Catch and Release
Printed From: The Fishing Website
Category: Freshwater Fishing
Forum Name: Freshwater Fission
Forum Description: The place to discuss all matters related to freshwater fishing!
URL: https://www.fishing.net.nz/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=37263
Printed Date: 09 Jun 2026 at 4:35pm
Topic: Catch and Release
Posted By: Te Awa Kairangi Angler
Subject: Catch and Release
Date Posted: 28 Jan 2009 at 5:42pm
|
Request from A. Trout. To breathe, I need to be in the water. For protection, I need my slime. Lifting me out of the water for hook release or for photos is torture. Your landing nets and hands are hurting me. The big net users and photo posers might like to reply: |
Replies:
Posted By: Capt Asparagus
Date Posted: 28 Jan 2009 at 6:05pm
|
No H.A., I don't think so.
Besides, who cares if the net hurts the poor little fishy-poos, when the dirty great descending Waka about to connect to its skull is going to solve all its problems from then on?
Sorry H.A. but your note from Mr Trout is just a little inane... even for a troll, who can be bothered with it. Please, do not post dumb stuff like this again, it is just a waste of space. this is me speaking as a Moderator here, OK?
Cheers mate, feel free to post more interesting and informative stuff next time, not junk like this.
Growwwlll growwwllll grizzle growwllll... your first growling from a moderator eh!
Cheers,
Stu.
|
Posted By: goosebayhunter
Date Posted: 28 Jan 2009 at 6:33pm
ow boo hoo im sure they wont die you just need a wet rag, im not going to leave my trophy trout in the water ------------- globe warming,higher sea levels,more fishing spots BRING IT ON |
Posted By: michael29973
Date Posted: 28 Jan 2009 at 8:03pm
if you havnt caught that much trout and you get some decent ones of course your going to want to take a picture of your fish.you may hurt them a little bit taking them out of the water but they survive after you release them. all of the fish i have caught and released swim of fighting fit  .
|
Posted By: tmmo
Date Posted: 28 Jan 2009 at 8:41pm
| I am sure that taking them out of the water for a quick photo before release is no more stressful to the trout than having a metal hook in the corner of the mouth, and being attached to a line for a few minutes! and certainly less stressful than being wacked on the head! |
Posted By: Cheeko
Date Posted: 28 Jan 2009 at 9:32pm
|
I dont agree that it damages them too much when netting and taking a quick pic (provided that the net is not lifted out of the water onto the bank). I always leave the fish and the net in the water and then lift them up for a quick pic and back they go.
I have caught the same fish on three different occassions over a couple season period and wouldnt be able to remember how often I have caught the same fish twice whether it be over the course of a season or over a period of a week.
I have seen some pretty brutal treatment of fish at taupo river mouths that are destined for release so its not surprising that some of them float away.
Overall I believe that provided you are quick and careful when releasing fish I dont think it does too much damage but then again im no scientist.
|
Posted By: Pole Dancer
Date Posted: 28 Jan 2009 at 10:48pm
|
Ok, fellas, settle down. I never seen a thread before where I thought nearly everybody was wrong but this is one!
Firstly I personally believe our esteemed moderator owes Hutt Angler an absolute apology! What HA has put forward is not airy fairy, new age, politically correct, feel good, nonsense and couldn't be further from a troll in my opinion. I would rate as very good advice, in principle. most on this forum could take a lesson from it. It's standard accepted practice on how care for a fragile fishery in many parts of the world. Unfortunately his strategy, while good on the whole, is also flawed for many or most NZ fisheries... I am going to explain why but a few points first.
Capt. You are so wrong on this... sooo bloody wrong and my keyboard is getting a pounding right now. I'm seeing red at your response as you no doubt will have gathered from my private message to you!
Goosebay, you are wrong, in many instances a wet rag can remove more slime from a trout. trout are extremely fragile. many sea fish i will handle in the manner you suggest, but trout definitely not.
Michael, you are young and embarking on an exciting journey of discovery of fly fishing and many awesome adventures await you. You have a lot to learn, as even us old farts do, but you perhaps even more than many of us. Handling fish is a skill I rate at the top of all skills and I'll rate an angler who handles fish well over one that catches plenty or casts further. many of the fisheries you are going to enjoy over th next sixty years exist in the form they do today because many anglers who have fished them for the past 30 years took care and paid attention on how to care for trout. For the sake of the young anglers who follow you into this sport I would want to see you do the same. A case in point was the photo you or Tane took of a small fish on the hot river stones of the Ruamahunga. That fish sustained very bad burns to one side and would have dead within minutes of being returned... please never photograph fish like that.
Everything HA has said has merit, but it based on recommendations made for overseas fisheries where the trout are not as big as we get in NZ overall. Landing nets are essential items in decreasing stress on fish because they allow the angler to land a fish in much less time than would have practical otherwise, especially if fishing in company and another can do the netting. this has two effects. The fish is in much better shape when brought to hand and it does not have to be played to absolute exhaustion, as is the case with most of our fish in excess of 4lbs, before being able to be released. Secondly, if a fish is brought to hand completely exhausted and then released by simply twisting the fly out (I use barbless hooks in freshwater to aid with this and the bonus is you catch more fish with barbless but that's another thread) the fish will almost certainly expire because it will not have been adequately revived.
So the ideal mix is right in the middle.
