Jump to content
Trout Unlimited Canada - Northern Lights Fly Fishers
Garhan

Getting Older And Tying Larger Flies Is A Benefit To The Fishery

Recommended Posts

http://icesjms.oxfordjournals.org/content/65/6/899.full

 

 

The older I get the less likely I tie small flies. Mostly because of the deterioration of the eye sight. But after going to a fishing club meeting last night in Calgary. A topic of discussion was tabled due to the break down of the federal government making changes in the or not including the provision to enforce barbed vs. barbless hooks. This becomes a ethics, whats is the truth and a moral responsibility to a dilemma now in the heart of the anglers. Do we go barbless or do we fish barbed hooks. In inevitably we will have the barbless ruling back in place as the government corrects this oversight. But is it based on what is best for a fishery and it seems that the government has marketed this well enough to convince most anglers that this is the best policy. Scientist seem to say is is not the best and the end result has liitle difference on the fishery. But with 42% of all the fines rendered last year being barbless infractions. The question is are our efforts in enforcement of a law effective for the preservation of fish in our waters or is this a money grab. Should the government spend that same money and man hours on teaching people how to identify fish especially those that are protected so as to not have Bull Trout in the frying pan because it again was misidentified as a Brook Trout. So where is the money better spent. The conversation became a very interesting debate on the side of "what is really best for a fishery". And that the government mostly ignored scientist at the time of this ruling. Well the first time it was turned down by our fisheries people because they spoke to scientists and Ralph Klien went with that. The second time it was asked to be imposed the new Fisheries man in Alberta took the word of non scientist/ non biologists and went with what some well meaning special interest individuals had to offer the new fisheries policy maker. The scientists and biologist were not consulted. And wallla a policy was passed that has little to no truly positive effect on the enhancement of our fishery but has taken your money. I thought we wanted to improve our fishery not penalize our countrymen for a punitive fisheries law that has stopped people only long enough to recuperate there financial loss by the next pay check on lt to go out and do it again. Myself I will fish barbless only to avoid the fine, but I always question the value of this law.

 

At the end of the evening a voluntary test was offered for people to identify 9 different photos of trout. There was only 4 species that are common to Alberta. Don't forget these are people with flyrods in there hand frequently and spend 100's of hours fishing salmonoid species in Western Canada.I was amazed how many people did not get 100%, some of these anglers were old as myself or older with hundreds if not thousand of hours on the water over fish in Alberta. I would have easily assumed that they would get it right and would even say to them selves after the test "that was to easy." Apparently not. There was another test if you choose or dared yourself to take. It had 40 photos with ten species and only 4 people took this test out of about 45 people at the meeting. Only 1 100% test was turned in. These again were species that were common to Alberta. They included 3 different whitefish, grayling, browns, rainbows, cutties, brooks, lakers and Bullies.

So if you can tell the difference between a size 12 Royal Wullf and a 6 Grey Wullf and pattern name, then you should be able to be equally and efficiently in ID ing fish if you really want to help out the fishery in Alberta barbed or not.

 

 

http://icesjms.oxfordjournals.org/content/65/6/899.full

 

And never remove a deep hooked fly. Always cut it away. It only costs you 50 cents at best most of the time.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I found this on another site and thought it was helpful in understanding the truth that leads towards catch and release practices.

 

