: wildmanyeah on November 09, 2019, 07:27:25 PM
A bait ban will just result in people beading.

Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: milo on November 09, 2019, 07:59:22 PM
A bait ban will just result in people beading.

What's wrong with beading? I'm looking into it more and more. Sounds like a good artificial option.
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: wildmanyeah on November 09, 2019, 08:33:08 PM
There is nothing wrong with using beads or yarn but I donít see how itís any different then using roe.

I donít think a bait ban would result in any less pressure or any increase in survival.
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: RalphH on November 09, 2019, 08:35:42 PM
I also wanted mention that the Thompson was the last river with a summer run of steelhead to get a bait ban. So much for it being "spearheaded by people with their own personal agenda and it wasnít the well being of the fish."
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: RalphH on November 09, 2019, 08:42:42 PM
There is nothing wrong with using beads or yarn but I donít see how itís any different then using roe.

I donít think a bait ban would result in any less pressure or any increase in survival.

beads are usually rigged to avoid deep hooking - often the fish is hooked outside the mouth... so I don't think your contention is correct.
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: wildmanyeah on November 09, 2019, 08:56:53 PM
beads are usually rigged to avoid deep hooking - often the fish is hooked outside the mouth... so I don't think your contention is correct.

Exactly
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: avid angler on November 09, 2019, 09:05:41 PM
I also wanted mention that the Thompson was the last river with a summer run of steelhead to get a bait ban. So much for it being "spearheaded by people with their own personal agenda and it wasnít the well being of the fish."

Yes it was. Iím not even opposed to the bait ban. Im opposed to the effort that went into it when the entire community of Thompson river anglers should have been fighting the chum roe fishery. Not to mention it was the perfect scapegoat for dfo to be like ďhey look at the new gear restrictions we implemented, see weíre doing something, we care!Ē
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: Spoonman on November 10, 2019, 07:50:14 AM
What's wrong with beading? I'm looking into it more and more. Sounds like a good artificial option.
.........aren't most beads made of plastic?......thought that was something we were trying to get out of the  water...as well as lead but that's another can of worms....
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: RalphH on November 10, 2019, 09:05:04 AM
...don't get me started on worms and worm cans!  >:( :o
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: Wiseguy on November 10, 2019, 11:52:39 AM
Bravo Bravo Bravo! Spoon man. The most intelligent post I have seen on here in a very long time.
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: milo on November 10, 2019, 08:35:13 PM
.........aren't most beads made of plastic?......thought that was something we were trying to get out of the  water...as well as lead but that's another can of worms....

What about fishing line?
Let's not even go there...

Maybe we should just do the right thing: stop fishing altogether.
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: Rodney on November 10, 2019, 08:52:22 PM
What about rubber/plastic particles from tire and brake wear on your vehicles, or synthetic fibres from your clothes, which end up as microplastic in our waterways and oceans?

Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: wildmanyeah on November 10, 2019, 09:06:43 PM
yeah the list effecting salmon is endless

Break dust has been shown to be very bad for coho. Apparently chum are more resistant to it.


https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2017/10/20/we-have-to-act-now-how-car-pollution-is-causing-the-rapid-die-off-of-this-salmon/%3foutputType=amp
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: Roderick on November 10, 2019, 11:03:21 PM
It seems obvious that there are some fishermen that don't like using bait.  It's a personal choice that often comes from years of fishing.  Often these fishermen started off as children with bobber and worm and went on from there to more sophisticated set-ups.  Why these fishermen would want to prevent other less experienced fishermen from going through the same evolution that they did is beyond me. 

Then there is the question of why fishermen that strictly fish artificials hate, and yes hate is the word, bait fishermen.  I personally use whatever works best but I have heard stories.  One fly fisherman told me how frustrated he was when he had been fishing a pool for over an hour with no bites and someone came and got fish right away on roe.  He was really upset. But there was no way he would consider switching to bait simply because it works. 

And bait does work.  It must be hard to watch as the hordes of newbies catch fish on bait while you get nothing but the satisfaction of knowing that you are more evolved then them. 
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: AaronWilde on November 11, 2019, 04:40:37 AM
It seems obvious that there are some fishermen that don't like using bait.  It's a personal choice that often comes from years of fishing.  Often these fishermen started off as children with bobber and worm and went on from there to more sophisticated set-ups.  Why these fishermen would want to prevent other less experienced fishermen from going through the same evolution that they did is beyond me. 

Then there is the question of why fishermen that strictly fish artificials hate, and yes hate is the word, bait fishermen.  I personally use whatever works best but I have heard stories.  One fly fisherman told me how frustrated he was when he had been fishing a pool for over an hour with no bites and someone came and got fish right away on roe.  He was really upset. But there was no way he would consider switching to bait simply because it works. 

And bait does work.  It must be hard to watch as the hordes of newbies catch fish on bait while you get nothing but the satisfaction of knowing that you are more evolved then them.

Enjoy being more "evolved" than me while I catch fish in front of you while your elite method doesn't catch jack.

All methods have their place and most good open minded anglers know this. I use all methods of fishing. They are tools in the box.

Bait isn't the problem - handling skills and ethics are. Keep the fish in the water, it should be a regulation. Stop with the hero shots. No need for 5/0 hooks on Salmon, save that for Chinooks in the Ocean. The list goes on. Mortality is far higher when you treat the fish like cupcakes. There should be a basic test to get a license at the very least. Sadly lots of guys know better and still treat the fish like garbage.
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: RalphH on November 11, 2019, 09:15:27 AM
this fall fly fishing for coho  I out fished both bait anglers and lure chuckers by rates of 2 and 3 to 1 at times. It wasn't the Vedder. The fish were mostly wild. It's not all about having a hooked rigged with something that stinks.

Has anyone read the last post I put on the "Wasting fish only for roe." thread: http://www.fishingwithrod.com/yabbse/index.php?topic=43131.0

That thread seemed to start this off. In the end I believe it was a red herring based on a misinterpretation of "the evidence". During that discussion I somewhat tongue in cheek suggested if the situation was so bad perhaps we should ban roe.