I have released thousands of trout over the years as for 27 years I was a guide specializing in back country fly fishing on some of our most fragile waterways. The trout had to be protected and looked after to ensure the health of the the trout and fishery and of course i want to return to those waters myself and catch fish. many of the fish we caught we easily identifiable by eel bite marks etc and we know that many, many fish were caught repeatedly. I have also seen other anglers not so careful release fish that swam away but turned belly up and died due to poor handling.
Remember,, even if a fish swims away they can still die due to lactic acid build up in the muscles which can take time and the fish essentially becomes paralyzed and cannot swim or maintain itself. Just because a fish swims away does not in itself mean it is fit, healthy, and is going to survive.
In fact studies in the US have shown that at the very best there is about a 5% mortality for all trout landed and released regardless of handling. When what is called "standard handling" is used the mortality is about 30%. That's is pitiful, there is no excuse and many of our fragile rivers cannot handle that. Add to this the draconian limits set for some of our fragile fisheries and it's no wonder you hear old farts lamenting about the old days.
So how do you do it?
1) Get the right net. There are nets available these days with a rubberized netting that has no knots (abrasive edges on knots) and will protect the fish. These do minimal harm to fish and are used by many fisheries biologists studying fish and have been proven to do little damage. they cost a little more, they are worth it.
2) Use an absolute minimum of handling, the least you can get away with. try as much as possible not to lift the trout from the water. however, a few seconds lifted properly will do the fish no harm. Do not lift it too far or over rocks so that if it flaps out of your grip, little harm is done. Get the fish set in the water, ask the photographer if they have everything set (I've been through this with clients a thousand times or more) when they say yes say "One, two, three" and lift. get the shot and immediately return the fish to the water. Two things happen. you get a far more interesting photo because there'll be water pouring off the fish and the shot will have Acton, the fish will suffer no more harm than if it had jumped up itself.
3) Only ever touch a fish with wet hands and keep handling to a minimum. Never squeeze the delicate areas or touch the gills. squeezing a fish will kill it.
There are many fisheries in NZ where killing fish is acceptable, primarily the put and take fisheries and those, such as Taupo (although that could be up for debate) which is managed to sustain a harvest). however nearly all small and back country streams are fragile and i wouldn't kill a fish from them for all the tea in China.
Look after these rivers, Handle the fish with care using the strongest leader you can get away with, net them quickly with a quality catch and release net and handle as little as possible while still reviving them and still getting your photo and no one, least of all the trout will be harmed.
This photo shows exactly how to do it! and the right net!
 ------------- http://www.clarkreid.co.nz" rel="nofollow - www.clarkreid.co.nz FFF Certified Casting Instructor / Umpqua Designer Tier 
|
Posted By: Cheeko
Date Posted: 28 Jan 2009 at 11:39pm
|
great response Clark and good advice for us all
cheers
|
Posted By: Capt Asparagus
Date Posted: 29 Jan 2009 at 1:24am
|
Clark... I am not arguing with the fish releasing content of the post... it is just standard fish handling lore. If releasing the fish, do not gill it. Keep it wet, do not flop it on the bank, all that stuff. Great, I am bang alongside this, no worries.
It is however the tenor of the original posting that caught my attention. It was not a question of "is this right" it was not asking for opinions of other was, better ways or others experiences in releasing fish.
However, using words like Hurting, torture, Posers (referring to anyone who would debate Mr Trouts plea) is all inflamatory, and apart from my reply, these seem to be otehrs here too who have felt this way.
The original post was not inviting debate. I was inviting argument.
Now Hutt Angler... Clark feels I should apolgise to you for asking you to post something a little meatier than this... if you feel I have slammed you unfairly, then indeed, I apologise... I would indeed like you to continue posting, I encourage anyone and everyone to contribute freely to discussions on the site,... but please mate, discussions, not arguments.
Clark, you feel strongly on this subject, good for you. It is obviously one that is close to your heart. Your passion for the subject is greatly respected as well, so if this has offended you, then I will apologise to you as well.
Now, Having read the original post by HA, please, tell me, what else can anyone post afterwards apart from a string of "hear-hear"s?
How about something like this though..... Letter from Mr Trout...
To breathe, I need to be in the water. For protection, I need my slime. Lifting me out of the water for hook release or for photos is a process that needs to be done very carefully... I cannot stand having hands put in my gills, or dry hands or hard nets ripping my slime covering or skin. This can in the long run kill me. Oh, bugger, I can't get this to go back to the old type font... so everything from here down is from me again, OK?
A post like this amended one removes a lot of the contentious nature of the original posting. I tihnk it still reads pretty lame, I think something more like this would have been better....
What is the opinion of fishermen to the techniques of releasing fish? I have found that releasing fish without lifting them from the water, without certainly handling them in the gill areas or using hard nets to be a much better, gentler form of fish release than many of the older or more heavy handed ways seen in many streams and rivers around the country.
Removing slime from fish has been found to be a major wound to fish, leading to burning, disease and in not too long a time, death of otehrwise sucessfully released fish.
What ways do you think there are that could be found to let all fishermen know this? How can we get the message thru to the bulk of the fishing population? Does everyone feel it is worth killing a fish just to get a photo of it? What level of risk, harm or impairment are we willing to accept to get pictures of fish in wild rivers?
I would like to see what others think on this subject.
