For conscientous objectors to C&R fishing

Fishery bios have done extensive tests on this. Former top ODFW fish biologist and activist Jim Martin posted on the old ifish DB that the overall mortality rate on C&R'd salmon/steelhead was less than 10%; closer to 7% in extensive studies; regardless of any conjecture you hear. ...

As for the pain issue; it's debatable how much pain perception tiny brained fish feel - likely some to a degree. But I will make a contention that very little, if any at all, during a fight on hook and line. Why? Because their instinctual run from danger is an overiding total occupation of the very limited brain capacity. Even in human beings, with all that big grey matter, when they are fighting for their lives in the mouths of grizzly bears that are tearing their flesh and crunching their bones, the majority of survivors report they didn't feel any pain during that event - because it's overidden by total survival mental occupation. Got to be the same with fish; and they only have a fraction of the capacity of humans to feel pain anyway, even during non-distractive moments. Given that, I will continue to barbless C&R steelie nates and carefully release them. And I won't lose any sleep over them having posibly felt a bit of pain during the 'match'. ...

Another C&R factor to consider is that salmon released are going to spawn and then die a slow starvation death, or be beaten up in a hatchery. Released steelhead that spawn try to go back to sea in a weakened condition and most wind up being eaten alive by seals and sea lions; sometimes by killer whales and other predators. That's why less than 5% make it back to sapwn a second time. While most caught hatchery salmon/steelhead are kept, as is the desire of ODFW/WDFW, those that do get caught and released wind up banging their heads against cement walls in hatchery ponds, being tossed around alive, and then later bonked for the eggs/milt. Let's face it, fish are destined to have a tough life - regardless! They are chased around their entire lives by various forms of beings trying to eat them - both in fresh water and during their ocean stay. So PETA types need to know all of this and lighten up on both fish bonking and C&R sport fishing! It's essentially painless, and less than what mother nature deals them anyway.

RT

[STGRule]

RT: Your right, for salmonids in general. And for healthy populations in particular. Just remember that your 7-10% added to my 7-10% added to X,Y andZ's 7-10% adds up. The departments takes these figures into account when setting seasons and quotas.
We were also talking about fish in general with salmonids as a specific. The mortality is only part of the problem in resident populations. Sturgeon specifically. With only about 20% of the female population available to spawn in any one year, along with erratic spill regimes at the dams to create spawning habitat, and an ever increasing pressure on the very fish that are to spawn that year, we are causing damage to the resource. Over-stressed female sturgeon re-absorb their eggs rather than spawn. That causes one more problem for spawning success. While they can and will survive some fishing pressure, we may be approaching that limit right now. Catch and release has its place in certain fisheries, it's just not OK for every fishery.

[Thumper]

So STG, if I understand you correctly, your professional opinion would be that catching and releasing the big oversized Columbia River sturgeon is harming the resource?

[ol tuna skipper]

No matter where this thread goes, there will be CAVE people.

Citizens
Against
Virtualy
Everything

[img]images/icons/grin.gif[/img]

[happybrew]

Good post RT.

happybrew

[STGRule]

Thumper: In my professional opinion we are closing in on harming the sturgeon resource. Because of a lot of factors. Dams, lack of spawning habitat, loss of diverse rearing habitat, pollution, targeting depressed spawning populations, loss of traditional food sources, water temperature problems, water quality issues, on and on. Just like a lot of fish species, they can only take so much. So far the governing bodies have done a pretty good job of managing the resource. It only irks me when politics get in the way of biology. But the good thing is for every knee-jerk liberal like me, there is a (fill in your own adjective) conservative to counter balance it all. That's the beauty of America. [img]images/icons/smile.gif[/img]

[FM2]

RT's quote

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>That's why less than 5% make it back to sapwn a second time. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That seems like a low number for steelhead. Im curious about where you obtained this stat!

[Point-of-Sale Clerk]

STGRule

I find it interesting you did not mention commercial harvest…
Very interesting.

From your earlier post I see you are a fisheries Biologist.
Are you one of the fisheries biologists studying sturgeon gonads out of Clackamas?
Interesting work but I believe a little hard to explain at dinner parties…

*** Clerk

[STGRule]

***: sorry to burst you bubble. The commercial harvest is included in "on and on". That's as "interesting" as that gets. I bet if I hadn't been trying to get dinner served and the last of the venison jerkied I might have been more complete on the long, long list of reasons for the reason sturgeon are being impacted. [img]images/icons/smile.gif[/img]
And yes, I am "one of the Clackamas Crew". I am on the research side so I don't have to make the decisions, only have to supply the biology. Best job in the world. After 16 years, I still love to go to work in the morning (and the afternoon, and the evening, and the middle of the night). And again, yes I do the gonad staging along with the ageing (among about a million other things) [img]images/icons/wink.gif[/img] .
(and you would be amazed how interested people are in what I do at dinner partys. I mean not what I actually DO at the dinner party....)