Bait anglers underestimate the damage bait can do but then I think that's true for all forms of angling and anglers. On the same stream I referenced above some years back I spent half a day fishing. When I started I was the only angler. Trekking back upstream to the car, I counted 3 fish a couple of trout and a coho jack slowly drifting belly up on the surface. I hadn't seen any other anglers before this. When I got to a popular spot there was a guy float fishing roe. He was all excited about what a great day he was having. He said he had just released a 10lb coho doe and had released some number of cutthroat and jacks. I felt like chewing him out but I just said enjoy your day and walked on. He wasn't doing anything wrong legally. He may not have been aware those fish subsequently died. I don't know how many fish I release die but I know some do. I hope everyone tries to keep that number as low as possible.
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: Robert_G on November 11, 2019, 01:54:08 PM
Roe ban on the Thompson came too late. Had it been implemented some 20 years ago, it may have made a difference.


The Thompson Steelhead are gone because of the years of abuse by the Fall Chum Roe Gillnet Fishery in Area 29 - E (and Area 29 - D to a lesser extent ) of the Lower Fraser River....the end...period...not sure why people still debate this....
If you think otherwise, you have your head buried in the sand.
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: clarki on November 11, 2019, 02:42:57 PM
The Thompson Steelhead are gone because of the years of abuse by the Fall Chum Roe Gillnet Fishery in Area 29 - E (and Area 29 - D to a lesser extent ) of the Lower Fraser River....the end...period...not sure why people still debate this....
If you think otherwise, you have your head buried in the sand.
Iíve learned to respect your single mindedness, Robert, and your absolute confidence in your singular grasp of the truth.

Itís reported that the Thompson steelhead started to decline in the 1990ís. When did the Fraser chum gillnet fishery begin?
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: Morty on November 11, 2019, 03:06:01 PM
Chemical poisoning.
I'm against fishing for Steelhead with chemically cured bait because Steelhead can live-on after spawning and breed another year or more.

If a Steelhead takes a cured bait and shakes the hook, or is wild and released, that chemically cured roe, or shrimp, or prawn, or.... remains in their gut.  I've seen several pictures of legally retained steelhead when 'gutted' revealed several baits in their stomach.  I sense that roe-bags would cause additional threats.

Curing with non-iodized salt 'might' be ok, but borax and many of the other chemicals are poisonous.  [Although Boron (the basis of borax) in micro-concentrations is essential for animal life, higher concentrations can be poisonous].  Rainbow Trout, a very close relative to Steelhead, seem to be the most sensitive.

 http://www.greenfacts.org/en/boron/l-3/boron-5.htm

Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: RalphH on November 11, 2019, 04:25:25 PM
Iíve learned to respect your single mindedness, Robert, and your absolute confidence in your singular grasp of the truth.

Itís reported that the Thompson steelhead started to decline in the 1990ís. When did the Fraser chum gillnet fishery begin?

I have a copy of a letter dated in the 1950s from a biologist with DFO that discusses the impact of the fall gillnet fishery in the Fraser on Thompson steelhead. Estimate of the by catch was 3,000 or so - about 30 to 40% of the run. He estimated while the gillnets reduced the # of fish available to anglers on the Thompson it did not seem to effect the size of the total return. In the mid 80s a study of the FN sockeye fishery estimated  the by catch could take as many as 5,000.
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: Robert_G on November 11, 2019, 04:47:44 PM
Part of the problem is that too many people here and the so called experts don't really understand how run timing and genetic diversity work...dependent and independent of each other that is...
The bycatch numbers you mention are not sustainable 'long term' to keep strong genetics in the runs. It takes its toll after time. We are seeing the final stages of that right now.

Its the same as when some of you guys ask why certain runs of salmon or steelhead only contain smaller fish. What happened to the big fish we used to catch on 'x' or 'y' stream?
The answer is the same. Loss of genetic diversity.

Almost every system sees the same pattern. First they lose the larger/stronger fish, then years later...the population crashes. Only hatchery systems survive....and I can tell you from both personal experience and catch statistics that both the Coho and Steelhead on the Vedder are averaging smaller every year.  A simple case of loss in genetic diversity. So the loss of numbers in a run doesn't necessarily happen at the same time a big commercial gillnet fishery starts. The timing will vary on the actual collapse.
The Thompson Steelhead are past that stage and with no hatchery, this strain of Summer Run Steelhead are in the final stages of collapse.
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: AaronWilde on November 11, 2019, 05:07:59 PM
 :'(
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: RalphH on November 11, 2019, 05:58:45 PM
...hmm. I think you have seriously misread my post and missed the point.

For a start the other fisherman was not a 'noob'. I had met him a number of times and he was clearly experienced. I also did not say any coho he caught - I wrote "he said he had just released a 10lb coho doe and had released some number of cutthroat and jacks" - had died or floated belly up. The trout are all wild in that stream as are most of the coho. Though I hate to see such fish floating belly up I made a point of not discussing it with him.

BTW if you caught 200 coho in one season that in itself is a problem in my book. I think I caught 25 to date and killed 4 hatchery fish

How's that for elitism?
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: RalphH on November 11, 2019, 06:04:08 PM
Quote
Part of the problem is that too many people here and the so called experts don't really understand how run timing and genetic diversity work...dependent and independent of each other that is...
The bycatch numbers you mention are not sustainable 'long term' to keep strong genetics in the runs. It takes its toll after time. We are seeing the final stages of that right now.

I've never heard this particular version of the erosion of genetic diversity RG, do you have a source for this?

As far as the 40% rate of by catch for T steelhead ....well the traditional harvest rate for IF coho through to the 80s was 60% to 70% (from Brian Riddell's talk at the BCWF selective fishery seminar earlier this year) and still the long term average return of fish was maintained.