This is a topic dear to my heart (which is almost failing now that we are in the armpit of winter out here in Ontario). I posted something on this topic on my fishing blog this past June. At one of the Management Council meetings I was onto my usual rant about catch and release practices while the water was warm (above 22C). Afterwords, one of the biologists approached me and said that they were more concerned about fish being caught from depth and being unable to release their air bladder. Here was my report:I've been in conversation with a fellow member of the FMZ 18 Council who is a post doctoral fellow at Carleton. It appears the "Science" is NOT settled on fatal temperatures for trout. Most of my concern has been on our local stocked Rainbows. I admit it, I'm a trout bum. I love to catch Rainbow Trout. Pound for pound, they give the best fight, jump the highest, pull the hardest. A close second is SM Bass. I've been concerned about the dangers of warm temperatures on trout. The biologist's textbook bible, "Freshwater Fish of Canada", states that the "fatal" temperature of Rainbows is 24C or 75F. And that is why for the last few years, I have switched over to SM Bass fishing come July and continue through to September when I go trout hunting again until hard water. It appears that the "science" contained in the textbook is a bit out of date and research is continuing, interestingly enough, right here at Carleton U. under Steven Cooke (also a member of the FMZ 18 Council). The Council is meeting with various stakeholders to determine new policy and regulations and give recommendations to the Ministry. I fish for trout mainly in FMZ 15 but they are not having a Council. I suspect that whatever we decide will impact their area as well as the Ministry is keen on simplifying regulations. I have a few biology contacts across the country and I am awaiting responses. Since the textbook appears to be unreliable and the internet even more so, I'm assuming that researcher's comments are closer to the mark. One researcher I'm keen to hear from out west is on how long we can keep fish out of water. My memory of our conversation is that more than 30 seconds causes permanent gill damage but don't quote me at this point. That email is in one of my many dead computers. Some of the more famous trout fishers (other than myself) like Brian Chan and Phil Rowley have given me figures like 7 or 15 seconds out of water as a max. (I notice on an earlier report on this thread that Brian is now recommending 3 seconds. Well, I have him on video holding a fish out of water longer than that but maybe he has come to realize that we better get them in faster)Rather than paraphrasing Nick's comments, I'll paste them directly. In the first one I expressed interest in stress as a factor."I agree that stress can be a killer across the animal kingdom. At the same time, catch and release has proved to be effective across a range of species and conditions (when fishes are handled properly). In terms of fish being caught several times in a season, that could have effects on growth rate, but this type of stress has short-term effects. Unless the fish was severely injured, the effects of that stress would only last a few hours to days at most. Being caught multiple times wouldn't likely lead to cumulative stress, though it could perhaps slow growth a tad."In this exchange, I was concerned about Catch and Release (C&R) for Lake Trout in warm temperatures from depth for slot determination but also in terms of other trout. Baratrauma, is the stress of unequal pressure between the inside and outside of the fish, ie, "bends". Many people believe that trout, especially Lakers, can easily equalize pressure through their air bladder. That apparently is not true, and especially in the case of Rainbows which rocket from depth when caught. "I don't think anyone has a good handle on how deleterious catch and release angling can be. It all depends on the situation- sometimes survival can approach 100%, other times mortality rates can be very high. Changes in temperature can be stressful to the fish, as can the energy spent fighting. Add to that handling (which carries the potential for a wide variety of stressors and injuries), and in some cases barotrauma. Overall, these factors tend to be cumulative- (but) for example, exposing a fish to warmer temperatures might not have a major effect if it is not handled much and released quickly."Here was my first inquiry on temperatures. BTW, FCC costs around $120 which is why I don't have one."FFC is a fantastic textbook - the authors give a lot more information than just basic biology, including etymology (the history of where fishes' names came from) and a section for each fish on relation to man, which generally involves how they taste. Fatal temperatures aren't quite as cut and dry as that. Rainbow trout can certainly survive more than a few seconds (probably hours, even days) at 25C, but prolonged exposure will lead to stress and eventually death. Higher temperatures will lead to this occurring faster- at 35C, rainbow trout would probably be dead in less than half an hour. Even at 23C though, rainbow trout would experience stress and lower growth rates because their metabolism isn't as efficient outside their optimum temperature range. As for other trout, they range considerably. I don't know exact numbers off the top of my head but lake trout would be in the 12-15 C range, whereas brown trout might be in the 25-30C range. "There are many factors to consider when practicing C&R for trout. When surface temperatures are ideal around 11C (52F) then one doesn't need to be too concerned. However, when the water warms, one should get that trout in as fast as possible, keep it in the water, and get it on its way ASAP. If you are going to fish for trout in the summer, make sure to bring along your canvas creel. You might have something unintended for the bar-b-que. Another concern is slime removal. Even a small skin area of slime removed through over-handling and rough nets will cause fungus growth and eventual death. Use soft rubber nets and keep it in the water. Don't fish deeper than 10 meters at any time just to be safe. The research on baratrauma is ongoing. --------------------------------------------The slime issue is something that many fishers are quite ignorant of. I saw a video where the caretaker of a famous British stream is seen landing the fish, placing it on the grass, taking the hook out after if flopped around and then sending the fish back on its way. He was roughly 80 years old and had been doing this probably since the dawn of time. On your BC regulation brochure, you can see a fisher 'tailing' a fish with a glove. Excuse me! Gloves take slime off. Just to balance that criticism with a kudos, a 74% release rate in B.C. is terrific. I would be surprised if Ontario had one higher than 24%. Go ahead, call us Neanderthals. We deserve it. I'm trying to change that fisher by fisher.

