» Fishing Forum  Fishing Regs  
 Members |  Forum Rules |  Search
Pages: 1 2 3 4 > »»   ( Go to first unread post ) Closed TopicStart new topicStart Poll

> Catch & Release fishing is doing harm
xiaolu
Posted: Oct 11, 2018 - 07:10 pm


World Record Trout
*

Group: Members
Posts: 3541
Member No.: 50
Joined: February 10, 2011




I find this comment "one cannot keep everything they can catch in any lake. This is why there are MNR set limits..." too broad.

For example on Lake Simcoe (and on many other lakes in Ontario), there are no catch nor possession limit on rockbass. So yes, you can keep everything you can catch in a lake if they are all rockbass:-)

Hence: One cannot keep everything s/he can catch in any lake IF AND ONLY IF there are limits set on the fish species in question.

PMEmail PosterYahoo
Top
Pungo
Posted: Oct 11, 2018 - 07:39 pm


Alevin
*

Group: Newbies
Posts: 14
Member No.: 4311
Joined: June 04, 2013




In addition to the conservative licence I have right now, single barbless hook is the farthest I can go.

PMEmail Poster
Top
CousinHippy
Posted: Oct 11, 2018 - 08:11 pm


Lunker Trout
*

Group: Members
Posts: 433
Member No.: 8483
Joined: January 19, 2015




If we are talking about catch and release VS catch and keep I think 35 percent less feeding is a lot better odds of survival than going in the pan... Maybe I should bite onto a hook every now and again... 35 percent less desire to feed would do me wonders! Probably strengthen my chance of survival rather than hinder it...

PMEmail Poster
Top
icecy
Posted: Oct 11, 2018 - 10:01 pm


Parr Trout
*

Group: Members
Posts: 73
Member No.: 4685
Joined: September 16, 2013




QUOTE (Brookie56 @ Oct 11, 2018 - 06:54 pm)
Icecy - You will have to show me in the regulations where it says you should go home or target another species once you reach your limit..

The 2018 Regulations Page 8 & 9 state this:


If you catch a fish after reaching the daily catch or possession limit for that species, the fish must me released back in to the water immediately.

This includes fish that may be injured during the catch.

I have had MNR officers watch people catch 4-5 rainbow trout in Leith and Port Albert, with two already in the bag - no problem as long as the fish were quickly released , he recommended not taking them out of the water to do so. No issue whatsoever in targeting the fish. He did charge people for culling Rainbows  off a stringer which is a a definite no-no.

I always thought the MNR started encouraging  'catch and release" to help off-set government (their masters) cut-backs in stocking and fish hatcheries.

Let me first say that MNR's first priority is to enforce the rules and are not opposed to catch and release, but they specify how the fish to be released should be handled. Unfortunately a lot of people don't pay attention to those guidelines and there is no way for the MNR to enforce them.

And yes, they do not specifically say that you should stop fishing after you catch your daily limit, they just say release it immediately, unlike for example the state of Wisconsin which is more specific: "Once you reach your limit for a species, you must stop fishing for that species. This includes catch and release." or the state of California: "When fishing in freshwater, each person is allowed to take only one daily bag limit per day. Once you catch your daily limit for a species of fish, you are done fishing for that type of fish."

Here in Ontario if you ask this question to several MNR officers you're likely to get conflicting answers as the Ontario regs are not as clear as the above mentioned states'

Culling fish from a livewell is also regulated with very specific requirements. Culling from a stringer is not allowed as the fish will most likely not survive.

PMEmail Poster
Top
icecy
Posted: Oct 11, 2018 - 10:08 pm


Parr Trout
*

Group: Members
Posts: 73
Member No.: 4685
Joined: September 16, 2013




QUOTE (sabmgb @ Oct 11, 2018 - 03:13 pm)
....we'd see lots of dead fish floating around.  Think of all the small perch that are thrown back.


Not likely with an army of seagulls flying overhead, floaters don't float for too long...lol

PMEmail Poster
Top
icecy
Posted: Oct 11, 2018 - 10:39 pm


Parr Trout
*

Group: Members
Posts: 73
Member No.: 4685
Joined: September 16, 2013




QUOTE (mephisto_lake @ Oct 11, 2018 - 07:09 pm)
I have to ask this question since you brought up tournaments being bad for fish  (which I agree, just not to the same extent) and suggested stocking is the only thing keeping fish numbers up.......out of all the lakes I've fished tournaments on and even in general where do they stock lakes with bass? I just don't know how that's an actual fact but I'm open to being wrong.