There. It is a bit shakey, but a lot less judgemental and argumentative, and will lead to a debate, and through this, hopefully a change of opinions in some who feel so inclined. That initial post simply would not have. Well, that is what I feel anyhow.
So then, I have had my say now... and a lot more saying than I thought it would need about 10 posts further up the page,
cheers,
Stu.
|
Posted By: Pole Dancer
Date Posted: 29 Jan 2009 at 1:45am
|
My last post on this subject and any other on Fishing.net.nz Stu, what you have said is reasonable in your last post. What you said in your post immediately following Hutt Anglers is dispicable.
I'll tell you who cares. I DO and I have spent too damn long on this sport and encouraging people, especially young and novices anglers like most of the contributor to this thread, to have a balanced and respectful attitude to our sport and the world class fisheries we have which are fragile and require protection not ignorant rants about bashing in their heads and not not giving a stuff about them to be bothered.
The content of the post was pure gold Stu! and needed saying andyou completely undermined that and that goes against my grain BIG TIME! You seem to think people have to good messages in a way that appeases you.... that's not moderating Syu, thatsjust BS! It's not English class it's a forum. give out your D- in your own time, but leave valid posters alone!
Look at my post count Stu and then realise that 90% of that is not comment of a frivilous nature but hard won knowledge I am want to pass on to the anglers starting out in the sport of fly fishing whether that be salt or fly. i have done a lot of good, I'd like to think, in that regard and there's been a lot of battles along the way and the last thing this forum needs is such ridiculous and disresprectful views on the quarry and sport which has made me a living since I was 17 years old and is a passion i will hold to my grave.
you on the other hand are in here as a moderator because no one esle wants it, you'd rather be chucking softbaits in Whitianga or Vanuatu than talking trout in fact i din't even know if you can or do use a fly rod.
I am simply not going to put my time into a forum where someone posts something that is, in a flyfishing world sense, pretty reasonable, albeit apart from the posers stuff, but hey, the rest was pure gold that Goose, Michael, Tane and others here needed to be told.
You obviously don't think so, but then I've seen you release fish on TV!
Absolutely 100% irresponsible and lacking in knowledge and i will have no part of it. In fact you should be ashamed of yourself. It's bloody pitiful!
Clark ------------- http://www.clarkreid.co.nz" rel="nofollow - www.clarkreid.co.nz FFF Certified Casting Instructor / Umpqua Designer Tier
|
capt apsparagus wrote:Posted By: Capt Asparagus
Date Posted: 29 Jan 2009 at 2:19am
|
Clark, like I said, I have no argument with the release of fish. What I reacted to in a fairly light hearted way was what I percieved to be a rather confrontational post in the first place. If someone is going to keep a fish, it does not matter a lot what sort of way they hold it for photos. If a fish is to be released, then I also think pretty much everyone knows how this should be done. You do have a valid point however, that of educating the young as the the merits of fish handling or otehrwise. However, I did not think this post was particularly aimed at the young. Not with the "posers" comment, anyhow. I cannot really say more than I have said above. cheers,
Stu.
|
Posted By: TheBadger
Date Posted: 31 Jan 2009 at 3:02am
Come on guys, pick it up. Not worth coming to blows over this. Bit of an overreaction on both sides thats spiralled out of control isn't it? I'm interested to hear that using a net in the correct way can actually increase successful release rate Clark, and as for the knotless nets, I've got one, not only great for handling fish but flies don't get as caught up in them. On a bigger point, us young guys DO need to know this stuff. And yes we will make mistakes (like the brown on the rocks), and by telling us (albeit in a slightly forceful way) you're ensuring that we learn and don't repeat our mistakes. However the bickering and the division between you guys ain't setting a good standard for us . So I implore both of you to get off your high horses and apologise. As an added incentive...whoever apologises first is always going to be the bigger man . If anyone agrees with me then post on here too.
|
Posted By: geoff_fishie
Date Posted: 31 Jan 2009 at 8:37am
| wow, didnt think there was too much variation in the way people handled fish. be gentle, wet your hands, only lift the fish once the camera is ON and ready and put him back SLOW AND GENTLE or else shane will yell "SLOW AND GENTLE!!" in your ear! |
Posted By: Capt Asparagus
Date Posted: 31 Jan 2009 at 9:38am
|
ummm, geoff, I did already! from above.... "Now Hutt Angler... Clark feels I should apolgise to you for asking you to post something a little meatier than this... if you feel I have slammed you unfairly, then indeed, I apologise... I would indeed like you to continue posting, I encourage anyone and everyone to contribute freely to discussions on the site,... but please mate, discussions, not arguments.
Clark, you feel strongly on this subject, good for you. It is obviously one that is close to your heart. Your passion for the subject is greatly respected as well, so if this has offended you, then I will apologise to you as well."
So, did i win the "First to Apologise" race? Yaaaayyy! I win, I win! And if you ever saw a pic of me mate, you would have to admit, there are few bigger men than me, lol....
cheers,
Stu.
|
Posted By: Tore
Date Posted: 31 Jan 2009 at 4:07pm
|
I've been on flyfishing forums since 1997 in Europe, US and NZ (believe it or not...) and I have to say this is one of the worst pieces of moderating I've ever seen! H.A's post is fair and dead on. And Stu you're wrong - a lot of guys DON'T know how to handle fish. In fact, in my experience most anglers do it wrong. I guess that is HA's experience too, since he started this thread in the manner he did. So Clark's follow-up post should not only be read, but printed in big letters and hang on the wall of every angler!