Other research on T steelhead found there was a fry to parr bottleneck, regardless of the number fry produced we ended with the same # of parr implying there was some loss of productivity in the rearing waters.
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: avid angler on November 11, 2019, 06:16:55 PM
I have a copy of a letter dated in the 1950s from a biologist with DFO that discusses the impact of the fall gillnet fishery in the Fraser on Thompson steelhead. Estimate of the by catch was 3,000 or so - about 30 to 40% of the run. He estimated while the gillnets reduced the # of fish available to anglers on the Thompson it did not seem to effect the size of the total return. In the mid 80s a study of the FN sockeye fishery estimated  the by catch could take as many as 5,000.

The chum roe fishery became a bigger problem for ifs when the chum were enhanced and the run timing changed to earlier in the season and the ifs migration timing. Also how can it effect the number of fish available to anglers but not the total return? Your statement completely contradicts itself.
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: avid angler on November 11, 2019, 06:20:58 PM
Chemical poisoning.
I'm against fishing for Steelhead with chemically cured bait because Steelhead can live-on after spawning and breed another year or more.

If a Steelhead takes a cured bait and shakes the hook, or is wild and released, that chemically cured roe, or shrimp, or prawn, or.... remains in their gut.  I've seen several pictures of legally retained steelhead when 'gutted' revealed several baits in their stomach.  I sense that roe-bags would cause additional threats.

Curing with non-iodized salt 'might' be ok, but borax and many of the other chemicals are poisonous.  [Although Boron (the basis of borax) in micro-concentrations is essential for animal life, higher concentrations can be poisonous].  Rainbow Trout, a very close relative to Steelhead, seem to be the most sensitive.

 http://www.greenfacts.org/en/boron/l-3/boron-5.htm

If itís killing them care to explain why the couple hundred broodstock caught steelhead throughout the province that are caught primarily on bait and held for months have a mortality rate of basically 0
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: Robert_G on November 11, 2019, 06:24:14 PM
Whoa....Ralph took me off his ignore list.

I've never heard this particular version of the erosion of genetic diversity RG, do you have a source for this?

There are thousands of journals and articles written on this.

As far as the 40% rate of by catch for T steelhead ....well the traditional harvest rate for IF coho through to the 80s was 60% to 70% (from Brian Riddell's talk at the BCWF selective fishery seminar earlier this year) and still the long term average return of fish was maintained.

And did you not notice that the Interior Coho and Steelhead crash came pretty much in the same time frame as each other? Yes the average return of fish was maintained for both Coho and Steelhead, but the collapse also was pretty much the same time frame as well. That is not a coincidence. The genetics in both Coho and Steelhead work similar to each other...as we can see by the collapse of both.
And you seem to be ignoring what I said on the stages of collapse with the large fish disappearing first before the run collapses. I KNOW you've witnessed that first hand...so I'm confused how you don't see the similarities.

Other research on T steelhead found there was a fry to parr bottleneck, regardless of the number fry produced we ended with the same # of parr implying there was some loss of productivity in the rearing waters.

The stage of growth that the fish are in or what part of the watershed they are in when the greatest losses happen is irrelevant to the collapse when we are discussing genetic diversity. The fact is that the collapse happened, is all that matters...and that it starts with losing the largest/strongest fish followed by the final stage of the run collapsing. The signs of a genetic diversity problem are obvious. That progression from start to finish is consistent in pretty much every salmon/steelhead run that we have lost. Again....I know you have witnessed that first hand.
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: stsfisher on November 11, 2019, 06:25:21 PM
We, my family and I exercised our right to bar fish the Fraser today to ensure generations don't forget what it is like to socialize on the river by a fire without any distractions....... Oh sorry that's another thread :)
Anyways I am happy to report we used guts and did our very best not to harm any fish in the process, we did however have a great day.
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: milo on November 11, 2019, 06:42:30 PM

And bait does work.  It must be hard to watch as the hordes of newbies catch fish on bait while you get nothing but the satisfaction of knowing that you are more evolved then them.

I don't feel I'm more evolved. I simply hate the stink and the mess associated with cured roe.
I have no issues with people using bait, except when fish are wasted only to harvest roe for fishing. If people prefer to catch fish by feeding them rather than by fooling them, so be it. Whatever cranks your tractor.
What I do know is the few times that artificials outfish roe are absolutely glorious. Like yesterday. It felt great catching the only hatchery coho in the run using a jig under the float amidst a bunch of guys washing roe. :)

Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: RalphH on November 11, 2019, 06:59:02 PM
We, my family and I exercised our right to bar fish the Fraser today to ensure generations don't forget what it is like to socialize on the river by a fire without any distractions....... Oh sorry that's another thread :)
Anyways I am happy to report we used guts and did our very best not to harm any fish in the process, we did however have a great day.

...and that's the main reason I still keep, cure and freeze the roe I catch fishing artificials. Sadly I think bar fishing will be going the way of the dodo.

Quote
And did you not notice that the Interior Coho and Steelhead crash came pretty much in the same time frame as each other?

yes pretty much the same. Also pretty much the same as when coho stopped residing in the Straight and headed out to the West Coast of the Island.

Quote
I don't feel I'm more evolved. I simply hate the stink and the mess associated with cured roe.

what an elitist!
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: milo on November 11, 2019, 07:27:51 PM
what an elitist!

Thank you. Takes one to know one.  ;D
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: Morty on November 11, 2019, 09:18:07 PM
If itís killing them care to explain why the couple hundred broodstock caught steelhead throughout the province that are caught primarily on bait and held for months have a mortality rate of basically 0

I backed up MY statement!!
Give me some data to work with.  Was that bait cured?  What was it cured with?  How many baits did each swallow?
Did you even read the science in the link I provided?
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: Morty on November 11, 2019, 09:25:56 PM
I've never heard this particular version of the erosion of genetic diversity RG, do you have a source for this?

As far as the 40% rate of by catch for T steelhead ....well the traditional harvest rate for IF coho through to the 80s was 60% to 70% (from Brian Riddell's talk at the BCWF selective fishery seminar earlier this year) and still the long term average return of fish was maintained.

Other research on T steelhead found there was a fry to parr bottleneck, regardless of the number fry produced we ended with the same # of parr implying there was some loss of productivity in the rearing waters.

