Three fish, you're out?

[happybrew]

I fished Eagle Creek yesterday. Lots of coho moving up. I kept one, released a foul hooked fish, and lost about five. At the first hole I fished at, I hooked two in the lip, but lost them, and foul hooked the one, that was released. In the hour I was there, I saw 3 other fish foul hooked and released. During that hour, mine were the only two that were hooked in the lip. Quite frankly, I can see why it is a snagger's paradise.

Anybody have any thoughts on this idea? For waters that have a problem with snaggers, how about a "three fish you're out" rule, or whatever the limit is on that water. You MUST keep the first three fish you bring in, unless they're nates, then quit fishing, regardless of whether they are foul hooked or not. I suspect a lot of snaggers just keep doing it over and over again, then releasing the fish, for the "sport" of it. I had very few problems avoiding snagging the fish, with the exception of the one. If they have to stop fishing, maybe they'll quit snagging. It would be easier for law enforcement because rather than trying to determine if the fish was intentionally snagged and released, they can nail anybody releasing a fish, as well as anybody they can prove are intentionally trying to snag fish. And I know there's a lot of snag and release going on. I've seen it on the South Santiam, and on Eagle Creek. I think that there's more of that than the ones who keep snagged fish. I have never seen anyone keep a foul hooked fish. I've seen plenty of snag and release.

I realize the catch and release fishermen wouldn't like that, but if only a few rivers with big snagging problems do that, it shouldn't interfere too much with their sport. Maybe just limit it to the times when there are a lot of fish (and snaggers) on the rivers. Anybody the police can prove are intentionally trying to snag fish, would still be busted. Let's face it, it's a problem that isn't going away. Maybe this would make them think twice about setting the hook on a line bump, or throwing their lure into the middle of a bunch of stacked up fish and pulling up sharply on the line. If they have to go home, rather than continue fishing, it takes the incentive away. And it would be easier for law enforcement because it's easier to spot a release than it is a snagged fish.

Just a different perspective on the problem that I'd throw out there, to see what people think. Not a for or against, just a question.

happybrew

My, the computer censor does a good job. It bleeped out the word that starts with a j, then an e, an r, then a k, and ing, so I had to change it to "pulling up sharply on the line"

[ 10-16-2001: Message edited by: happybrew ]

[Thumper]

Happy --- I think you just advocated legalizing snagging, except that you couldn't release the snagged fish. Progress???

[Jennie@ifish]

The censor program screws up. Wonder if it allows screw?
I'll go try and figure out the jerk problem, sorry!
Jen

[Silent Lucidity]

How about skunky fish? Those nasty nasty living corpses that we catch from time to time? Don't make me keep those! The meat isn't fit for human consumption and the eggs (if it's a female) are loose as a bag of marbles sans the bag.

Don't like it. Don't like it at all.

[ 10-16-2001: Message edited by: Silent Lucidity ]

[Jennie@ifish]

Now, you can write jerking.
I think.
Jen

[happybrew]

No, Thumper, not legalized snagging. If they can show you intentionally trying to snag, you'd still be prosecuted. Just trying to get the ones who are hard to prosecute off the water. The ones who snag and release.

Silent Lucidity: you're right. I wouldn't want to keep one of those mold-encrusted fish either. I guess that kills the idea.

Hey, how about if we make the snaggers EAT the mold encrusted fish?

happybrew

[sinker]

This reminds me of a post on Bob’s board quite a while back.
Someone was talking about lining and a couple guys jumped him about it. Now these couple guys admitted to lining sockeye in Alaska where it’s legal to do so in some certain river. They say that they don’t down here because it”s immoral. Since when in the world does the law have ANYTHING to do with morals???

The way I see it is if you’re some doughball that’s letting the weight settle on the bottom of the river and jerkin it back in, and then repeating this over and over. NAIL ‘EM TO THE WALL!!!

But if you’re on some river that is getting a huge return like the Quilcene did up here and you happen to foul hook one, big deal, you aren’t impacting the overall health of the run. Now if you’re sight snaggin like a lot of those guys were it’s another story. A lot of those guys were waiting until they could see a fish and then would cast to it and snag it. DOUGHBALLS!!

As long as a hatchery is getting FAR more than it needs, why not be able to keep foul hooked fish??

The Quilcene hatchery let the indians come into the hatchery pool with dip nets and haul off truck loads of fish. I don’t see any reason you and I can’t take our share as well.

[happybrew]

I think you and I see it the same way, sinker. And if you've foul hooked one in the belly, why throw it back just to die? And those guys foul hooking and releasing a bunch of fish are doing a lot of harm to the run, and that should be stopped, but enforcement is difficult, because you have to prove intent.

happybrew

[sinker]

happybrew, exactly, if they keep their 3 foulhooked fish and go home it doesn't do nearly the damage that foulhooking fish after fish and then turning them loose does.
I've got a feeling alot of the gamies feel this way too. I tend to fish the combat areas, not because I'm a snagger but because I go where the fish are and that usually involves the combat zones. I hear reports on here of gamies busting people in a hole at a time that I was there and never seen anyone. I seen one report of a gamie getting a guy for 31 snagging violations!!! [img]images/icons/shocked.gif[/img]
Now how in the world is that possible without nailing him to the wall for being WAAYYYY over the limit???
I call BS on that one. I think the individual was trying to scare the snaggers off.