Fishing with Rod Discussion Forum
Fishing in British Columbia => General Discussion => Topic started by: dave c on June 23, 2013, 07:29:13 PM
-
I recently watched with interest a video on this link showing Air Spawning Steelhead filmed at Seymour Salmon Hatchery. I found it interesting that the Hatchery worker used a wool glove when handling the fish. I've read many heated discussions in this forum regarding the danger to fish handled this way. I find it odd that if it were so dangerous to the fish that Hatchery Staff would use gloves.
-
gloves are harmful, and im doubting the survival rates are very high on those fish anyhow.
-
The survival rate of steelhead spawning in the wild is minimal; fish being held in a dark compartment for a few months and treated with formalin to combat fungus and bacterial diseases no doubt lowers this survival even further and... air spawning steelhead requires a docile fish and if the fish are not sedated (and if they are to be released they cannot be sedated with anaesthetics) are very difficult to handle, hence the gloves.
IMO, air spawning steelhead is entirely for optics and a waste time and effort. Autopsies of air spawned Chilliwack River steelhead morts invariably had 5-600 eggs remaining in the body cavity; multiply this by the number of females used and the benefit of releasing these fish is most often negated.
Time for the Province to get it's collective head around this misdirected procedure and follow standard hatchery procedures for salmonids for optimum production and that means killing the broodstock when sexually mature.
Feeding them optimum rations and proper water temperatures when being reared is helpful also ;)
-
Fish are not made of sugar. It takes some force to damage their protective coat.
Wool is soft and unless you are using rubber gloves or some other hard material the fish should be ok.
-
if anything rubber would be less hamfull than wool dont know where you get that from.
-
if anything rubber would be less hamfull than wool dont know where you get that from.
I agree,
to disagree
-
If I'm not mistaken the Seymour Hatchery is privately funded and run and they use different guidelines than that of say the Chedder or Chehalis hatcheries.
-
If I'm not mistaken the Seymour Hatchery is privately funded and run and they use different guidelines than that of say the Chedder or Chehalis hatcheries.
I believe you're right about different protocols JC, and wild Seymour fish are, to my knowledge, rare indeed. It's my understanding hatchery fish have been used for augmentation in the past, unlike the Chilliwack or Chehalis facilities. Perhaps the question is ... should wild Seymour steelhead be used for broodstock or, be left to spawn naturally? Tough call and I hope others with more knowledge of this system chime in.
-
I think seymour wilds should be left wild, don't see them very often almost all the fish i've caught there are clipped.
-
I think seymour wilds should be left wild, don't see them very often almost all the fish i've caught there are clipped.
There is a way higher survival rate of hatchery raised fish than fish surviving in the wild. There is clearly something wrong on the river if the wilds aren't making it on their own.
-
The Seymour river still has to use hatchery fish to make there quota. Also there are a lot more wild summer fish then winter fish.
Poaching is a problem on that river in the summer. People will make pools in the lower to trap fish.
-
lots of guys using bait there aswell, i find lots of roe on the rocks along the banks.
-
Fish are not made of sugar. It takes some force to damage their protective coat.
Wool is soft and unless you are using rubber gloves or some other hard material the fish should be ok.
Actually wool gloves are very hard on fish as has been stated before. You never want to handle silver bright salmon or steelhead with them as they do remove the slime and allow fungus to develop in that area. I have handled many thousands of fish over the years while running collection / spawning programs and wool gloves on silver fish is a big no no. Fish that are close to spawning is no big deal as these fish will be killed and spawned shortly and will not be alive long enough for the fungus to develop. That also applies to salmon that are released and are close to spawning.
Surgical gloves are good as they do not remove the mucus but that has to be balanced with the fact that the fish are damn near impossible to hang onto once you have your hands on them. The best way is just to use your wet hands and develop a tight grip around the wrist of the tail while placeing your other hand under the pectorals. They won't break if you do it properly!
-
Nice post B. The new position is looking good on you ;)
-
Actually wool gloves are very hard on fish as has been stated before. You never want to handle silver bright salmon or steelhead with them as they do remove the slime and allow fungus to develop in that area. I have handled many thousands of fish over the years while running collection / spawning programs and wool gloves on silver fish is a big no no. Fish that are close to spawning is no big deal as these fish will be killed and spawned shortly and will not be alive long enough for the fungus to develop. That also applies to salmon that are released and are close to spawning.
Surgical gloves are good as they do not remove the mucus but that has to be balanced with the fact that the fish are damn near impossible to hang onto once you have your hands on them. The best way is just to use your wet hands and develop a tight grip around the wrist of the tail while placeing your other hand under the pectorals. They won't break if you do it properly!
Steelhead used for brood stock are NOT killed for their eggs and milt.
-
Steelhead used for brood stock are NOT killed for their eggs and milt.