Here's what Rodney wrote to another thread this September...
So when it comes to "fitness", big or strong does not always translate into "fit" if we are talking about genetic or adaptation. A population is not fit if there are only large fish, or only small fish, or medium sized fish. Fitness of a population can be measured by diversity. The more diverse a population is, the stronger it is when it comes to a change in environment, diseases, predation etc.

Killing that one big fish does not alter the fitness of the population, you're not taking away all the big fish immediately. If it was a female, then yes you're losing a lot of offsprings so that has an impact on the population.

If we are selectively harvesting only big fish (like we have unconsciously been doing) - directional selection, then that's bad for the population in the long run. You're shifting the bell curve of the population spectrum. Over time, fish become smaller because you're slowly taking out the genes that yield larger fish.

Selectively spawning only large fish at the hatchery is no good either, again, directional selection. This time, the bell curve of the population spectrum shifts right instead of left.
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: RalphH on November 11, 2019, 09:46:56 PM
In Darwinian terms 'fitness' means rearing the largest number of a cohort or generation to reproduce. Size doesn't matter. Pink salmon may be a good example. Small mature size almost to the extent of coming from a cookie cutter predominates with little varistion.

 However with all salmonids, the larger the fish, particularly but exclusively with females, the more potential reproductive potential, larger females produce more eggs though large males can both control and fertilize more females.

It seems to me more and more people are recognizing many of our salmon species, at least locally, are smaller than we have historically seen on average. It also seems to me that hatchery  specimens are significantly smaller than their wild counter parts which wasn't the case 10 or 20 years ago.
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: RalphH on November 11, 2019, 09:49:48 PM
If itís killing them care to explain why the couple hundred broodstock caught steelhead throughout the province that are caught primarily on bait and held for months have a mortality rate of basically 0

simple - they cull the ones less likely to survive. Bleeders don't go into the holding tanks. The brood stock info has been recognized to have been biased in this manner for at least 20 years.
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: avid angler on November 11, 2019, 11:27:46 PM
simple - they cull the ones less likely to survive. Bleeders don't go into the holding tanks. The brood stock info has been recognized to have been biased in this manner for at least 20 years.
Man you donít have damn clue. You think they murder wild steelhead if they arenít going to make it? You are really something else. I literally spoke with the chilliwack hatchery staff to ask what their yearly losses were. He said in the past few seasons they lost one fish. It jumped out of the tank and sustained injuries and died a few days after the incident.
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: RalphH on November 12, 2019, 06:34:37 AM
So what... the bleeders etc are not taken to the hatchery and put into the tanks so they would experience little or no mortality.

The 2nd issue is like so many you rely on the best case survival rates to support your position but ignore cases such as trout taken on roe which have far worse outcomes - like 30 to 50% mortality.
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: avid angler on November 12, 2019, 07:15:59 AM
So what... the bleeders etc are not taken to the hatchery and put into the tanks so they would experience little or no mortality.

The 2nd issue is like so many you rely on the best case survival rates to support your position but ignore cases such as trout taken on roe which have far worse outcomes - like 30 to 50% mortality.


No one is catching bleeder steelhead. Itís so rare to see.
If you actually caught more then a handful a season like every other idiot you would know that. Yes bait caught rainbow trout have a high mortality when caught on bait. Especially when caught on gear targeting larger fish.

I honestly canít wrap my head around you. You talk about sports fishing like itís the devil itself and the reason for collapses far and wide. But then turn around and say that when nets were taking thousands of ifs a year that it wasnít effecting overall returns. Your position on pretty well everything fishing related  is so my friend backwards and outright stupid that sometimes I swear your just trying to mess with people.
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: avid angler on November 12, 2019, 07:19:36 AM
Also Ralph your contradicting yourself again. You said they cull the fish that wonít make it, are they killing them or just not bringing them to the hatchery? Which is it?
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: AaronWilde on November 12, 2019, 07:45:08 AM
So what... the bleeders etc are not taken to the hatchery and put into the tanks so they would experience little or no mortality.

The 2nd issue is like so many you rely on the best case survival rates to support your position but ignore cases such as trout taken on roe which have far worse outcomes - like 30 to 50% mortality.

Apples to Oranges. You said Trout.. Steelhead is a totally different situation. Trout often taken in frog water with bait under a float or on bottom, where they have ample time to swallow it - obviously there will be high mortality there. Steelhead are taken almost exclusively in fast moving water where they very raraly swallow the bait - it's almost always in the mouth, where the mortality will be very similar to fly or gear fishing. You're such a pain to argue with all your bullsh skewered stats.
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: RalphH on November 12, 2019, 08:03:15 AM
Also Ralph your contradicting yourself again. You said they cull the fish that wonít make it, are they killing them or just not bringing them to the hatchery? Which is it?

Cull: verb; to select from a large quantity

I suggest you have a loom at: http://ospreysteelhead.org/archives/TheOspreyIssue43.pdf

pages 14 to 16

Bob Hooton on published data from the BC Steelhead Brood stock collection mortality data:

Quote
The  best  available  sets  of  hooking mortality  data  for  steelhead  were  collected  during  the  1980s  on  Vancouver Island.    Those  data  have  frequently been  quoted  out  of  context  and  misapplied  in  British  Columbia  and  else-where.

 Largely  ignored  in  subsequent interpretation  and  application  of  those results were the following:1.  The  brood  stock  collection  mortality figures were minimal because:a.  They  included  only  fish  retained  and delivered  to  a  holding  facility,  not  fish that  were  occasionally  released  at  the point  of  capture  because  they  were bleeding  from  hook  penetration  and  it was judged they stood a greater chance of  survival  in  the  wild  than  if  handled and  confined  in  artificial  environments associated with transport and holding.b. They did not include fish that died in holding more than 24 hours after being captured.c.  They  did  not  include  the  occasional mortally  hooked  hatchery  fish  harvested  (legally)  by  the  brood  stock  collection crew. d. The data fail to acknowledge the higher  standard  of  fish  handling  exhibited by  the  trained  fisheries  professionals involved relative to that expected from"average" anglers. 

you might also look for The Wild Steelhead Coalition publication Catch and Release Impacts on Wild Steelhead: What we know and what we don't know.