[Point-of-Sale Clerk]

STGRule

Thanks for the reply, I thought you might be with the Clackamas crew. If I had read the Anti-fishing thread first I would have not had to ask.
I have been keeping up to date on your group’s preliminary results by reading your draft reports. A lot of good unbiased science of which I understand about half with regard to the sturgeon study but something to base future management decisions on if the Commission ever pulls it’s head out of it’s … well the same place you put the radio transponders in the sturgeon to track them after release…

I have a picture of the Clackamas researchers on my computer but I do not know which one you are. No need to tell either, I have a tendency to respect privacy. Glad to see you posting on Ifish

*** Clerk

STGrule and *** Clerk, it is so great to have knowledgable guys like you to give us the inside info on fish biology; and at times how they relate to regulation politics. Thanks so much.

STG, Buggle' and I were to conference call the Clack office last week about the issue of heavy regional stream salmon snagging going on this fall, alerting them to access this BB and snagging thread solutions ideas. We weren't able to connect at the same time, so can I ask you a favor? Will you alert Steve King and/or Craig Foster out of your Clack ODFW office to access this ifish BB and read the long thread (topic + replies) called "Suggestions on slowing down the snaggers"? I will go find it and bring it back to the top. It has a lot of very good solution ideas that can help your undermanned enforcement crew to deal with this growing and important to stop problem. Of particular interest to your office would likely be the Eagle Creek snagfest each fall - worst ever this fall and last year, by all accounts. Perhaps they could register and post feedback within that thread. Or they are welcome to e-mail me at reeltruth1@home.com with any feedback or updates they would care to share. I also write a column in STS magazine, and brought out the issue of helping our enforcement officers with video cams, cell phones, license numbers, and wittness accounts - due out in the winter Dec./Jan. issue. I hope your colleauges will respond to this important issue. Thanks. &gt;&gt;&gt;

Pilar, the mortality rate studies on coastal wild steelhead runs and 2 year study on Willamette spring chinook runs took into account angler pressure numbers/days along with many other factors in coming up with a 7% approximate total run mortality rate for C&R fishing per season. They did not say that each angler killed a certain % of their C&R'd fish via C&R techniques; thus not adding way up as you alluded to. &gt;&gt;&gt;

FM2, the calculated/estimated 5% rate of return second spawning wild steelhead came from wide spread studies done several years ago by both Oregon and Washington state entities. I would think with the great increase in the seal/sea lion populations in recent years that the % figure of second time spawners would now be even lower. However, because it's the law and because even getting a small % of wild steelhead back could be significant, I hope all C&R anglers use barbless hooks Feb. thru April when targeting them - and use proper release techniques for highest survival rates (which Jim Martin indicated public education has been succesful in implementing in a majority of C&R sport fishermen in recent years). You might be able to find a debate thread with the search feature that was started by Marty Peterson, I think in late winter 2000 - maybe on the old DB, about banning bait for wild coastal native steelhead season (Feb. - April). A letter I posted from Mr. Martin, a foremost expert about this subject, shed a lot of light on the issue of both C&R and bait use.

[ 10-21-2001: Message edited by: RT ]

[obsessed]

Here's a recent set of repeat spawner data that I compiled:

Skagit/Sauk 13%
Snohomish 13.6%
Green 6.5%
Quillayute 7.8%
Queets 15.4%
Hoh 10.7%
Puyallup 10%
Nisqually 7%
Alsea 9%
Suislaw 11%
Rogue 17%

These data were obtained from several sources including regional salmon managers at WDFW, ODFW, and data compiled by NMFS. I put it together as part of the work done by the Wild Steelhead Coalition, a non-profit conservation group dedicated to getting C&R in the State of Washington. Its part of a briefing report to be submitted to the Washington Fisheries Commission, who are going to make a decision on state-wide C&R of wild steelhead in Washington come early next year.

The interesting thing to know about repeat spawners is that on average they carry up to 30% more eggs than first time spawners. Another thing, in most river basins, over 70 percent of repeat spawners are female (some basins virtually 100%). More eggs per female and more females as a proportion of the total number of spawners make repeaters very valuable!

