Print

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

[Matt]

There is nothing wrong with the river. It's only natural that hatchery fish will have a higher survival rate. They are protected in pens so nothing eats them until they are released.
This is a huge advantage

To be blunt, you're wrong about hatchery survival rates and wrong about gloves. 

Its accepted that juveniles reared in hatcheries are less able to avoid predation and ultimately have better reproductive success compared to hatchery fish.  I can provide insightful scientific literature as to why this is if you like, just say the word.

Wool gloves remove more slime than rubber (who wears leather gloves fishing?).  Stick out your tongue and try wipe saliva off with a bare finger, now a rubber glove, finally a wool sweater... you'll have your answer as to which removes more slime and thus is more harmful to fish.  As for the situation in which you need wool gloves to control a fish so that it doesn't bounce around on the rocks, this isn't a common problem for most people, not sure why you're having difficulty with it, but it doesn't necessitate wool gloves.  Kneel down, grip the wrist with a bare hand, keep the fish in about 8" of water... works for most everyone else, should work for you as well.

[joshhowat]

Amen Matt!!

[adriaticum]

i dont get your logic on wool gloves not being as damaging, if you blew snot all over your hand what would type of glove would wipe that off better wool, rubber, or leather? soft material dont change a thing its gonna wipe all that slime coat off the fish regardless.

Simple logic is that rubber is a harder material then wool and it will to more physical damage. If the fish is wiggling which it always does, I think wool would be less damaging to the scales.
But yes all handling of fish will remove slime no doubt. It's just a question of how much slime removal is dangerous. Fish remove slime in the water naturally when they swim around the rocks, rub themselves, jump falls etc. It's just a question of how much is too much I think.

[adriaticum]

To be blunt, you're wrong about hatchery survival rates and wrong about gloves. 

Its accepted that juveniles reared in hatcheries are less able to avoid predation and ultimately have better reproductive success compared to hatchery fish.  I can provide insightful scientific literature as to why this is if you like, just say the word.

Wool gloves remove more slime than rubber (who wears leather gloves fishing?).  Stick out your tongue and try wipe saliva off with a bare finger, now a rubber glove, finally a wool sweater... you'll have your answer as to which removes more slime and thus is more harmful to fish.  As for the situation in which you need wool gloves to control a fish so that it doesn't bounce around on the rocks, this isn't a common problem for most people, not sure why you're having difficulty with it, but it doesn't necessitate wool gloves.  Kneel down, grip the wrist with a bare hand, keep the fish in about 8" of water... works for most everyone else, should work for you as well.

I think you are talking of hatchery vs wild over all. I'm talking about fry/smolts hatchery vs wild survival. I think that was the question.
Hatchery fish have a much better start in life and are bigger when released then wild.
Plus there is more of them. Take 1000 eggs and incubate them and rear them in ponds vs 1000 eggs that are hatched in the river. You will have more smolts from the hatchery fish because they are protected. Now when it comes down to the "street smarts" of the fish once they make it into the ocean, then clearly wild will fare better.

I don't agree with you on the rubber vs wool. I think wet rubber is more damaging to the fish. Try and put a rubber glove and rotate your wrist for a 360 . Chances are you will see a bit of redness. The reason people use rubber gloves is because they grip better.
But I will unfortunately not be able to prove either way since I don't use gloves while actually fishing.

[adriaticum]

I have a pretty good idea how you handle fish. With wool gloves, although in the water, which damages the fish no matter what. As for the fish that you see rolled on the rocks and they "appear" to be ok do you see the exact same fish 7-10 days later after an infection has set in due to the slime loss? Or the fish that you handle or see handled with gloves (of any sort whether they are wool or a synthetic)? No I didn't think so! Honestly you're all over the place about saying this is better that is better and you have no real clue what you're even talking about. It says clearly in the regulations that a bare wet hand is to be used to tail fish that intend to be released. Now if anyone out there is too worried about not getting that grip and grin hero shot with a fish they shouldn't be fishing, simple as that.