There you will find,  that at least in Washington State where they kept proper records brood stock mortality varied from 9% to 23% in some cases.

Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: RalphH on November 12, 2019, 08:11:22 AM
Aaron why would we not include other sport fish species in the discussion? Lot's of trout, Bulls and salmon are caught fishing with roe. Most data I have seen suggest those species experience higher release mortality than steelhead.

Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: AaronWilde on November 12, 2019, 08:43:41 AM
Aaron why would we not include other sport fish species in the discussion? Lot's of trout, Bulls and salmon are caught fishing with roe. Most data I have seen suggest those species experience higher release mortality than steelhead.


I'm not saying disclude them, but what studies? There are tons of Trout/Char caught in lakes and I see tons of deep hooking in lakes, but for river fisheries which is what we are really discussing here you won't see as much deep hooking/mortality I guarantee. Bait under bobber/on bottom around a fish that is trying to eat food and yeah, you'll kill a lot more. Were talking about Steelhead and Salmon here, which once again are in moving water where I see far less of that. Almost every fish I have caught with a bottom rig and a worm/roe in frog water/lake water has swallow the bait. Put a worm/roe on a float and drift it for a Steelhead though and almost every fish is in the mouth/lip. Apples to Oranges. What studies show high mortality? These studies probably include feeding Trout/Char caught in lakes/frog water, where a ton, if not the majority of the fishing is probably done!

If you have put in any real numbers, as others have noted, you should have seen this by now. I don't think I've ever deep hooked a Steelhead, mind you I've only put in a few seasons and under 50 fish total. I also don't exclusively use bait though, probably 1 or 1 out of 5 Steelhead I catch is with bait. Just as many bleed from my fly in the throat or a big lure hook.
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: RalphH on November 12, 2019, 10:12:50 AM
if you are not aware of those studies, many of which are getting towards 50 years old then maybe you should look. Most were done in streams and rivers.

A lot of people also still fish with bait in streams, sloughs and rivers where they catch and hook trout char and salmon.

You can find a summary in the  Hooton article for which I provided a link above:

Quote
Data  available  from  various  hooking mortality studies involving a variety of  species  throughout  North  America offer  instruction  for  local  situations.The  feature  common  to  almost  all  the applicable  hooking  mortality  investigations on salmonids is that the use of bait results in the highest incidence of hooks penetrating  critical  anatomical  areas(e.g.  gills,  esophagus,  heart).    That result has been described for coho, chinook,  Dolly  Varden,  Arctic  char,    summer and winter steelhead, resident rainbow  trout,  resident  and  anadromous cutthroat trout and  landlocked Atlantic salmon.    The  higher  the  incidence  of hooking in a critical area, the higher the mortality   rate.      Another   consistent observation  was  that,  when  all  three gear types (bait, artificial lure, fly) were examined,  the  mortality  rate  was  highest with bait, followed by lures, followed-by flies.  Baited hooks produced mortality  rates  that  were  three  to  nine  times higher  than  when  artificial  lures  were used.    Studies  where  flies  were  also examined   normally penetrated  only  the  periphery  of  the jaws or mouth.
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: buck on November 12, 2019, 10:15:44 AM
Having been involved with collecting steelhead brood stock at the Chilliwack Hatchery for 30 years mortality rates were extremely low.  During that time frame we handled approximately 2100 fish which were caught, handled and transported to the hatchery.  The number of bleeders were almost negligible.
All brood stock caught by anglers were transported  to the hatchery. None were released as you have suggested. Some deeply hooked fish (line cut and hook left in fish) survived. After about 1 or 2 weeks in holding we would find the hook lying in the holding pond. Overall mortalities were were about 4-5 percent annually with most occurring later in holding and just prior to spawning. There was no culling of fish for size or physical condition. They all went to holding.
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: RalphH on November 12, 2019, 10:34:07 AM
Thanks Buck. I am not suggesting anything other than people read the segments of the article by Bob Hooton I quoted above or read the entire article

Four to five percent is consistent with what he estimates for professional brood stock programs. Winter steelhead Catch and release using mortality indicate  somewhat higher rates but generally not out of line with good c&r management practice.

This is not always the case and more often not the case depending on the species of fish.

I'd also like to say this part of the discussion isn't about the Vedder Chilliwack, it's brood stock program or about banning roe or bait.
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: Rodney on November 12, 2019, 11:00:59 AM
After about 1 or 2 weeks in holding we would find the hook lying in the holding pond.

Thanks Buck, finally someone who I know worked closely in the program is able to provide solid information.

This part I find interesting. Any idea how that happens? Does the hook get passed through the system or just popped out from the mouth?

So 4~5% mortality, looking at 2 to 3 fish from the 70 broods collected per season. Any particular cause of death that stands out?
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: clarki on November 12, 2019, 11:57:18 AM
On a related note, why do many Region 1 streams have a year round bait ban? (Quote: Bait ban: applies to all streams of
Region 1, all year, with some important exceptions.)

I'm curious, when was this ban implemented and the reasoning behind it? How is Region 2 different from Region 1 in that a bait ban is present on Vancouver Island and not the Lower Mainland? 
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: RalphH on November 12, 2019, 01:10:57 PM
well according to Bob Hooton's chronology of BC Steelhead regulations, the general ban has been in place since 2001.

The lack of a bait ban is a Fraser Valley thing as many streams on the North Shore, Squamish watershed and Harrison Watershed from the lake up have a bait ban. Why them and not many rivers in the valley or the LM?
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: avid angler on November 12, 2019, 01:12:42 PM
Thereís way more wild summer run populations in region 1 would be my guess.
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: MetalAndFeathers on November 12, 2019, 01:23:21 PM
well according to Bob Hooton's chronology of BC Steelhead regulations, the general ban has been in place since 2001.