A piece of advice: For the sake of this forum, hand over your moderator "job" to someone who is better qualified. Both with people skills and especially fish conservation. Sorry mate, this is not for you...
 . |
Posted By: Te Awa Kairangi Angler
Date Posted: 01 Feb 2009 at 5:29pm
|
Dear A. Trout, I’ve posted your request to anglers and had an interesting response. Part of the reaction was my use of words deemed inflammatory. I apologise to you for that and to anglers who took offence. Here’s the break down so far with 9 addressing your request: - Don’t care. 1 - Trout isn’t dead so it’s okay. 4 - It’s okay to handle trout, hold out of the water and to use nets so long as it’s done carefully. 3 - If a trout is going to be kept, it doesn’t matter how it is treated. 1 (Same respondent as Don’t care) At this point in time in New Zealand, A. Trout, the answer is No. Request denied, Regards, HA. |
Posted By: Capt Asparagus
Date Posted: 01 Feb 2009 at 6:12pm
|
Welll... Ok. So how would you advise those who know no better as to actually handle fish better? No nets, not ever? Not even those nice rubberised, non-knotted type ones? What about if you cannot actually reach the water to stand in it to release the fish (like if fishing off banks over deep pools or so on? Does lifting a fish from the water with wet hands harm it? If not, why not do so to get a quick shot of the fish for the album. If so, hmmmmmm..... should no-one ever take a picture of their fish again in your opinion? (apart from those who actually catch a fish and might like to eat it or somethnig) This is the stuff a discussion should be about, leaves things open for others to ask questions about and to express opinions etc. Tell A. Trout that people are listening, now perhaps if he would like to be a little more enlightening, the conversation could expand a bit... what do you think? cheers, Stu. |
Posted By: long john
Date Posted: 01 Feb 2009 at 6:58pm
|
So, you guys who have spent years wandering the banks of trout rivers, how often do these dead trout wash up that have been mishandled and subsequently died from infection?
------------- Proud member of the Glen Innes Spearfishing Club |
Posted By: Rusky
Date Posted: 01 Feb 2009 at 7:52pm
|
Bloody hell, what a load of bollocks Mortality rates are always going to be a factor when fishing, no expert handler is going to get a 100% survival rate for every fish he/she releases in there fishing career. Its a fact of life, get over it.
|
Posted By: Te Awa Kairangi Angler
Date Posted: 01 Feb 2009 at 8:00pm
|
Dear HA, You call that an interesting response? Interesting? You’re pathetic and really missed the point. I’ll give it to you again and this time, listen. 1.) I can only breathe in the water 2.) I have protective slime 3.) Prolonged playing, handling and time out of the water is stressful and could lead to my death Therefore, After hooking, release me quickly, keep handling to an absolute minimum and leave me in the water. The good news is that some New Zealand anglers are achieving this and some of those are doing this without landing nets. For the others, let’s reverse roles in response to the messages posted above. Once the angler is hooked, get him to sprint around the paddock. That’s just a jog HA and I said SPRINT. Deplete that oxygen and get a good build up of lactic acid. Now you’re getting there. Once he begins to bend over and double up, I’ll scoop him up in a landing net, walk over to the river and dunk him in. That’s right. I’m holding his head under the water, feeling through pockets for the forceps. Let’s get hands around him, clear the net and position the angler’s head for the hook extraction. First shot, no good. Second shot, no good. Third shot his mouth falls open and still under water, he looks like he’s going to cark it. Not a problem because he’s not dead yet. Hook is out now. At this point of exhaustion when the angler’s chances of revival are in the balance, would you mind if I hold his head under a bit longer, for a photograph? After you’ve applied Mouth to Mouth, CPR and called the ambulance HA, don’t give me this rubbish again about an interesting response. If New Zealand anglers are still asking what to do, then consider this: For every angler action after hooking the fish, ask For who’s benefit is this? If it is for the trout’s benefit – do it If it’s for the angler’s benefit – don’t do it. |
Posted By: Capt Asparagus
Date Posted: 01 Feb 2009 at 10:51pm
|
Geez HA, I don't think A Trout likes playing with humans! ...I mean, at what point do you have to ask yourself, "Should I be hooking these fish at all?". Much more interesting dialogue now though. Cheers, Stu. |
Posted By: biggear
Date Posted: 02 Feb 2009 at 7:23am
|
Just a passing comment, but it seems to have gotten a bit out of hand on this topic. I will say that with fishing, at some point a fish will be harmed. We all do our best to release fish we dont intend to keep as best we can so the fish has the absolute best survival rate possible. I for one want my kids to be able to catch fish in the future. However, the only way to not harm a fish is...........................dont put a line in the water. ------------- Dont let the grey hair fool you! |
Posted By: waitakidan
Date Posted: 02 Feb 2009 at 8:50am
|
HA, you seem to be anti the use of landing nets. In my opinion and experience, the correct use of an appropriate landing net great increases a fish's chance of survival, as the fish can be landed a lot quicker and in better condition. Likewise, lifting a fish out for a quick photo, no problem. Look at Clarks photo, water still pouring off fish, thats how it can and should be done. Dan |
Posted By: geoff_fishie
Date Posted: 02 Feb 2009 at 10:23am
ive only ever seen a dead trout on the bank twice. once in the upper rangetikei river (looked to me like his ticket back to the main river dried up) and once on the waikato river. you see plenty more dead snapper etc, sometimes still whole but have been chucked out anyway! (waihi camp '09) |
Posted By: Tore
Date Posted: 02 Feb 2009 at 10:36am
I totally agree. It is better to use a net correctly than play the fish to the point where it's totally exhausted to land it without one.
