Bait Guys vs Fly Guys Mortality
- Thread starter JeffS
- Start date
pcray1231
Well-known member
Gotta agree with Jack here. Streams don't survive without fishermen, cause the PAFBC, DNR, DEP, and local governments all operate on the premise that a stream that contributes more recreation is worth more in the fight to protect it. Think about it, not only do we have fingerling projects, and special regs, we also have watershed assocations, TU chapters, conservancies, fish commission land, state game lands, etc. Our streams are categorized as "high" or "exceptional quality waters" by conservation organizations, which increases the sewage treatment requirements, regulates how mining and quarry operations do business, regulates how much landowners can mess with streams, and a myriad of other stream protecting laws.
Obviously, a politically active, environmentally enlightened, and stream watchdog type fishermen is the best you can get. But most of those guys had more modest roots. They started as bait guys when young, who probably didn't understand or care about the environment, and killed fish. But the opportunities were there and the fishing was good enough. As they spent more time astream, they got a better appreciation for the resource, and maybe witnessed first hand how management and land use decisions affected a favorite stream, for good or bad. At the same time, they became fly fishermen, lure fishermen, or perfected responsible bait fishing. They became good guys. What would have happened if early on, as unskilled bait guys, they saw the regulations as meaning they weren't allowed to fish? They would have given up the sport, or never started to begin with, and we'd be out a valuable ally.
The fish commission needs to have a balance. And the easiest way to early success is bait, and success breeds enjoyment. Project waters are fine, but they have to provide opportunities for a variety of angling methods and skill levels.
Obviously, a politically active, environmentally enlightened, and stream watchdog type fishermen is the best you can get. But most of those guys had more modest roots. They started as bait guys when young, who probably didn't understand or care about the environment, and killed fish. But the opportunities were there and the fishing was good enough. As they spent more time astream, they got a better appreciation for the resource, and maybe witnessed first hand how management and land use decisions affected a favorite stream, for good or bad. At the same time, they became fly fishermen, lure fishermen, or perfected responsible bait fishing. They became good guys. What would have happened if early on, as unskilled bait guys, they saw the regulations as meaning they weren't allowed to fish? They would have given up the sport, or never started to begin with, and we'd be out a valuable ally.
The fish commission needs to have a balance. And the easiest way to early success is bait, and success breeds enjoyment. Project waters are fine, but they have to provide opportunities for a variety of angling methods and skill levels.
LehighRegular
Active member
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2006
- Messages
- 768
Well...if the fish aren't there to harvest or fish bait for....then where is the oppurtunity? If there are no fish, I highly doubt there will be anyone fishing?
Artificial lures only does not alienate a paticular type of angler, just his/her terminal tackle.
Artificial lures only does not alienate a paticular type of angler, just his/her terminal tackle.
TDB
Member
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2007
- Messages
- 590
I have to agree with LR and as I read these posts I am again frustrated to think that people just don't realize the "no fish" situation. Bottom line is if guys have to keep everything they catch then fish the put and take streams and have a ball. But with so few quality year-round fisheries in this state, why not manage them a little more strictly?
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2006
- Messages
- 17,385
I can only speak to my own observations, so perhaps yours differ, but the only streams I ever hear referred to as "fished out" are stocked streams.
The idea that harvest prohibitions or blanket harvest limits or tackle restrictions are a needed management technique on wild trout stream is a fantasy, in my opinion. In PA, there may be a handful of streams that absolutely need them and another handful that could greatly benefit from them and that's about it.
I can't image why you would think there are "so few" quality year-round trout fisheries in PA, there are actually more than most of us could name in a half-hour's worth of typing-- ready, GO!
The idea that harvest prohibitions or blanket harvest limits or tackle restrictions are a needed management technique on wild trout stream is a fantasy, in my opinion. In PA, there may be a handful of streams that absolutely need them and another handful that could greatly benefit from them and that's about it.