The lack of a bait ban is a Fraser Valley thing as many streams on the North Shore, Squamish watershed and Harrison Watershed from the lake up have a bait ban. Why them and not many rivers in the valley or the LM?
Because most rivers in the LM without a bait ban are factory hatchery kill rivers?
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: RalphH on November 12, 2019, 04:21:29 PM
Thereís way more wild summer run populations in region 1 would be my guess.

Wild steelhead release and bait ban on summer runs regulations were put in place on all wild summer run streams in 1982.

Bait bans were placed on all streams and rivers May 1 to Nov 30th in 1985. That was to protect trout and parr.

Perhaps no one recalls but almost every river on the East Coast of the Island saw dramatic declines in steelhead returns in the 1990s regardless of hatchery enhancement.

Quote
Because most rivers in the LM without a bait ban are factory hatchery kill rivers?

Again this is a steelhead-centric reponse. The Squamish system had a roe ban and then a bait ban imposed to protect it's bull trout. Those are now the dominate sport fish in that system

There are several smaller rivers in the LM/FV that have small returns of winter steelhead and no bait ban. These streams often have cutthroat populations. Don't the trout deserve protection? Evidence is cutthroat experience significantly higher bait caught c&r mortality than steelhead . The hatchery enhancement program for cutties has been cancelled. So now there will be a bait fishery for not abundant populations of wild trout that have to be released and are susceptible to high c&r mortality.

This fall on the little coho streams I fish I noticed that when the bait anglers showed up in number, the trout disappeared...but that may be do to their avoiding the salmon by moving upstream or out of the river.
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: buck on November 12, 2019, 07:15:19 PM
Rodney: Brood stock mortalities usually started to occur after checking fish for maturity. Some of these fish look like they had just arrived in the system. No abrasions, wounds or sign of disease but dead in holding. We felt these mortalities were stress related due to handling and months in isolation.

Regarding the hooks found in the holding condos, they appeared to have been ejected from the fishes mouth. The hooks were generally rusted and appeared to have been eroded to some degree. How they accomplished this feat is a mystery.

Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: AaronWilde on November 13, 2019, 05:31:25 AM
So what... the bleeders etc are not taken to the hatchery and put into the tanks so they would experience little or no mortality.

The 2nd issue is like so many you rely on the best case survival rates to support your position but ignore cases such as trout taken on roe which have far worse outcomes - like 30 to 50% mortality.

You use random statistics and blanket statements to try to justify your biased view. 30% to 50% mortality when using roe for trout??? You're so delusional! If roe kills that many Trout then fly and gear kill nearly just as many. Anything with a hook is doing similar damage. Even local hatcheries are telling you and you still make excuses like theyre lieing and they cull the ones that wont make it and lie about mortality statistics.

If 30 to 50% of trout died from roe there would be no trout left.

Youre clearly extremely biased against roe. It doesnt do your cause against roe justice to argue in hopes of only being right instead of having a fair unbiased debate.
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: RalphH on November 13, 2019, 06:44:36 AM
 ::)...

In a lot of places the trout did all but disappear. There is nothing random about this information and it's your problem you are not aware of or able to mentally process it.
 
Browsing the water specific regs for Region 3, 4 and even 5 bait bans are among the most common kind of restriction of both lakes and rivers. Why do you think that's the case?
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: Knnn on November 13, 2019, 11:47:03 AM
I'm not sure about the specific statistics, however based on my experience, and I believe many other anglers have found this, when fishing artificial like chironomids, wet or dry flies, spoons, spinners, twitching jigs, 6 inch pink worms or beads set 1.5-2 inches above the hook, I have rarely experienced a deep hook set (I'm not saying never, just that it is rare and I acknowledge that it may also depend on angler experience etc.).  In the past when I fished with roe or an occasionally real worm, the chances of a tongue or deep throat hook set seemed to go up dramatically; certainly enough that I noticed the difference and now very rarely use bait.  I now also use the trailing hook method on spoons to try and minimize deep hook sets and from my N=1 experience, this has been a worthwhile technique.  Therefore, the theory/conjecture that roe and other real baits result in increased mortality due to increased risk of deep hook sets and increased risk of blood loss appears to be both logical and reasonable to me and also fits my experience.  The fact that it is banned by regulatory authorities (with a lot more experience and access to research than I) in many (most?) non meat fisheries provides additional credence to this theory.

I'm not sure why discussions on the potential merits of banning roe or other real baits generates such angst.  Everyone would be on a level playing field and good, experienced anglers would still catch plenty of fish. 
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: stsfisher on November 13, 2019, 11:54:04 AM
.....was holding off but time to rant...two different threads that end up bashing the use of roe...calls for roe bans on hatchery harvest rivers....descriptions of  roe fishers that paint a picture of  unskilled unibrow knuckledraggers.....all self righteous drivel that smells of eliteism ...new laws to address the lack of compliance or enforcement of existing ones only impact those that follow the existing rules....a good example would be the closing of parking areas because of garbage dumping or break ins......if you don't like roe,don't use it....your game,your rules..... curing and presenting roe is just as satisfying as tying and fishing a fly ,building a spinner etc....roe does work but is not like using a net or dynamite...washed a lot of roe only to have it ignored....its  only one tool in a box full of others that are needed to be a successful angler.....even if it was the silver bullet and was used to fill somebody's freezer, as long as its within the existing rules that's their busines ,mind your own.....time and effort would be better spent elsewhere on things that benefit the fishery  and all users.......
lol, look what you started spoonman. Now you have 3 threads bashing the use of roe by uni brow knuckle draggers, lol
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: milo on November 13, 2019, 12:48:57 PM
lol, look what you started spoonman. Now you have 3 threads bashing the use of roe by uni brow knuckle draggers, lol

