| MakoMike |
03-29-2006 08:17 AM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Sandman
MM,
I have been biting my own lip not responding to this. I honestly don't mean anything personal and I think you are trying to send a positive sportsmanlike message that I fully support. I generally try to be as careful as possible when handling fish that I plan on releasing and think all fishermen should practice this. When thinking about this, I seem to weigh fish that I plan to take home, those that are released are generally not weighed but I have weighed and released some fish. It does bother me when I see someone kick a fish back into the surf harshly or abuse a fish in any manner. And over all I think the aricle was good in sending the message to be more careful when releasing fish.
|
Sandy, no offense taken, the only poor question is the one not asked
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Sandman
But, when I read that sportsman that release fish are causing 100% mortality by simply weighing fish, I have to question where this is coming from.
|
You need to read a little closer, the 100% mortality figure was for large fish, not all fish
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Sandman
Some reasons for my disbelief:
1) The study was not done on SB. You assume that the effect is assumed across the species board. Anyone in science or engineering will tell you...assumptions are the mother of all screw-ups. In fact, SB are a rugged fish, this is no brook trout, this is a sturdy ocean-going fish I am SURE they will respond differently then what ever species they investigated. I have witnessed severe wounds (like seal bites) to these fish that continue to live on and feed, they have a strong will to live. I have my doubts that picking one up for a moment with a bogogrip will kill it as you surmise.
|
Fair enough observation. But the studies were done on a number of fish which may or may not be as tough as the SB. My point was that, 1) someone needs to do the research and 2) there is no reason to assume that big bass, with their distended bellies would be any different
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Sandman
2) The AU study said 100% mortality if you hang them? How do I say this politely.....NO WAY. That alone (the 100% figure) tells me this study was seriously flawed. There is no way a respected technical study could show a 100% mortality unless they wanted to kill them all. Statistically (alone) this is almost impossible. Therefore I view the entire report as poor science and any responsible scientist should discard any and all conclusions they claim. I would look to see if the authors are connected with some other competing product to the bogogrip where they produced this "report" as sort of an infomercial so they might profit somehow... Typically this is the case.
|
The researchers are career employees of the Queensland Government. As far as I know they have no affiliation with any manufacturer of any fishing equipment. As for the 100% figure seeming incredulous, it is! That's why I noted it. Also see my notes above about the 100% being related to the size of the fish, then it begins to make sense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Sandman
3) You should have included a bibliography or index of these studies so the reader can flush out the question this study arises? Although I seriously doubt that any reader would chase it down that far. Was there a peer review this work by scientists in the US? I am not sure how they do things in AU but other leading scientists doing work in the same area generally review reports for credibility and repeatability before going public.
|
I did include the URL for the website, you can reach the researches through that website. They have established the website, which is funded by both the Queensland and Central Australian government, as a public service to C&R fishermen. C&R fishing is very popular in Australia.
4) deleted.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Sandman
5) In summary you state basically, Bogogrips with scales are bad for fish? Why does the IGFA then certify them for use in catch and release? I guess they are out of touch with this study. Have you discussed this with them? Are they aware of this study?
|
I don't know if they aware of this study and I'm not the least bit sure that they would care if they do know about it. The IGFA has historically required the fish to be killed to qualify for a record. They ceritfy scales to make sure they are accurate, not to make sure that the fish survives the weighing. In fact there are a lot of issues surrounding the C&R of world record fish, but that's a subject for a different thread
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Sandman
6) I noticed that a new potential Word Record Large Mouth Bass
was caught and it has been identified as the SAME FISH as was captured earlier by specific body markings. The fish weighed 21# and caught a couple years ago, WEIGHED and released, caught again and was something like 25# and was weighed and released again. There goes the 100% mortality theory. That fish should be dead.
How many times have you seen FW guys hoist up big bass by the lip flip them around in fits of joy and then and let them go? OK, they are not 50#ers but I think that there would be some mortality that would have been documented by now.
What about the millions of Tarpon and other offshore gamefishover 50# have been lip gaffed hoisted weighed and release. According to your theory, all of the should be dead. I think if this was actually happening, that it would have been identified by now as a real problem. In fact it has not. Oh, what about the fishery officals that shock fish, pull oiut the floaters, weigh and measure them and then put them back...they also seem to live on.
|
As for the largemouth bass, see my notes relating mortality to size above. As for tarpon, they are rarely lifted totally out of the water. Most times they are hoisted partly out of the water for a picture and then released. Even when they are brought into the boat, by their very shape and size, they are not hoisted completely off the deck. And there is a well documented mortality associated with hoisting tarpon even partially out of the water, which is why the state fo Florida along with the tarpon fishermen's association is activly trying to discourage the practice.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Sandman
7) Have you ever seen the way comm. fishermen handle fish? Rough doesn’t even begin to describe it. And I am talking about the ones they don’t want and let go.
|
Yes I have and I agree that its more than rough. But they aren't trying to insure the released fish's survival, are they? I thought the whole point of recreational C&R was to make sure that the relesed fish survives, which makes it much different than commercial discards
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Sandman
I think what bothers me the most is why does everyone blame the sportsman all the time who is trying to do the right thing and release a trophy fish while TONS of by-catch fish from draggers float on the surface and hundreds of illegal gill nets barely gets public attention. What am I missing?
|
I'm not blaming anyone for anything. I have nothing against commercial fishermen, except for the bycatch, which is basically only an issue in certain fisheries. My hope in writing the article was to make the recreational C&R fishermen better at keeping fish alive. I also don't have a problem if they want to kill and eat their catch. I wasn't trying to blame anyone for anything in the piece andif you read it that way, you are the first one. Maybe its something that you simply read into it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Sandman
Again, I know this seems like a harsh review but I believe this is article while well intentioned is promoting falsehoods about weighing fish.
I respect you as an experienced fishermen but have to disagree with the theory that weighing kills all fish.
|
Doesn't seem harsh at all. I don't expect anyone to take anything I write as gospel. Bit if I at least got you thinking about the possible harmful effects of weighing big fish, I accomplished my goal. |