I can't image why you would think there are "so few" quality year-round trout fisheries in PA, there are actually more than most of us could name in a half-hour's worth of typing-- ready, GO!
LehighRegular
Active member
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2006
- Messages
- 768
I think my question is getting off topic now...but how does one define a "Quality" fishery? I'm sure there will be a 100 different opinions on this board. I think there are A LOT of factors that go into "Quality" fisheries, especially year round or even 8-10 month fisheries. Habitat, water temp, flows, etc being the biggest factors. Then biodiversity (bugs, food) factors and ultimately fish populations and size distribution of the fish based on the above factors that make up that fishery.
Putting all those factors (and some I likely have not accounted for), how many does PA have???? Ultimately I think it comes down to the PFBC and what their goals are as a resource agency.
Putting all those factors (and some I likely have not accounted for), how many does PA have???? Ultimately I think it comes down to the PFBC and what their goals are as a resource agency.
wgmiller
Well-known member
This is an interesting topic and one to which I'm sure there is no concrete answer. Being a 'noob' to fishing at the ripe age of 36, I got started this past spring with bait and have progressively switched to artificial lures and other man-made items. Within the coming weeks I'm hoping to buy my first fly rod and work on learning the art.
My limited experience using live bait has been positive in the sense that all of the fish I caught released very easy and swam off with no problem. I learned early that mashing down the barb is the way to go not only for unhooking the fish, but for ensuring their chances of survival. Not one hook I own has a raised barb and I can say that I haven't lost many fish.
To me, it seems like the largest factor affecting mortality is a fisherman's ability to quickly land, unhook and release a fish. Things like wetting a hand, keeping the fish in the water and using a landing net all play into putting less strain on the fish.
Perhaps there is a stigma that bait fisherman are less educated or sloppier with their skills than their fly fishing counterparts. No doubt there is a lot less skill involved in buying a container of worms, slapping them on a hook and catching fish. I'm sure there have been many debates over bait versus fly fishing and my intent is not to rekindle them.
My limited experience using live bait has been positive in the sense that all of the fish I caught released very easy and swam off with no problem. I learned early that mashing down the barb is the way to go not only for unhooking the fish, but for ensuring their chances of survival. Not one hook I own has a raised barb and I can say that I haven't lost many fish.
To me, it seems like the largest factor affecting mortality is a fisherman's ability to quickly land, unhook and release a fish. Things like wetting a hand, keeping the fish in the water and using a landing net all play into putting less strain on the fish.
Perhaps there is a stigma that bait fisherman are less educated or sloppier with their skills than their fly fishing counterparts. No doubt there is a lot less skill involved in buying a container of worms, slapping them on a hook and catching fish. I'm sure there have been many debates over bait versus fly fishing and my intent is not to rekindle them.
Hook_Jaw
Active member
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2008
- Messages
- 1,339
Spring Ck and Penns Ck are 2 fisheries that I fish flies and also minnows. They both have a huge ammount of trout and I catch about the same using either of the 2. I never got into fishing spinners or artificial lures to me would like be asking a fly fisherman to make there fly out of toilet papaer. I do not keep trout so I do not worry about me hurting trout waters and I also fish tight line fishing so I never hook a trout deep and also use barbless hooks.
wgmiller,
Good luck with fly-fishing. I'm sure you will find it very challenging and rewarding.
I agree that fish mortality when bait fishing can be reduced significantly by using barbless hooks and actively fishing bait (setting the hook quickly). Unfortunately, a very small minority of fishermen use barbless hooks, and a little slack in your line is enough to allow a fish to swallow your baited hook.
I used bait when a first started fishing as a kid, and continued for quite a while until I discovered fly-fishing. Also, I sometimes fish with bait fisherman. I have to say that given all the fish I catch on a fly, it is a very rare occurrence that I deeply hook a fish and injure it when fly-fishing. With bait fishing, it was a common occurrence. One other thing, with respect to trout, in my experience, treble hooks on artificial lures seem to injure fish, maybe even more than even fishing bait.