 

Although barbed and barbless is moving people to think about our fishery. We still put to much emphasis on this philosophy that it will make a significant difference to our fishery in Alberta. This is not so and is a major collapse in our fisheries policy making on how to manage and want is best for Alberta waters. Once again we are managing people and not the fishery. Shame, shame.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

my 2 cents.....you want to improve a fishery?whatever that means-----ban sportfishing...no catch and release...no size limitations...the first fish you catch is the one you eat.

 

Anything else is pure speculation...no matter how many years you went to school or how many books you've read.

 

 

Myself,I fish how I want - where I want (legally) and obey nature's laws.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

my 2 cents.....you want to improve a fishery?whatever that means-----ban sportfishing...no catch and release...no size limitations...the first fish you catch is the one you eat.

 

Anything else is pure speculation...no matter how many years you went to school or how many books you've read.

 

 

Myself,I fish how I want - where I want (legally) and obey nature's laws.

Unfortunately that wont happen either. If it was up to me, we would have all east slope watersheds (rivers) as catch and release and if you want to eat fish catch one out of the many stocked lakes we pay for. That is my true feelings on this subject

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I heard that Switzerland has a must kill rule for fishing. Something about catching them solely for pleasure is a misuse of animals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I heard that Switzerland has a must kill rule for fishing. Something about catching them solely for pleasure is a misuse of animals.

Go figure, those Swiss are breaking all the rules and setting trends again…..lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

..............If it was up to me, we would have all east slope watersheds (rivers) as catch and release..............................

Actually, starting with the 2013 regulations, the Oldman and all its tributaries are catch and release (i.e. Racehorse, Dutch, Vicary, Daisy etc.), and to the south, the Carbondale and all its tributaries(i.e. Lynx, etc.) are catch and release for trout. That makes most of the best rivers and creeks in ES1 c&r, which as far as I'm concerned has been a long time coming. It's being done to protect the westslope cutthroat, which is admirable, but the collateral effect will be to enhance the fishery, especially if there is appropriate enforcement.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But Terry,

 

While C&R is everywhere down south now, it was done when the native cuts got down to 5% of the historic population. Then a movement is forming to cull rainbows from all cut waters. This movement is replicated on the Brookie cull.

 

Whether not the fishing will improve is unclear. If the rainbows and brooks are culled out, will there be anything left?

 

Don

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don, I'm just thinking that areas like the upper Oldman, Racehorse, and Dutch for example, might become the same quality of fishery as the Livingstone is now. I know there are a lot of other factors involved beyond retention limits, but as things stand right now, the Livingstone is head and shoulders a better fishery than the other rivers I mentioned, and I guess I'm naive enough to think it's mainly due to it having been C&R for some time. Even though the reason for the C&R regs is to protect the small population of westslope cutties, an improved fishery might be a collateral benefit. Terry

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...