We also put together a brief summarizing steelhead hooking mortality, based on British Columbia hatchery brood stock programs. The numbers reported in this thread are close to those found in BC. The BC studies found that the lowest mortality was observed using barbless hooks, regardless of whether or not bait was used. In contrast, a lot of hooking mortality studies done on resident trout found substantially higher mortality--20 to 50 percent; big difference when dealing with feeding fish. The highest mortality of course was with bait. A clear distinction should be made between resident and anadromous fish when it comes to hooking mortality.

[ 10-22-2001: Message edited by: obsessed ]

[Buddy Page]

As I posted elsewhere, it appears to me that fish do indeed feel pain. The comparison of people not feeling pain while being mauled by bears doesn't really fit. Those people are already consumed by fear and overwhelming instinctive reactions and the need to flee and survive has kicked in both adrenaline and endorphines so pain won't interfere with the need to escape and survive.

When you hook a fish, its a surprise. They haven't had the time to realize they are being "captured" and preyed upon. It seems to me that the initial head shaking after you hook a fish is a direct reaction to pain. It's that initial pain that lets them know they are in danger. I'm sure the first clue they have to danger is a sharp pain in the mouth. After they start trying to escape and flee, they probably lose that initial pain, perhaps not.

Does it really make a difference? Only if you think pain is an unnnatural occurance in nature and that its an unnatural act for predators to prey on fish. All the historical and physicial evidence proves that we are predators. Predators cause pain and fear in their prey. That's simply how things work on planet Earth...

[ 10-22-2001: Message edited by: Buddy Page ]

[ 10-22-2001: Message edited by: Buddy Page ]

[finclipped]

I think they do feel pain, however I have noticed a fish hooked in the side of the mouth fights a lot harder than one hooked deep in the throat. It seems this deep hook set, would create greater pain than a side mouth hook set. So,,,, it seems reasonable the more pain the fish feels, the less likely it is to induce more pain by running. I would guess there are fewer nerve endings in a fishes mouth, as it has to attack some "stickey" prey, in its quest for food. It would really suck if it hurt everytime you had attack your dinner.

[Salmonator]

Buddy Page, so you're saying that if I should grab a salmon by the tail (no pain) and hold him under water that he's just gonna sit there and let me hold him because he's not in pain? I'm assuming he's gonna do a bunch of head-shaking because that's what he needs to do to get away from me real quick...

Obsessed, I'm all for the Wild Steelhead Coalition and their efforts to get Washington's angling regs changed to protect nates, as is done in Oregon. It's long overdue. As for the stats you posted above toward that cause I'm pleasantly suprised, and glad I was wrong posting a lower % figure (from long past studies). I hope the Oregon rivers are getting more repeat spawning steelhead back also. Those interested in joining the WSC can do so via a link on the www.piscatorialpursuits.com site and BB. Thanks much, and good luck with that useful endeavor.

BP, I disagree with you that the comparison to surviving people reporting not feeling pain while in the mouths of grizzly bears (reported in Western Outdoors magazine, in the Dateline West section) does not compare to salmon and steelhead hooked. I believe it does. Your statement of "already consumed by fear and overwhelming instinctive reactions and the need to flee and survive has kicked in both adrenaline and endorphines so pain won't interfere with the need to escape and survive", I think could apply to all invertrabates. Anyway, I'm not saying they don't initially feel the hook, I'm saying they are not suffering with pain perception during the fight. You mention the head shakes of fish just hooked as your evidence. I think they are shaking their head to become untangled and free of what is pulling at them, for a few seconds before they run toward escape. Again, they have a tiny fraction of brain capacity compared to people and are mostly instinct driven. I'm quit confident in claiming their brains could only process the receptors of escape instinct. Also, don't forget that mother nature deals them more pain and constant hardship than brief fights on line do; in my opinion. As you also correctly mentioned at the end of your post, people are evolved predators, and "That's simply how things work on planet Earth"... I agree with that part.

*Note: I left word with the Clack ODWF office to check out the "Suggestions on how to slow down snagging" thread. I hope they find some of the posts useful, and give us feedback on the issue.

RT

[Buddy Page]

Salmonator,

All I'm saying is that I think they feel pain when the hook first sinks in. I think they start trying to flee and put up a fight after they try to escape the initial pain and *then* realize they are also "hooked" and captured by "something".

Pain isn't the only thing that triggers the instinct to fight and/or flee. Capture and unexpected sensation and touching will kick in the survival instinct also. It's simply not an either or proposition.