This is from a Maryland study I posted earlier:
”It is clear that trout caught on treble hook equipped artificial lures in this study sustained more physical trauma than those captured on single hook flies, as evidenced by the higher incidence of bleeding fish. Over half (57.4%) of trout captured on spinners were hooked in a location other than the jaw and 27.8% were bleeding when unhooked. Only 13.6% of trout captured with flies were hooked in a location other than the jaw and only 2.5% of those were bleeding when unhooked. Mongillo (1984) concluded that salmonids hooked in a non-jaw location (gills, esophagus, tongue, or eye) were four times more likely to die regardless of hook type. Although trout captured in our study were not observed for more than about 4 to 6 hours, the relatively greater physical damage and bleeding observed among trout captured with artificial lures versus flies supports the premise that a larger proportion of trout caught on lures would experience delayed mortality.”
http://www.dftu.org/Clippings/MD_mort_study.htm
Good luck with fly-fishing. I'm sure you will find it very challenging and rewarding.
I agree that fish mortality when bait fishing can be reduced significantly by using barbless hooks and actively fishing bait (setting the hook quickly). Unfortunately, a very small minority of fishermen use barbless hooks, and a little slack in your line is enough to allow a fish to swallow your baited hook.
I used bait when a first started fishing as a kid, and continued for quite a while until I discovered fly-fishing. Also, I sometimes fish with bait fisherman. I have to say that given all the fish I catch on a fly, it is a very rare occurrence that I deeply hook a fish and injure it when fly-fishing. With bait fishing, it was a common occurrence. One other thing, with respect to trout, in my experience, treble hooks on artificial lures seem to injure fish, maybe even more than even fishing bait.
This is from a Maryland study I posted earlier:
”It is clear that trout caught on treble hook equipped artificial lures in this study sustained more physical trauma than those captured on single hook flies, as evidenced by the higher incidence of bleeding fish. Over half (57.4%) of trout captured on spinners were hooked in a location other than the jaw and 27.8% were bleeding when unhooked. Only 13.6% of trout captured with flies were hooked in a location other than the jaw and only 2.5% of those were bleeding when unhooked. Mongillo (1984) concluded that salmonids hooked in a non-jaw location (gills, esophagus, tongue, or eye) were four times more likely to die regardless of hook type. Although trout captured in our study were not observed for more than about 4 to 6 hours, the relatively greater physical damage and bleeding observed among trout captured with artificial lures versus flies supports the premise that a larger proportion of trout caught on lures would experience delayed mortality.”
http://www.dftu.org/Clippings/MD_mort_study.htm
wgmiller
Well-known member
I can see how treble hooks could be very damaging to a fish, particularly a trout. As ashamed as I am to admit it, on a few occasions I've landed some rainbow trout on a Rebel crayfish lure. As time goes by, I learn more about the effects of different bait on the fish and adjust accordingly. I look forward to the day when my fishing kit doesn't have anything other than flies and related gear and I can relegate the crankbaits and spinners to a lesser used tackle bag.
My previous post should be amended slightly in the sense that I did have a rainbow absolutely nail a drifted salmon egg once which did cause a very deep set in the corner of his mouth. Needless to say, the hook did end up very close to his eye. The logic that fish strike natural baits hard does seem to make some sense in retrospect.
I look forward to my pending switch to fly fishing. It certainly won't be quite as easy as tossing a worm on a hook and "goin' fishin", but I think it'll be a lot more rewarding due to the degree of difficulty in technique and selecting the proper fly.
As much as I'd like to say I'll never baitfish again, while on vacation in the Outer Banks I picked up some surf gear and got some 'line time' in on the beach. Bait fishing really seems like the only way to surf fish although I did read that fly fishing does exist (probably on the sound).