If you're really serious get one of these:
 |
Posted By: Capt Asparagus
Date Posted: 02 Feb 2009 at 5:50pm
|
Where would you get such a beastie Tore? I think Purefishing (and probably lots of others I assume) sell rubberised nets, is there a difference? If the fish are eating smelt, can you snip a little link out of your net there , pop it on a hook and use it like an SP? :-) Cheers, Stu. |
Posted By: lemmy
Date Posted: 02 Feb 2009 at 9:32pm
|
I,ve seen dead trout from catch and release anglers several times.
The worst would have to be on a hunting trip up the Horomanga River in the Urewera,s.
Me and a mate were staying in the Midway hut for a week of relaxing and trying to get a Rusa Deer(no Rusa but two reds)we had been catching trout like crazy in Aniwhenua so left the rods at the Farm.
Anyway we were joined by two fishermen for one night who had spent the day fishing on the way in catching and realeasing "heaps of fish"they had no landing nets and were fishing with light tippets playing the fish out before unhooking it,photo,s etc.
We were disturbed to find lots of dead fish the next day while travelling downstream in the backeddys of pools hooked in branches etc,they all looked fresh as ,and died from what I presumed to be stress or exhaustion.
In my opinion the best method for catch and realease is use a bit of ten pound flurocarbon straight through for your leader a good quality landing net and once a fish is hooked get it landed as quick as possible and realeased which I think can be achieved faster with a net.
Limit your catch to a reasonable amout of fish then start using hookless flys which can be tied as per normal just snip the hook at the bend with wire cutters for me its all about seducing the fish to strike, the fight is secondary.
If you want to spend the day catching and realeasing hundreds of trout do it in a lake not a headwater stream.
|
Posted By: Capt Asparagus
Date Posted: 02 Feb 2009 at 9:40pm
|
Golly, not just barbless hooks, but hookless hooks! Now that IS "zen" fishing! :-) Interesting idea though, I guess if you snipped off the point at around where the barb normally would be, then you'd still get the hit and a run or two, then flip them a little loose line and hey presto, there they go. If you are getting tons of fish (I have never been that skilled I am afraid), then I guess that would make sense. Means more time casting and hooking I guess and less time waiting for the damn thing to come back to the bank again. Always that thought in the back of the mind though surely.... "15lb brownie....".... oh darn! |
Posted By: lemmy
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2009 at 6:17am
|
Hookless Flys are quite popular in the States and Europe now food for thought.
During my big O-E while in England I fished in a few Commercial fisherys where the rules were you bought a three fish ticket,all fish must be killed,and once you had your limit you had to stop fishing,which you could do in under an hour.
Too get a days fishing ,we started off bending the hooks to a 45 degree angle and then throwing out a loop of flyline to realease the fish,and then went to hookless flys.
As for seeing a 15pound Brown take it I think most of us would be putting on the same pattern fully armed for the next cast!
|
Posted By: Tore
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2009 at 11:14am
| Stu, that is a Brodin net ( http://www.brodin.com - www.brodin.com ). I don't think anybody sells them in NZ. The one in the photo has a "ghost" net. The theory being the transparent rubber net won't spook the fish when you land it. |
Posted By: Rusky
Date Posted: 03 Feb 2009 at 5:23pm
Haha, and some stilts as well so they dont see your feet!
 |
Posted By: Nebuchadnezzar
Date Posted: 04 Feb 2009 at 10:00pm
|
'Berkley tournament release net' They are awsome! Realeasing fish is made 100x easier. Hooks never get stuck in them so you spend alot more time fishing. They'er not a flyfishing net, but great on the boat. Shallow rubber bag, big head, long and lite alloy handle, and only $69. Every body should have one! I dont think that poor handling of trout is anything to get too worried about, as fisherman get more experienced they quickly learn how to handle fish. Yes there are mortalitys from poor handling and there always will be, there has been for the last 50 years but i dont see any fisheries declining from it. For a new angler, getting up close and personal with there catch is a real buzz, its how life long addictions are started.
|
Posted By: waitakidan
Date Posted: 05 Feb 2009 at 6:09am
|
Disagree there Ol'betsy. Some of the worst fish handlers I have seen are old grey hairs. "Been handling fish like this for 50 years, not going to change now. Fish is lucky its not getting smacked on head" kind of attitude. If they were educated when they were young, how many less fish would have died in the last 50 yrs???? Sure, getting close to the catch is a buzz, but it soon goes away when the fish you release swims a couple of metres out and turns belly up. Dan |
Posted By: Te Awa Kairangi Angler
Date Posted: 05 Feb 2009 at 1:13pm
|
Dan, did you see the recommendation for handling trout on page 8 of the latest Fish and Game NZ magazine? (Issue 62)
"Turn the fish belly-up while removing the hook. Using this method, a trout can be carried safely for short distances. Handle trout gently and with respect and they won't panic or stress, ensuring their revival for release without damage and a minumum of fuss."