Well, roe is for little fat kids, what did ya expect? :P
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: clarki on November 13, 2019, 12:52:29 PM
lol, look what you started spoonman. Now you have 3 threads bashing the use of roe by uni brow knuckle draggers, lol
Hah, says you. Itís been years since I could touch my toes!
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: AaronWilde on November 13, 2019, 02:46:09 PM
I'm not sure about the specific statistics, however based on my experience, and I believe many other anglers have found this, when fishing artificial like chironomids, wet or dry flies, spoons, spinners, twitching jigs, 6 inch pink worms or beads set 1.5-2 inches above the hook, I have rarely experienced a deep hook set (I'm not saying never, just that it is rare and I acknowledge that it may also depend on angler experience etc.).  In the past when I fished with roe or an occasionally real worm, the chances of a tongue or deep throat hook set seemed to go up dramatically; certainly enough that I noticed the difference and now very rarely use bait.  I now also use the trailing hook method on spoons to try and minimize deep hook sets and from my N=1 experience, this has been a worthwhile technique.  Therefore, the theory/conjecture that roe and other real baits result in increased mortality due to increased risk of deep hook sets and increased risk of blood loss appears to be both logical and reasonable to me and also fits my experience.  The fact that it is banned by regulatory authorities (with a lot more experience and access to research than I) in many (most?) non meat fisheries provides additional credence to this theory.

I'm not sure why discussions on the potential merits of banning roe or other real baits generates such angst.  Everyone would be on a level playing field and good, experienced anglers would still catch plenty of fish.

More biased blanket statements. Chronimids are fished in lakes. In lakes obiously bait will be swallowed a large majority of the time resulting in deep hooked fish. Again, were talking about steelhead/salmon mortality when drifting bait in moving water where only a tool who doesnt have the experience would argue a large percent of fish swallow and get deep hooked causing mortality.
This isnt a reality.
The last 50 coho Ive caught on roe only one was hooked in the gill rake where i cut the line and released it to prevent bleeding. The rest in the mouth. Drifting roe for salmon and steel has very similar mortality to other methods. I see more bleeding fish from mega hooks that come on store bought lures.

Obviously bait bans on lakes and places where youre fishing for non anadromous feeding trout/char that are trying to swallow/eat food, especially lakes where the bait is stationary then ya youll kill a lot by using bait.

Youre summarizing lakes, rivers and places with trout that are actively feeding which is more biased pointless arguing. Were not talking about those situations.

Flowing water salmon and steelhead using a float the fish are very seldom getting gut hooked/high mortality. Ive gut hooked 3 coho this season where the hook was in the stomach. That was stationary non flowing frog water (like a lake) and yes the mortality will be high there with bait. You shouldnt use bait in those conditions if you dont want to risk gut hooking.

Ive caught a lot of salmon and steelhead in moving river water and  rarely does a fish get hooked deep. Im not the only one. The good anglers with good handling skills (keep the fish under water at all times), good ethics (targetting fresh fish, small hooks, using bait in flowing water rather than stationary when planning to release fish, etc), and this mortality you speak of is simply not the case. I know a lot of good anglers who would agree. I also have fly purist friends who would like to see bait bans on certain rivers and I 100% agree with it on certain flows.

I also think seasonal bait bans should be in place ie no bait in rivers from april 1st thru summer while trout are abundant,especially small.. but even then.. small flys will reek havoc on those trout. Be ethical.. its not about what you use but how you use it.
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: firstlight on November 13, 2019, 04:44:03 PM
I wonder how many fish die after being released after a too long fight with some hero and his 6 wt. fly rod?

I also remember how the argument went about banning roe.
It isnt because of deep hooking and mortality but because its just too effective and too many fish get caught.

I like how the story allways changes to suit others personal gains.
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: RalphH on November 13, 2019, 05:02:09 PM
I wonder how many fish die after being released after a too long fight with some hero and his 6 wt. fly rod?

2.275/100

Quote
I also remember how the argument went about banning roe.
It isnt because of deep hooking and mortality but because its just too effective and too many fish get caught.

that too

Quote

I like how the story allways changes to suit others personal gains.

well if roe catches more and you fish roe - whose gain?
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: Roderick on November 13, 2019, 07:17:22 PM
It isnt because of deep hooking and mortality but because its just too effective and too many fish get caught.


X2
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: Hike_and_fish on November 13, 2019, 08:05:35 PM
I'm in favor of bait bans for one simple reason. It's fine for salmon since they're pretty well dead once they're in fresh water. The resident fish or Steelhead are another story. If we can eliminate Borax bassed cures or just straight up ban borax that would be better. The borax is poison to those fish. The science is there. Borax is toxic. The one and only reason why I dont use Borax cures. Plus I'll land just as many Steelhead on a single bead than with roe.
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: Spoonman on November 13, 2019, 08:35:45 PM
lol, look what you started spoonman. Now you have 3 threads bashing the use of roe by uni brow knuckle draggers, lol
......oops...my bad... :o
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: Knnn on November 13, 2019, 09:21:31 PM
More biased blanket statements............

I'm sure I tried to make my point based on my experience, my friends experience, what I experienced, N=1 experience, etc, etc.   So where were the blanket statements?  Are we not all "biased" by our experiences and knowledge, or were you just trying to belittle my opinion by the use of an adjective that is often considered derogatory in general conversation?

My apologies, I did not realized that your argument was solely limited to salmon/steel-head under a specific set of conditions, because we all know that salmon and steel-head are only caught under those conditions; well only if you are not a tool. Therefore, for clarity, are you suggesting that tools should not use roe, and particularly if they don't know how to use it properly under specific conditions?

I'm not sure I have seen anyone argue that a large percent of fish swallow and get deep hooked causing mortality under the conditions you describe.  Under those conditions, I would probably agree with you.  However, the scenario you present will not apply to all the myriad of conditions anglers use roe; such as fishing roe in slow moving or still water for Coho or trout, where wild fish and/or other non-anadromous species may also be present.

I'm glad to see that you acknowledge that "then ya you'll kill a lot by using bait" and that bait bans have a use.  Therefore, the only slight difference of opinion appears to be in the conditions under  and/or the extent to which bait bans should be applied. 
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: RalphH on November 13, 2019, 09:28:32 PM
...

Obviously bait bans on lakes and places where youre fishing for non anadromous feeding trout/char that are trying to swallow/eat food, especially lakes where the bait is stationary then ya youll kill a lot by using bait.

...