Well, to me it's a fact that tournements are bad for fish, and this is why i never participated (well, that's a lie. I did participate to Great Salmon hunt once but changed my mind rather quickly) or intend to participate. Turning fishing into a entertainement and money making occasion for big businesses is against the very reasons i fish for.

This out of the way, let me say that while stocking is a sure way to keep the numbers of fish up, there is no scientific evidence that C&R is the main reason for sustaining or increasing those numbers, on the contrary:

"During an Oklahoma Department of Wildlife Conservation study, up to 43 percent of fish released after being caught died within six days as a result of inadequate holding and weigh in procedures during tournaments.

More recent studies reported in Montana estimate that approximately 20% of released trout die from injuries or stress and even those that don't die, their injuries may significantly reduce their ability to feed and grow."

And yet there is no scientific study that demostrates C&R is beneficial to fish health and/or numbers. And all this without even getting into the unethical nature of C&R fishing which induce pain and suffering to a living creature for the sheer pleasure of entertainment.

https://tinyurl.com/yccgrwow

http://www.cbbulletin.com/434341.aspx

PMEmail Poster
Top
icecy
Posted: Oct 11, 2018 - 10:42 pm


Parr Trout
*

Group: Members
Posts: 73
Member No.: 4685
Joined: September 16, 2013




QUOTE (xiaolu @ Oct 11, 2018 - 07:10 pm)
I find this comment "one cannot keep everything they can catch in any lake. This is why there are MNR set limits..." too broad.

For example on Lake Simcoe (and on many other lakes in Ontario), there are no catch nor possession limit on rockbass. So yes, you can keep everything you can catch in a lake if they are all rockbass:-)

Hence: One cannot keep everything s/he can catch in any lake IF AND ONLY IF there are limits set on the fish species in question.

Ok, you've got me on this one. Now let's find an angler who targets and catches rockbass all day long....lol

PMEmail Poster
Top
xiaolu
Posted: Oct 12, 2018 - 05:40 am


World Record Trout
*

Group: Members
Posts: 3541
Member No.: 50
Joined: February 10, 2011




QUOTE (icecy @ Oct 11, 2018 - 10:01 pm)
Here in Ontario if you ask this question to several MNR officers you're likely to get conflicting answers as the Ontario regs are not as clear as the above mentioned states'

To me, this is very wrong with the law! I mean the law should have been and must be as clear as black and white. That is, in this case with Ontario Recreational Fishing Regulations (Law), if you ask same question to either ALL of the MNR officers or everyone and ALL from the general public (ALL of the average Jane and Joe included), the answer will ALWAYS be the same with no different/conflicting answers whatsoever.

When several MNR officers (whose responsibility is to enforce fishing regulations) would give you conflicting answers to the same question, how could anyone expect you or me an angler know the correct answer?

PMEmail PosterYahoo
Top
Nado
Posted: Oct 12, 2018 - 01:36 pm


Parr Trout
*

Group: Members
Posts: 75
Member No.: 8095
Joined: January 09, 2015




The study doesn't come remotely close to answering the question, at best it is a small piece of a very large puzzle.

To me the real question is whether it is worse to catch and keep two whitefish or catch and release 20 whitefish. There's going to be variables there such as how deep the fish are caught, how fast they were landed and how much time they spent out of the water. Logically it does make sense that practicing catch and release on a large quantity of fish could potentially be worse than catching two and going home. Luckily the large majority of us don't have the ability to catch that many fish on a regular basis.

PMEmail Poster
Top
kingphoenix
Posted: Oct 12, 2018 - 02:03 pm


Trophy Trout
*

Group: Members
Posts: 664
Member No.: 10053
Joined: October 09, 2015




QUOTE (Nado @ Oct 12, 2018 - 01:36 pm)
The study doesn't come remotely close to answering the question, at best it is a small piece of a very large puzzle.

I hate editorialized articles on scientific studies.

Their study was to determine if having a hole in the mouth would affect the amount of suction a fish can produce when feeding.

They proved the suction is reduced. That is all.

They specifically state they did not analyze whether it would affect real world feeding and survival rates.