I wondered what turning a trout upside down has to do with respect so emailed the NZ Professional Fishing Guides Association for their recommended practices with Catch and Release. Not surprisingly, this was their reply:
Hi I have spoken to our President regarding your query. His comment is that while NZ Professional Fishing Guides Association is very much for the promotion of catch and release this is very dependable to the situation at the time of catching the fish. |
Posted By: Capt Asparagus
Date Posted: 05 Feb 2009 at 1:21pm
|
Not sure about the upside down thing with trout, but certainly for marine species, eg snapper, this works excellently. In fact, for snapper, to hold fish so they stay rock still while being handled, you hold them upside down and put light pressure on their anal vent-belly area... (with your thumb) I know, sounds wierd/kinky, but the fish just sit there as limp as you want, no kicking or anything. Then you can simply flip them back carefully into the water, and off they go. Kingies quiet down heaps if upside down, and sharks will go dormant if upside down too, so perhaps it is a species wide thing. Do fish sleep on their backs? :-) cheers, Stu. |
Posted By: bazza
Date Posted: 05 Feb 2009 at 1:43pm
Hi Tore
Great to see you back on the forum again, does this mean you are
back in NZ or merely nostalgic for some summer fishing?
If you care to read the "Ruamahanga .... tomorrow" thread (pg.2) you
will see a report of Cooper (grandson) having caught his very first trout
flyfishing from a river with your rod. Was a real "buzz" & one of life's
special moments being with him when he did so, however as I did not
manage catch anything that time out, may be somewhat less thrilled
for him, if he continues to make a habit of that occurring too often.
By way of explanation for those who may not be aware ..... Tore when
leaving NZ last year, very generously gave away quite a considerable
amount of f/fishing gear to youngsters interested in the sport.
My 7yo grandson was one of the grateful recipients of a rod & several
other related items.
Unfortunately unlike his lake catch, do not have a pic to send you this time
of his river fish.
Cheers mate.
P.S. gave him the option of releasing it, but he chose to keep it, in order
to proudly show his family, which he perhaps can be forgiven for under
the circumstances.
|
Posted By: Tore
Date Posted: 08 Feb 2009 at 2:04pm
Hi Barry! I'm thrilled to see the gear is fullfilling its purpose! Give Cooper my biggest congrats! 
I don't know anybody who honestly can say that he released his first fish...
Unfortunately I'm not back in NZ. Im stuck in old Norway with 40cm of snow! Like I told my wife this morning: "Now I remember why I left Nrway in the first place...".
All the best!
|
Posted By: Fishsnatcher
Date Posted: 08 Feb 2009 at 5:21pm
|
Speaking of keeping their first fish... when I was about 5 years old i distinctly remember catching my first spotty and yes we kept it and cooked it, can't remeber what it tasted like though...
|
Posted By: TheBadger
Date Posted: 10 Feb 2009 at 11:05pm
| I released my first trout! it was a 2lb rainbow on the Tukituki river. |
Posted By: Pole Dancer
Date Posted: 14 Feb 2009 at 9:08am
|
A lot of comment in this thread is based on ignorance of how many modern flyfishers approach their sport. I think that those don't reularly flyfish for trout should probably just read this rather than comment because it continues to throw the thread off topic.
Hooklies flies are common. The first time I used them was about 18 years ago on Mystery Creek when we had landed and released about 22 fish by lunchtime and, concious of the mortality with Catch and Release we decided not to hook and play any more fish. We snipped the hook off our Stimulators and "played tag" for the afternoon. The competition was to see how many times a trout would take one before giving up. Randall won with six takes on the same fish... God they were dumb up there back then.
Catch and release is not about doing harm to a fish, it's about attempting to the least amount of harm possible and if we look at overseas models where they have had their fishing decimated by over fishing and over killing we see that where the flyfishermen have adopted an almost total "no kill" policy the fisheries have recovered and have bounced back to become the best fisheries in their respective nations. The USA has many prime examples.
Because of this, worldwide the majority of flyfishermen are totally "no-kill" anglers and that is what is being adopted in NZ and, I believe, should be promoted as it grows. Most fly anglers now find their sport somewhat sullied by taking a fish. Anglers from other styles often are incredulous at this and wonder they are sometimes regulated off certain waters... go figure!
