Sore Loserman Thread

[Centerpin]

Great discussion! Not once were low blows thrown. Had some good laughs and learned a few things. The highlight for me was the logging summer student stabbing the forest industry in the back.

I think we all agree that we love to fish. At least you guys down south can share that common ground. Up north we have guys who would rather walk around not catching anything then they frown upon those who do.

I asked this question: The limit is 4 fish per day. You can utilise 4 fish. You can easily catch your limit. How many fish would you keep before you went home?


I personally would keep 4. Is there anything ethically wrong about that?

Not if the fish population can withstand the take without any discernable decline in sustainable numbers of fish. Especially if you give some of the fish to people who really need them. Personally, I wouldn't often take 4 fish; I would rathter keep 1 or 2 and release the others. Depends on many factors.

[smilesforu]

Silvers was a 4 fish limit. I would keep four and give fish away as I left to people who couldn't catch their own and took the time to comment on my catch (especially the kids). The hatchery steelhead have been given away this year because of the excellent silver run (fish overload). These fish are a hatchery run and are meant to be removed. Its good to share with those who appreciate the fish. Nice fishermen would share fish when I was young and fishless. What goes around comes around...cya
Tight Lines

------------------
Marty M
Steelheader.net

[Pilar]

Amen, RT. Give your fish to someone who appreciates it. Freezer burn sucks and all the folks I know get as much fresh fish as they can stand. I don't know about the rest of you but I figure the hatchery fish were bought and paid for on license renewal day. They wont be allowed to spawn anyway. Waste not want not.

The bend is your friend!

[Centerpin]

RT,

Is it ethically wrong to catch and release as many fish as possible in a day. Say you roll into a nice pool and you start catching fish. Will you stop after you catch 4 or 5 or will you keep catching fish until things slow down? After things slow down or you catch 4 or 5 will you go home?

[Snagly]

If the limit is 'X' and you take 'X' there's nothing illegal about what you're doing. The question of ethics (addressed by another poster here recently -- unfortunately I've forgotten the thread) is fuzzier. You've already said that you can use all four fish, so the "Take only what you can use" guideline doesn't apply. RT's point about whether the fishery can withstand the loss is probably the second most commonly used ethical guideline. Here we're on equally fuzzy ground since present (poor) native fish returns suggest too-generous limits in past in certain systems.

So you've got the state or provincial authorities saying "It's OK to keep four." Billy and you know more about the rivers in the Terrace area than all but a handful of people alive. Depending on the river and the year, you will feel whether the run is above or below normal. To keep four in a year when the run appears to be half the previous ten year average would be unethical in my view. Given the past history of screwups in respect of fisheries studies, any error we make in respect of retention should be made in favor of the fish. But if you have a record run -- say triple the MSY estimate of the biologists -- then keep all you can use.

I'm also reminded of a story in Bill Herzog's book "Spoon Fishing for Steelhead" -- highly recommended BTW -- where he lists the total seasonal catches for an unnamed small river summer steelhead fishery on the Olympic Peninsula. While it wasn't 'scientific', Bill's numbers demonstrate that his friends and he could affect the catch totals in subsequent years by the number of fish they kept in the current season. Once they voluntarily decided on C & R, the catch rates bounced up and stayed high. That story has made me favor very conservative limits on scarce fish (native steelhead normally being just such an animal). After all, given the amount of money we spend on our sport if eating fish is really the object we can buy a couple (extra) at the market if need be.

As for voluntarily stopping C & R fishing because you've already had a big day, we'll that's a personal choice. I don't think ethics comes into it at all unless the method you are using is gut or gill hooking a high proportion of the fish, or through bad luck your Siwash has skewered a couple of fish through the eye. In short, as long as you are playing your fish swiftly and releasing them in good shape I see no reason to stop fishing other than boredom (hah!) or fatigue. And when was the last time you left a hot bite because your arm was tired? "Never!"

While you didn't bring it up in this thread, in another comment recently you mentioned being in favor of keeping certain "stack holes" open in some Vancouver Island rivers. Now I've not fished there, so this is a general comment but I could see the case for restricting fishing under certain conditions (extremely low water) in such areas simply because "all" the fish in that part of the river are there and a disproportionate number of them are being abused via foul hooking (or there was evidence of substantial C & R mortality or other extenuating circumstances). There's got to be "sport" in sport fishing, and my view would change if these stack holes could only be reached after an arduous two hour hike (leave 'em open!) vs. driving up and parking next to them (shut it down).

CP, I C&R fish a good percent of the time. Especially with native fish predominately present, as in the latter part of our winter steelhead runs, I use methods that usually hook fish near the jaw with barbless hooks, and not the throat. I also use proper release techniques that ensure a high survival rate. Yes I do keep on fishing after I've C&R'd 4 or 5 fish. It's a tough question as to how ethical that is. It's a matter of techniques, health of fish runs, and your perspectives. How do you feel about that CP? - RT

[ZaQ]

If I may post.......

I keep a VERY detailed log of all my days spent on the river. At the end of the year (now) I know exactly how many days I fished, how many fish I have caught among a miriad of other things. I do not keep fish. According to my journal, in the year 2000 I caught 57 fish and killed 2. I killed one of 13 steelhead last year, and I remember the day. I feel bad about it to this day. Why? I don't know, I was brought up fly fishing for trout and we never kept fish. It was ingrained into me since I was 10. I don't think keeping the legal limit is wrong. But if you are going to kill 4 fish, and not eat them, than that is wrong. If I were to kill four fish, they would more than likely go to waste, or be given away. I would rather put that fish back in the water and let someone have a chance of experiencing that fish in another couple of days.

My thoughts........


------------------
Fish this!
ZaQ



[This message has been edited by ZaQ (edited 12-21-2000).]

[meyersbilly]

CP: I enjoy taking a fish or two or even taking my limit the odd time. I think for most people it’s a personal thing and setting personal limits is based on ones beliefs, ethics, opinions… I guess the problem we face is when someone’s personal limit/opinion contradicts another.

Snagly: Fantastic contributions to the BCFDF board. You are a wise sage. Unfortunately people fail to realize how multidimensional fisheries management really is.

[Centerpin]

RT,

I find nothing wrong with what you are doing. I fish the same way. RT you might be interested in the ramblings of Mr. Hadden on the BCFDF e mail board. He figures that people will get the point the more times he writes the same thing down. We should all try not to impose our personal beliefs onto others. I just wanted to know if I was out there being a threat to the resource.

CP