Print

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

[marmot]

Haven't people known that gloves and fish don't mix for 15 plus years now???

It's pretty easy to take them off when you start playing a fish....and you don't have to squeeze the life out of a fish to tail it properly, contrary to what is being argued.

[Dave]

Gloves, especially wool gloves, should never be used on fish you wish to release, for all the reasons already given.   Until a few years ago, the steelhead captured by a certain individual during the Chilliwack broodstock capture program had a higher (much higher) mortality rate compared to other anglers.  On investigation it was revealed he used wool gloves to handle the fish. Not anymore.  Gloves were forbidden during the handling of Cultus sockeye and it's broodstock program.

[Sterling C]

"The caudal and anal fins of sexually mature female fish
are more frequently infected than the male fish (Richards and Pickering, 1978) and it is
precisely these areas that are used for redd-digging in the gravels of spawning streams.
Abrasion to this area of the body is unavoidable. Hatai and Hoshai (Chap. 4, this volume)
show that destruction of the epidermis overlying the adipose fin is an important
predisposing factor for saprolegniasis."

I wonder how much, if any, redd-digging she had done.

None. Its a summer run steelhead.

[Every Day]

Yea labmik that was a summer steely.
No where close to REDD digging and was caught WILD out of a river by brood stockers.
Not sure what glove was used, don't think my friend caught that one (or saw it caught) but I can try asking.

That fish in the photo was WAY better off than a fish that would have been released back into the wild.
Little or no energy was going into swimming in those 10 days and antibiotics were in the water to try and help it out.
In the wild that fish would probably have been dead faster than 10 days which would explain why you guys probably don't catch many fish looking like this.

I still think gloves are horrible to use.. with little or NO benifts and probably cause alot more harm than good.
Hopefully this shows effectivly what they can do and may change some of your opinions on gloves, who knows maybe you will stop using them one day.
So far every argument here for USING gloves has been weak. It's unnecessary and causes harm to fish, don't use a glove if you care about the Steelhead or any fish...
PERIOD.

[doja]

So what about a latex glove? would that be bad or not an issue as it should not remove much slime. I ask this as I some times use a latex glove over my wind stopper gloves when it's really cold and raining or snowy slush.

[HOOK]

how do you wear a latex glove OVER your windstopper gloves ?? I have the same gloves and i could never fit a latex over them. I have seen guys that wear latex under their gloves but still remove their gloves to tail fish, i mean they remove the wool/fleece gloves not the latex.

[nickredway]

Am interested if latex gloves are OK too. My hands take a right beating at work tying steel  / pouring concrete outside all year so usually wear them under work gloves and was thinking about wearing them under my fingerless for fishing.

[doja]

Yes, I wear them OVER my gloves as to keep them dry and thus much, much warmer. I have the newest pair with cut off fingers.

I tried them under the glove but they just end up holding allot of COLD water and almost seems points less although they would probably work better under a pair of thicker wool gloves.

I used some gloves from my sister, as it was her idea, and a very good one. I believe they were large or extra large and blue and maybe from pharasave. The fit was decent, not too tight. Took some skill to put on but was fairly easy to do and the benefit of having dry, warm hands made a great day fishing, even if it was raining/snowing and cold. And it is so easy to re-tie when you can actually feel your fingers.

[HOOK]

hmmm  you do know that those gloves are designed to keep you warm even when they are soaking wet. I pull mine off when they get wet and ring them out and back on they go, hands still stay nice and warm. my fingertips do get cold but i just put the flap over them and in about 2 minutes they are toasty once again  putting latex over them is kinda pointless because your just creating yet a second layer of windproofing however you are creating a layer of dryness. I dont know i just think its pointless to have $60 gloves and then cover them up, i bet if you tried just the latex you would find them almost just as warm without the gloves because your hands will sweat alot inside them and should keep you warm.

just my thoughts 

[Kristopher]

I have personally never landed a fish with gloves on and I never would either.  I have only fished with gloves on a few times as I find them cumbersome while trying to fly fish (even the fingerless ones,) but every time I've worn them I've simply removed them with my teeth as soon as I hooked fish.

[DionJL]

Randolph20: Trying to disprove photo "evidence" on a technicality (the difference from a fungicide to antibiotic) is pathetic. You look for an argument everywhere you post and I for one am tired of it. The term "educated" is used on this forum in reference to fishing experience and knowledge, not Biology, Chemistry, or Physics knowledge. I would strongly suggest that you think long and hard before you hit the reply button next time.

EveryDay: It's obvious you are passionate about fish welfare. However, I also suggest that you take a few minutes after typing out a reply before you hit the post button. You'd be surprised how often you decide it's best not to post. Also though you pride yourself on claiming you know the regs you posted

you are only allowed to use ONE hook in BC!

earlier today which is wrong. Treble hooks as well as barbs are allowed on some lakes throughout the province. It is only in rivers, sloughs, creeks, etc. that the blanket "one single barbless hook" regulation applies.

Everyone else: As I mentioned to randolph20 I'm tired of his post, he is always looking for an argument based on technicalities. In the words of fisherforever: DON'T FEED THE TROLL!


I am leaving the topic up because it does contain important information for both new and experienced anglers. Keep it on topic.

[Every Day]

Sorry Dion I worded it wrong.
I meant ONE hook as in one hook tied to the line (whether it be barbed, treble).
Randolph was referring to a 2 hook setup (2 treble hooks, etc on a flatfish).

[DionJL]

Sorry Dion I worded it wrong.
I meant ONE hook as in one hook tied to the line (whether it be barbed, treble).
Randolph was referring to a 2 hook setup (2 treble hooks, etc on a flatfish).

All the more reason to take that minute or two to re-read your reply before you hit the post button.

[labmik]

I know it's off topic, but I've always been bothered by the wording vs meaning of "single barbless hook."  To me, that means a single hook without barbs.  Thah hook could have multiple points, but you can have only one hook.  If the intent of the meaning is to restrict the lure to one hook with a single point, shouldn't the wording be "barbless single hook?"

[Rodney]

I know it's off topic, but I've always been bothered by the wording vs meaning of "single barbless hook."  To me, that means a single hook without barbs.  Thah hook could have multiple points, but you can have only one hook.  If the intent of the meaning is to restrict the lure to one hook with a single point, shouldn't the wording be "barbless single hook?"

For BC's tidal and freshwater recreational fisheries, these terms are defined in the regulation synopsis. Single is defined as a hook with a single point. Barbless is defined as a hook without a barb.

One of these four different types of hook restrictions can be found in each fishery:

• No hook restriction - The angler can use a single or a treble hook, which can either be barbed or barbless.
• Single hook restriction - The angler can use a hook with a single point, which can either be barbed or barbless.
• Barbless hook restriction - The angler can only use a hook that does not have a barb, which can either be a single or a treble hook.
• Single barbless hook restriction - The angler can only use a hook that has a single point, which needs to be barbless.

I see what you are saying, the term single barbless hook implies a different setup if one uses proper English to interpret it.
[/list]