They are in some places.
I know because I have done it for the reasons that Dave has mentioned. Air spawning leaves many eggs still in the fish and since it is a numbers game it is better to utilise all of the eggs in a fish as opposed to just getting more fish from the river. Return rates on air spawned kelts is low as very few of them come back on subsequent years to spawn.
-
Fish are not made of sugar. It takes some force to damage their protective coat.
Wool is soft and unless you are using rubber gloves or some other hard material the fish should be ok.
This is simply incorrect. No gloves. Wool will scrap protective slime off the fish exposing it to disease and fungi as has been said many times on this forum and is printed in the regs:
http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/fw/fish/ethics/
If you must handle the fish, do so with your bare, wet hands (not with gloves). Keep your fingers out of the gills, and don't squeeze the fish or cause scales to be lost or damaged. It is best to leave fish in the water for photos. If you must lift a fish then provide support by cradling one hand behind the front fins and your other hand just forward of the tail fin. Minimize the time out of the water, then hold the fish in the water to recover. If fishing in a river, point the fish upstream while reviving it. When the fish begins to struggle and swim normally, let it go.
If you can't pick up a fish barehanded without dropping it, leave it in the water and unhook it there.
-
Wool is soft and unless you are using rubber gloves or some other hard material the fish should be ok.
I have not done my own mortality tests on fish, but I would be shocked - SHOCKED - if anyone could prove to me a wool glove removes LESS protective slime than a rubber glove.
Think about it - if you got slime on your hand and you wanted it off, and there were two walls in front of you. One was made of wool, and the other was made of rubber... which one would you rub your hand on to get all the slime off?
-
This is simply incorrect. No gloves. Wool will scrap protective slime off the fish exposing it to disease and fungi as has been said many times on this forum and is printed in the regs:
http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/fw/fish/ethics/
If you must handle the fish, do so with your bare, wet hands (not with gloves). Keep your fingers out of the gills, and don't squeeze the fish or cause scales to be lost or damaged. It is best to leave fish in the water for photos. If you must lift a fish then provide support by cradling one hand behind the front fins and your other hand just forward of the tail fin. Minimize the time out of the water, then hold the fish in the water to recover. If fishing in a river, point the fish upstream while reviving it. When the fish begins to struggle and swim normally, let it go.
If you can't pick up a fish barehanded without dropping it, leave it in the water and unhook it there.
I know that's the theory. But if you have to use gloves, wool is better than rubber or leather.
I pretty much don't use gloves and when I do, they're wool. I see fish kicked and rolled on the rocks all the time and most of them are ok.
Not that I want to teach people to kick and drag the fish onto the rocks.
-
I have not done my own mortality tests on fish, but I would be shocked - SHOCKED - if anyone could prove to me a wool glove removes LESS protective slime than a rubber glove.
Think about it - if you got slime on your hand and you wanted it off, and there were two walls in front of you. One was made of wool, and the other was made of rubber... which one would you rub your hand on to get all the slime off?
All handling of fish will remove slime from fish unless you don't touch the fish and unhook it in the water with one of the unhooky thingamajiggies.
Wool is softer than leather (nobody uses leather gloves anyway in the water), I don't have to tell you that. Just put a pair on and touch your face.
You are doing more damage to the fish by rolling it on the rocks and laying it on it's side and letting it thrash around than handling it's tail with wool gloves.
I would always rather keep the fish in the water fully and grab it's tail with wool gloves than roll it on it's side on the rocks to unhook it.
But we all know perfect scenarios rarely happen.
-
I don't understand the point of using gloves on steelhead or salmon. They are easy enough to release by tailing and unhooking.
If it's winter and cold take the glove off, release fish, then put the glove back on.
-
Also if its cold and your wearing gloves and you take them off before handling the fish. When your done with the fish your wet cold hands will become dry warm hands in your dry gloves. Not soaking wet hands and gloves all day.
-
Wool is softer than leather (nobody uses leather gloves anyway in the water), I don't have to tell you that. Just put a pair on and touch your face.
What does "softness" have to do with this? We're not petting the fish, we're grabbing them.
Whether or not you remove slime is all about texture, not whether the material is soft or hard. Rough-textured materials (ie. wool) will remove more slime than a smooth material (ie. rubber), assuming your grip is firm.
I used to use textured gloves when tailing fish because it provided a better grip. They would always be covered in slime afterwards. One time while on the water I had on a latex glove because I had a cut on my hand, and after I'd tailed the fish with my wet latex glove, there was minimal (if any) slime on it.
Nowadays (and for many years), I simply don't wear ANY gloves when tailing fish.
-
There is a way higher survival rate of hatchery raised fish than fish surviving in the wild. There is clearly something wrong on the river if the wilds aren't making it on their own.