If someone wants a trout there are many places in NZ with put and take fisheries where taking fish is fine. Rotorua Lakes(A few years ago I would have said Taupo, not so certain at the moment) or any of the fisheries with released fish and limited spawning. Even so, after so many years of Catch and release fishing I never keep a trout anymore, I used to keep the occasional one for my father when he was alive but as he isn't around anymore I have no need for one. It took a bit of adjusting to even start keeping snapper once I embarked on Saltwater fly. ------------- http://www.clarkreid.co.nz" rel="nofollow - www.clarkreid.co.nz FFF Certified Casting Instructor / Umpqua Designer Tier
|
Posted By: TheBadger
Date Posted: 14 Feb 2009 at 2:46pm
| Great comment clark, echoes my sentiments exactly. A couple of years back I was fishing on the Arnold river (which has an exceptionally high population of trout) when I hooked a beautiful 5 pound brown. After a fairly long fight the person we were fishing with landed it and promptly despatched it. Now had he asked me I expect I actually would've said yes, I've kept a fair number of sea fish. But for some reason killing this trout really got to me, I even shed a tear or two. I can't exactly explain why, but there is a certain intimacy between the fly angler and his quarry. I think it has something to do with the fact that fly anglers tend to respect their opponents (the trout) much more than sea anglers do (I'm generalising here, I know a number of sea anglers respect their fishes greatly). Its also the fact that we have decieved the trout. Its not as if we have attacked it with violence, as a hunter does, but there is something almost underhand, albeit highly skilful, about tricking a trout to eat an artificial fly rather than a natural. Whatever the case is, from that time on I haven't kept a fish and I have done my absolute best to minimise any harm done to fish I catch. Also just a comment about the official no-kill policies, whilst in Canada I caught a trophy Bull Trout. Now the thought of keeping it did not enter my mind, but even if that had been my wish I wouldn't have been able to, because British Columbia has a statewide catch and release policy for certain species. It is also a part of their regulations that all hooks must be barbless. I wonder how policies like this would go down in New Zealand...Not well is my guess. |
Posted By: Cuba Libre
Date Posted: 20 Feb 2009 at 6:37pm
|
Just to clarify the BC experience a bit Badger. You are right on for some species... Its "no kill" for wild steelhead province-wide. There are also many conservation closures or C&R for bulls/dolllies as they are suckers for a spinner, bait or streamer. The regulations for keeping wild trout , however, are very much a system by system, or lake by lake senario. You damn near need a lawyer in your back pocket to understand the BC fresh water regs
As far as barbless-- that too varies wildly! Generally- its single barbless in streams. But in most lakes it permissible to use barbed hooks, and trebles-- but most knowledable fishos do not.
There is also a good number of fly-fishing only waters... and further, no winter ice fishing ( why anyone wants to freeze his butt off in that way, I cant understand.) on some lakes.
In the last few years, the govt has promised to standardize and simplify the regulations for fresh water. The reason is that license sales went on a downward skid when they started complicating the regs and people saw that as unfair.
The biggest contenscious issue was an attempt by a few govt bios to increase the number of "fly fishing only" lakes. There was such an outcry that it was discriminatory, that they backed down.
Clear as mud????? But-- what the hay-- still pretty good fishing to be had here!  ------------- What a ride!! |
Posted By: TheBadger
Date Posted: 20 Feb 2009 at 7:41pm
| haha yeah I checked the rules after my post, but they were far too complicated for me to try clarify. NZ's closest thing to Steelhead are the Taupo spawning runs, can you imagine if the govt tried to make that a 'no-kill' zone??? there'd be an uproar. Definitely agree on the good fishing there, 12lb bull trout on my 3rd cast. |
Posted By: philphy
Date Posted: 21 Feb 2009 at 12:10am
|
It's kind of curious that "catch & release" has recently been banned in Switzerland as it previously has been in Germany. Their law now states "it is not permitted to go fishing with the 'intention' to release the fish." I understand that this has been pushed by animal welfare lobyist's but it seems to fly in the face of most other countries where if "catch & release isn't policy then it is certainly encouraged.
Any thoughts on this?
|
Posted By: Pole Dancer
Date Posted: 21 Feb 2009 at 12:55am
|
Yep, it is laws put through to satisfy a small group of loopies... absolute nutters...
the same ones who come up with this garbage!
http://www.fishinghurts.com/feat-dogfish.asp - http://www.fishinghurts.com/feat-dogfish.asp ------------- http://www.clarkreid.co.nz" rel="nofollow - www.clarkreid.co.nz FFF Certified Casting Instructor / Umpqua Designer Tier
|
Posted By: Snap T
Date Posted: 21 Feb 2009 at 3:14pm
|
That reminds me of a funny conversation came up at the pub over new years break with a fishing buddy's wife (she was probably just p**sed off her husband was spending more time fishing with me than time doing the DIY's at home)
To convince me I was a cruel fisherman she used the parallel she had probably heard on Oprah or something, of a man walking up to a hamburger eating it only to get hooked in the lip, dragged around the room to then be scooped up in a net and held under water where he couldn't breathe for the hook to be taken out and a photo be taken.
- Witty and poetic..... kind of put her point across....... yes and to be honest I was stumped for a response.
Untill I pointed out she had ordered the fish and chips only minutes before and asked if it would be better to kill the man?
Funny enough I haven't been fishing with her husband since then, must give him a ring.
|
Posted By: Te Awa Kairangi Angler
Date Posted: 21 Feb 2009 at 3:31pm
|
With bag limits, we know how many fish can be killed.
Using Catch and Release, there are no limits.
How many is enough?
|
Posted By: Moggy
Date Posted: 21 Feb 2009 at 3:44pm
|
Whilst not a fresh water fisher this thread needs posting to the saltwater area as well. This problem is not just freshwater but probably more salt water issue. I would have to say that over the years I have been fishing the care and attention to fish welfare has been almost non-existent. I'm no greeny but think so of our fishing breathen actually need a wakeup call on their lack of handling care. After all we need to ensure that the resource lasts for our children’s children not just us. Stu - let’s see you start this post on saltwater forums – much overdue. Now that WILL get some interesting responses. |
Posted By: Fishsnatcher
Date Posted: 21 Feb 2009 at 3:58pm
|
I believe that the catch limit should include released fish, though that would mostly rely on anglers honesty.