This is likely a precursor study to try to secure funding to probe the subject more.

The article and those who read it are drawing their own conclusion based on information not tested or proven in this study.

PMEmail Poster
Top
WTFish
Posted: Oct 12, 2018 - 04:51 pm


Parr Trout
*

Group: Members
Posts: 62
Member No.: 14462
Joined: August 13, 2017




Regardless of survival rate, it's still tormenting an animal for entertainment.

When on the other hand you're catching a meal - that's the way nature works, something has to die for us to eat.

PMEmail Poster
Top
Putaforkinya
Posted: Oct 13, 2018 - 06:56 am


World Record Trout
*

Group: Members
Posts: 3707
Member No.: 3100
Joined: January 22, 2013




Thanks for sharing.

The article like all media spins things.
Even if I ask accept the fact that it I
Causes a 35% reduction in eating. The fish is still alive and able to survive where as catch and eat is killing 100% of fish. Also keep in mind that that percentage will reduce as the fish's mouth heals. There's a big difference there and I would say they should be careful wording it that way or else there will be a ton of people changing their mind set and saying "well I might as well keep the fish since it's the same thing to let it go"

PMEmail Poster
Top
Disco
Posted: Oct 13, 2018 - 07:50 am


Lunker Trout
*

Group: Members
Posts: 441
Member No.: 10908
Joined: January 25, 2016




In addition there is no mention of the test method gear. What size of hook did this damage? I guarantee a 4 Ought hook would cause a loss in suction feeding but what about a size 14 dry fly or a tiny Steelhead wide gap #12?

This is why articles like this should not be sensationalized. Vague study sited in a sensationalizing way. This is how the left wing extremest animal activists work.

Keeping everything you catch even set limits by the MNR can and do distroy fisheries. How about the Walleye limit? Reduced after the fishery collapsed in many Kawartha Lakes. Where did they set limit help protect that fishery?
Any blind statement that the set limits by the MNR is made for a reason to protect fish stocks is just a way of putting blinder on and hiding behind outdated policies.

How about ethical thinking over ruling what we all know. We must all be a part to protect healthy fisheries. This means if we fish as individuals constantly we must practice catch and release. If as individuals we only fish on the rare occasion then keeping our limit is an acceptable practice.

PMEmail Poster
Top
WTFish
Posted: Oct 13, 2018 - 08:45 am


Parr Trout
*

Group: Members
Posts: 62
Member No.: 14462
Joined: August 13, 2017




Funny how easily "ethical" gets modified to suit selfish motivations

Reminds me of the current issue with Trump and the assassination of a journalist by Saudi Arabia. It's now ethical to continue military sales to Saudi Arabia because they are good for the bottom line of arms manufacturers and Trump's family business


"This means if we fish as individuals constantly we must practice catch and release."

Ya, actually if your ethics don't include torturing animals for entertainment the obvious choice would be not to fish constantly


Again to clarify, this is nothing to do with PETA, left wing or JT, haha. Fishing itself and releasing certain fish in certain circumstances is perfectly fine and part of the natural order of things. Fishing strictly for fun with no intent to eat what you catch - I'm sorry but you cannot claim that's ethical, no matter how inconvenient that is. Intent is the crucial keyword here.

There are plenty of other great outdoor hobbies, no one is forced to "fish constantly". Well actually some probably are but that would certainly be for consumption.

PMEmail Poster
Top
stevepod
Posted: Oct 13, 2018 - 09:14 am


Lunker Trout
*

Group: Members
Posts: 372
Member No.: 9154
Joined: March 05, 2015




I fish constantly and will never stop. I practice catch and release mostly. Find another outdoor activity no thanks fishing is a passion for some anglers and I’m sure we all try to handle the fish properly so another fisherman can enjoy the pull on the line. I have nothing against anyone who keeps a limit of fish but if I were to keep my limit every time I went fishing I would think that would be worse.

PMEmail Poster
Top

Topic Options Pages: 1 2 3 4 > »»  Closed TopicStart new topicStart Poll

 

Fishing Lake Simcoe
Fishing forum for Lake Simcoe & Area. Fishing Reports, Current Ice Conditions, Fishing Tips, Discussions & More. Featuring Ice Hut Rentals, Accommodations, Bait & Tackle shops, Marinas and Fishing Guides. The best fishing in Simcoe County!

Marketplace