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
-
No glove is how I ended up with 2 kids !!! :o
Im in the NO GLOVE side of this debate when it comes to fish handling, I also tail fish I intend to release in water deep enough they cant smash around on the rocks/sand unless its not possible
-
I know that's the theory. But if you have to use gloves, wool is better than rubber or leather.
I pretty much don't use gloves and when I do, they're wool. I see fish kicked and rolled on the rocks all the time and most of them are ok.
Not that I want to teach people to kick and drag the fish onto the rocks.
All handling of fish will remove slime from fish unless you don't touch the fish and unhook it in the water with one of the unhooky thingamajiggies.
Wool is softer than leather (nobody uses leather gloves anyway in the water), I don't have to tell you that. Just put a pair on and touch your face.
You are doing more damage to the fish by rolling it on the rocks and laying it on it's side and letting it thrash around than handling it's tail with wool gloves.
I would always rather keep the fish in the water fully and grab it's tail with wool gloves than roll it on it's side on the rocks to unhook it.
But we all know perfect scenarios rarely happen.
uhhh... dude, what? I think people were talking about rubber vs. wool gloves and the negative effects on fish handling, not comparing it to dragging the fish onto the rocks and unhooking it there, two different scenarios.
It's not rocket science...tail the fish with one ungloved hand, pop hook out with other ungloved hand... voila!
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
Agree that hatchery fish are able to 'hit the ground running' so-to-speak.
But in terms of the river having "nothing wrong with it" well, look at the estuary... you have Kinder Morgan Westridge on the left, Chevron oil refinery on the right and the transfer station and shipyards in between to name a few... the wild outmigrating steelhead smolts have to pass by all this, under the two bridges that happen to be populated by cormorants, and swim by the sewage treatment plant and out into the ocean...
The hatchery steelhead smolts are taken out to lighthouse park by barge or truck and released, absent of all pollution mentioned earlier. While the predation nets at the hatchery reduce the chances of fish being picked off by animals and birds, there is a little more to it... sorry for going off-topic ;)
anyways...NO GLOVE :P
-
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
Nothing wrong with the river? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA I REALLY hope you were being sarcastic or joking... Here's one HUGE problem on the Seymour... The dam! This causes far lower water temperatures in the river due to water being let out of the dam from the bottom of the reservoir versus the surface water which is warmer. Now as for the hatchery fish having a higher survival percent part. If it came down to two wilds in the river, one male and one female. Would you want to let them be in the wild or catch them and use their eggs and milt to raise 2500-4500 fry and greatly increase the chances of those fry actually having a chance at repopulating the river? I know what I would do and I think I already know what you would do as well as you tail the fish with your ever so soft wool gloves...
-
Nothing wrong with the river? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA I REALLY hope you were being sarcastic or joking... Here's one HUGE problem on the Seymour... The dam! This causes far lower water temperatures in the river due to water being let out of the dam from the bottom of the reservoir versus the surface water which is warmer. Now as for the hatchery fish having a higher survival percent part. If it came down to two wilds in the river, one male and one female. Would you want to let them be in the wild or catch them and use their eggs and milt to raise 2500-4500 fry and greatly increase the chances of those fry actually having a chance at repopulating the river? I know what I would do and I think I already know what you would do as well as you tail the fish with your ever so soft wool gloves...
Ok, sure the dam is a problem but given that that's not going to change the question was why do hatchery fish have better survival rate then wild fish in the same river. At least that's how I understood your question. Another way to answer it would be to ask why do domestic cows have a better survival rate than rocky mountain elk.
You know squat about how I would handle fish. I didn't say it's good to use gloves or that I use them.
I just said that I think wool gloves do less damage then rubber gloves and if I was forced to use gloves I would chose wool. Latex is not the same as rubber also.
And let me repeat it for you, I don't use gloves when fishing.
::)
-
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.
-
You know squat about how I would handle fish.
I pretty much don't use gloves and when I do, they're wool. I see fish kicked and rolled on the rocks all the time and most of them are ok.
All handling of fish will remove slime from fish unless you don't touch the fish and unhook it in the water with one of the unhooky thingamajiggies.
Wool is softer than leather (nobody uses leather gloves anyway in the water), I don't have to tell you that. Just put a pair on and touch your face.
You are doing more damage to the fish by rolling it on the rocks and laying it on it's side and letting it thrash around than handling it's tail with wool gloves.
I would always rather keep the fish in the water fully and grab it's tail with wool gloves than roll it on it's side on the rocks to unhook it.
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.
-
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.
-
Amen Matt!!
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
"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?
-
For "Fish sake" don't use gloves to tail your fish.
-
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.
-
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.
-
If you search Google Images for "fishing gloves", 99% of them are neoprene.
-
Mmmmmmmmm crayons my favorite. Wool has the most surface area so it will remove the most slime.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.