I also think seasonal bait bans should be in place ie no bait in rivers from april 1st thru summer while trout are abundant,especially small.. but even then.. small flys will reek havoc on those trout. Be ethical.. its not about what you use but how you use it.

you are starting to get it. :)
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: AaronWilde on November 14, 2019, 03:35:02 AM
I'm sure I tried to make my point based on my experience, my friends experience, what I experienced, N=1 experience, etc, etc.   So where were the blanket statements?  Are we not all "biased" by our experiences and knowledge, or were you just trying to belittle my opinion by the use of an adjective that is often considered derogatory in general conversation?

My apologies, I did not realized that your argument was solely limited to salmon/steel-head under a specific set of conditions, because we all know that salmon and steel-head are only caught under those conditions; well only if you are not a tool. Therefore, for clarity, are you suggesting that tools should not use roe, and particularly if they don't know how to use it properly under specific conditions?

I'm not sure I have seen anyone argue that a large percent of fish swallow and get deep hooked causing mortality under the conditions you describe.  Under those conditions, I would probably agree with you.  However, the scenario you present will not apply to all the myriad of conditions anglers use roe; such as fishing roe in slow moving or still water for Coho or trout, where wild fish and/or other non-anadromous species may also be present.

I'm glad to see that you acknowledge that "then ya you'll kill a lot by using bait" and that bait bans have a use.  Therefore, the only slight difference of opinion appears to be in the conditions under  and/or the extent to which bait bans should be applied.

I'm sorry Knn, you're not a tool, I shouldn't call names. You seem to be a respectable and ethical angler. I actually didn't notice it was you I was replying too and wouldn't of called you that though that doesn't make it okay. It set me off because it feels like you and Ralph were arguing just to be right by throwing out statements about mortality that cover lakes and other fisheries that shouldn't really be included in a discussion about Steelhead/Salmon mortality. We're discussing float fishing for Salmon and Steelhead, it's not just my argument but we're talking about bait bans on local rivers - not lakes and the entirety of BC trout fishing, where, undoubtably a bait ban makes a big difference. I couldn't agree with you more. There are conditions and times where it's unethical to use bait. I think we all know this and anyone who argues it either doesn't care about mortality or doesn't understand. Catch 100 trout out of a lake on a worm and tell me how many swallow? A lot. Catch 100 Steelhead or Coho on a worm drifted down a river under a float and tell me how many swallow? Barely any.
Totally different situations. Even in slow moving water from what I have seen, generally Coho are spook light biters, though I cannot deny that without a flow the chance increases and if you have a chance to release a fish then you probably shouldn't use bait if you want to be as ethical as possible.
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: redside1 on November 14, 2019, 11:29:09 AM
Iíve learned to respect your single mindedness, Robert, and your absolute confidence in your singular grasp of the truth.

Itís reported that the Thompson steelhead started to decline in the 1990ís. When did the Fraser chum gillnet fishery begin?

if you were around long enough to talk to the true old timers that fished the Thompson from the 1950's on wards, they would tell you that the last good year was in 1958 (could be out by a year or so) when nylon gill nets started to be used on the Fraser instead of cotton gill nets.
Steelhead and larger salmon could break through the cotton nets but not the new nylon nets back then.
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: milo on November 14, 2019, 03:38:03 PM
if you were around long enough to talk to the true old timers that fished the Thompson from the 1950's on wards, they would tell you that the last good year was in 1958 (could be out by a year or so) when nylon gill nets started to be used on the Fraser instead of cotton gill nets.
Steelhead and larger salmon could break through the cotton nets but not the new nylon nets back then.

Wow! That is rather revealing information.
Why did nobody back then speak up to try and ban the use of nylon nets on the Fraser?
Nothing traditional in using nylon gill nets, that's for sure.
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: greyghost on November 14, 2019, 07:59:32 PM
Why did nobody back then speak up to try and ban the use of nylon nets on the Fraser?
Nothing traditional in using nylon gill nets, that's for sure.

I will take a stab at this? It was the 50’s!!!! Tradition or is it Evolution!!!
Title: Re: ....l hate your guts...
Post by: cas on November 23, 2019, 12:42:30 AM
Here it is, plain and simple:

- NO, the use of bait on the Thompson didn't kill the Steelhead population.

- NO, the bait ban wasn't implemented too late - Ironically, the 30%, 40%, and then 80% collapse happened as soon as bait was banned in 2014. Figure that one out! Self-righteous, self-centred, and and egotistically agenda driven anglers could have done THEIR part in standing up for the real issues that faced Thompson Steelhead and IFS; fighting for minimal by-catch regulations, collaborating habitat restoration projects, joining clubs, writing letters, and overall, just working together as ANGLERS and CONSERVATIONISTS no matter the preferred method fishing.

It's plain and simple folks. Many fought for the wrong things when Thompson Steelhead needed our voice the most. The writing was on the wall 10 years ago, heck, even 20 years ago - some were just too focused on making sure they'd get to fish a fly through the Spur Bar before the selfless and volunteer driven gear angler "maybe" beating them to the spot.

If half the amount of nonsense that occurred up there in the last 10 years was put forth in building a better voice, the ball would be rolling a bit better on this topic - Am I saying it would have made a difference? Well, nobody really knows. Fisheries and Oceans can never seem to get this one right because if Thompson Steelhead and IFS were extinct, it would make their life a heck of a lot easier. The simple fact is that regardless of the outcome, more people would understand the severity of this, and a few more folks within the general public would certainly know as well.

Countless organizations have fought tooth and nail (and still do) for these fish, and many other iconic wild steelhead populations while many just sat on the sidelines bickering about a few bait guys enjoying their day on the most iconic and most important steelhead river.

For what it's worth, I have seen more Steelhead die on flies than on gear in that river. While not many, I'm sure most that are experienced and seasoned on this river, that most would say the same. And those dry flies... sheesh, those fish gobble them up like no tomorrow.

It is what it is.

Now - how about some people focus on the issues that still plague our governing bodies and the demise of Thompson and Interior Fraser Steelhead.