You have a pretty good "idea".
Dude you are putting words in my mouth and talking about ideas you have in your head.
You are not reading what I'm saying.
Ideas from someone smart mean something, ideas from a dumbass mean nothing.
It all depends where find yourself on that scale.
Don't let your mind paint pictures your eyes are not seeing.
That's called imagination.

[TayC]

"I don't agree with you on the rubber vs wool. I think wet rubber is more damaging to the fish. Try and put a rubber glove and rotate your wrist for a 360 . Chances are you will see a bit of redness. The reason people use rubber gloves is because they grip better."

Is your wrist slimy and covered in scales?

[Kenwee]

For "Fish sake" don't use gloves to tail your fish.

[HOOK]

would someone just post up some links to ACTUAL PROOF of how the use of gloves affect fish slime loss. Hopefully it goes over which are worse than others as well.

When you guys say rubber gloves, what the hell kind do you mean. surgical type gloves, neoprene with rubber grip areas, rubber palmed fitted gloves ?

I would say wearing latex surgical gloves to be non harmful because they don't soak up water, have no roughness, fit tightly to your hand allowing for maximum grip (almost like bare hands).....etc


I for a fact know how much crap wool gloves take off, Im guilty of tailing a couple fish way back years ago with wool gloves on. My gloves were so soaked in fish slime that I had to remove the glove to rinse them properly before putting them back on. Im sure lots of us have made this mistake before 


If you suck at tailing fish then buy a proper catch and release net and USE IT, also make sure its big enough to allow the fish to be cradled and not curled inside. fish that are curled wiggle around and peel tons of slime and even scales off their bodies.

[Matt]

I don't agree with you on the rubber vs wool. I think wet rubber is more damaging to the fish. Try and put a rubber glove and rotate your wrist for a 360 . Chances are you will see a bit of redness. The reason people use rubber gloves is because they grip better.

I'd explain to you why wool removes more slime, but I don't have enough crayons.  Just trust me.

[Easywater]

If you search Google Images for "fishing gloves", 99% of them are neoprene.

[Johnny Canuck]

Mmmmmmmmm crayons my favorite. Wool has the most surface area so it will remove the most slime.

[milo]

Simple logic is that rubber is a harder material then wool and it will do more physical damage. If the fish is wiggling which it always does, I think wool would be less damaging to the scales.

No Sasha.
It is not about hardness; it's about abrasiveness.
Rubber is far more abrasive than wool, and as such, allows for a much firmer grip on the fish than wool. A firmer grip brings about better control of the fish and less wiggling, which results in less of its slime being removed.

[bederko]

In 1977 when the first steelhead were taken for hatchery purposes we used wool gloves. At the end of the day the fish seemed fine but by the next day a clear hand print could be seen around the caudal peduncle and under the pectoral fins. Fungus was evident almost immediately. Fortunately for most of those fish we could use malachite green at that time and it was very effective against fungus.
Steelhead are not like trout in a lake they are deteriorating from the time they leave salt water until the time they return to salt water (if they return). Fungus is constantly trying to invade their bodies and most often succeeds. They often end up looking like a fungused-up dead salmon washed ashore in May and June and taken away by the freshet.
It's not about how much slime removal is dangerous to the fish. About 95% of steelhead die without ever being caught and handled by anglers.     

[adriaticum]

In 1977 when the first steelhead were taken for hatchery purposes we used wool gloves. At the end of the day the fish seemed fine but by the next day a clear hand print could be seen around the caudal peduncle and under the pectoral fins. Fungus was evident almost immediately. Fortunately for most of those fish we could use malachite green at that time and it was very effective against fungus.
Steelhead are not like trout in a lake they are deteriorating from the time they leave salt water until the time they return to salt water (if they return). Fungus is constantly trying to invade their bodies and most often succeeds. They often end up looking like a fungused-up dead salmon washed ashore in May and June and taken away by the freshet.
It's not about how much slime removal is dangerous to the fish. About 95% of steelhead die without ever being caught and handled by anglers.   

Now that's something we can use.