Unless we have a a ranger looking over the shoulder of every fisherman in NZ.
Which for obvious reasons isn't viable.
|
Posted By: Pole Dancer
Date Posted: 21 Feb 2009 at 4:32pm
|
As fish have no cerebral cortex comparing their suffering to human suffering is verging on ludicrous in any circumstance.
Sure, because we have a cerebral cortex we are moved to act in as humane a fashion as possible but they are far to simple creatures to be "traumatized as we would think in a human sense. (Thanks Ian for the lesson on that one previously...
As for limits, I think anglers should be their own judge. With C&R there is a small mortality and how much is enough should be self governing. There's not much point instituting UN policable laws.
As for opening this up to the Salties as well... I reckon not... This forum has suffered enough disruption over the past year without deliberately unleashing that on it .------------- http://www.clarkreid.co.nz" rel="nofollow - www.clarkreid.co.nz FFF Certified Casting Instructor / Umpqua Designer Tier
|
Posted By: SINNER
Date Posted: 21 Feb 2009 at 5:21pm
|
[QUOTE=Fishsnatcher] I believe that the catch limit should include released fish, though that would mostly rely on anglers honesty, unless we have a a ranger looking over the shoulder of every fisherman in NZ.
I dont think you would get to many fishermen that would agree with you on this FS.
Some of us travel hundreds of k's to fish. Let's say I travel from Wellington to Turangi to fish the Tongariro,TT or Hine for 3 or 4 days which I do every few weeks. To fish till I have caught 3 fish which by the way I always release dosen't take long at all. My friends and I normally start in a rip some where at 5am then move into the rivers then finish off again in the rips till 12. This would actually make me give up fishing all together under your system. There fore the money I spend on a license, tackle, fuel, accomodation etc would be lost to another sport that I could enjoy for a longer amount of time per dollar spent. Which if most other fishermen had the same opinion as myself would in turn ruin the Turangi economy, the tackle industry and DOC as they wouldn't have any money to look after the fishery thru lack of license sales.
Each to their own I guess
------------- <000<< Here Fishy Fish <000<< |
Posted By: Fishsnatcher
Date Posted: 21 Feb 2009 at 5:38pm
|
Fair enough, I've changed my opinoin after reading your post steve838, but I do believe there should be a limit to catch and release, though I'm not about to make another constroversial statement about what the number should be.....
|
Posted By: Snap T
Date Posted: 21 Feb 2009 at 6:56pm
|
6. DAILY LIMIT BAGS 6.1 No licence holder shall continue to fish for a particular species of sports fish on any day in which he or she has already killed the limit bag for that species. -Regulations taken from Fish and Game website. Note the regs just states "killed" doesn't mean you have to have the fish in a bag on the bank to have fished your quota. Face it, no matter how hard we try to release fish correctly there will be the odd botch up. For example the fish that is beat but downstream in current and due to inconvieniently placed blackberry scrub you can't get a net there, and by the time he's finally in he is completely exhausted. Who has honestly never released a fish and thought "hhmmmmm he might not make it". In waters with say a limit of 2, an honest C&R angler should definately stop fishing after 2 botch ups. If all other releases go correctly and you have done the best possible for the fishes health recovery fish on good sir! |
Posted By: Moggy
Date Posted: 21 Feb 2009 at 6:59pm
|
re:
Clark I just don’t agree with this - just because fish are not equipped like us doesn’t mean that they cannot feel pain - hells teeth, that’s a weak argument if ever I saw one. If we are the brighter species (and I'm none too sure about that) then it certainly up to us to minimize any suffering from life forms lower than us (well maybe lower than us but reading some of the posts I do have cause to wonder!) come on people just because the cannot yell as loud as your misses when you buy new gear and she finds out doesn’t mean we cannot try to minimize all harm. Thanks Stu for posting on the salt side!
------------- People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it! FISH FIGHT The Peoples Protest |
Posted By: Pole Dancer
Date Posted: 21 Feb 2009 at 8:00pm
|
Well it is your right to not agree with facts, and I didn't say fish don;t feel pain... so please just keep to what i said. I also said that the presence of our cerebral cortex is what causes us to minimise harm to the fish, something they do not possess and so do not extend to their prey.
I said they do not experience trauma in the way we do... and that is a fact!
It's not about being "brighter" (What a human reaction
) it's about bveing developed differently.While I believe we are devolped differently I absolutely do not think we are a "brighter" or higher species. Just different or maybe even just more ***** up!
But lets not make this what it isn't. Fish are just developed enough in the areas of comprehension etc to experience pain or suffering on the same level as humans... and that is just a simple old fact! ------------- http://www.clarkreid.co.nz" rel="nofollow - www.clarkreid.co.nz FFF Certified Casting Instructor / Umpqua Designer Tier
|
Posted By: Te Awa Kairangi Angler
Date Posted: 08 Apr 2009 at 9:59pm
|
Some interesting discussion here but check out what is coming up. There is a brand new, 6 week Fly Fishing Course for only $45. It starts 6 May at the Naenae College Community Education Programme, in Lower Hutt. http://www.naenae-college.school.nz/ - http://www.naenae-college.school.nz/ This will be a small, friendly group of beginners through to experts (A. Trout will not be attending!), with the emphasis on catching fish locally. As yet, it’s not on their web site. The Enrolment Form is in the latest Hutt News. |