My previous post should be amended slightly in the sense that I did have a rainbow absolutely nail a drifted salmon egg once which did cause a very deep set in the corner of his mouth. Needless to say, the hook did end up very close to his eye. The logic that fish strike natural baits hard does seem to make some sense in retrospect.
I look forward to my pending switch to fly fishing. It certainly won't be quite as easy as tossing a worm on a hook and "goin' fishin", but I think it'll be a lot more rewarding due to the degree of difficulty in technique and selecting the proper fly.
As much as I'd like to say I'll never baitfish again, while on vacation in the Outer Banks I picked up some surf gear and got some 'line time' in on the beach. Bait fishing really seems like the only way to surf fish although I did read that fly fishing does exist (probably on the sound).
jayL
Active member
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2007
- Messages
- 9,947
wgmiller,
There is no shame in fishing with bait and lures.
I only spin fish for trout once or twice a year, but I use spinners and corn. I'm also releasing all of the fish that show no damage. Keep in mind that I wouldn't do this on a wild trout stream, but for stockies it doesn't matter too much for me. If the trout is badly injured, I'll keep it.
My dad also spin fishes. He doesn't like fly gear, so when we fish together, he uses the short rod. When we are fishing stocked waters, he uses corn. When we go somewhere like spring, I give him a single hooked spinner, or a handful of scud patterns to drift with split shot. There are plenty of safe ways to spin fish.
Enjoy learning fly fishing. Hopefully you'll love it.
For the outer banks, I've found that throwing plugs and lures is the only way to go, but I'd like to fly fish the surf. I believe Bruno caught some stuff in the surf on the fly.
There is no shame in fishing with bait and lures.
I only spin fish for trout once or twice a year, but I use spinners and corn. I'm also releasing all of the fish that show no damage. Keep in mind that I wouldn't do this on a wild trout stream, but for stockies it doesn't matter too much for me. If the trout is badly injured, I'll keep it.
My dad also spin fishes. He doesn't like fly gear, so when we fish together, he uses the short rod. When we are fishing stocked waters, he uses corn. When we go somewhere like spring, I give him a single hooked spinner, or a handful of scud patterns to drift with split shot. There are plenty of safe ways to spin fish.
Enjoy learning fly fishing. Hopefully you'll love it.
For the outer banks, I've found that throwing plugs and lures is the only way to go, but I'd like to fly fish the surf. I believe Bruno caught some stuff in the surf on the fly.
Padraic
Active member
- Joined
- Sep 13, 2006
- Messages
- 1,756
wgmiller,
I think the discussion is more about limiting mortality (a big concern for C&R fishing, and from your comments a big concern of yours) rather than tackle. At times, I think you'll go back to your spinning gear. A windy day for instance or on big water where a spinner or crankbait would help you zone in on the holding water. When you do, there are ways to limit your mortality with that. Fishing upstream for instance. You can pull the jaw off a trout with a lure (or streamer!) fished fast on a downstream presentation. But upstream presentations are extremely effective (see a Nale Brothers vide!) and greatly reduce mortality.
Here's a great article on handling trout and releasing them safely.
http://flyfisherman.com/skills/release/index.html
From your comments, it sounds like you may already know most of this, but it's a good reference.
I think the discussion is more about limiting mortality (a big concern for C&R fishing, and from your comments a big concern of yours) rather than tackle. At times, I think you'll go back to your spinning gear. A windy day for instance or on big water where a spinner or crankbait would help you zone in on the holding water. When you do, there are ways to limit your mortality with that. Fishing upstream for instance. You can pull the jaw off a trout with a lure (or streamer!) fished fast on a downstream presentation. But upstream presentations are extremely effective (see a Nale Brothers vide!) and greatly reduce mortality.
Here's a great article on handling trout and releasing them safely.
http://flyfisherman.com/skills/release/index.html
From your comments, it sounds like you may already know most of this, but it's a good reference.
wgmiller,
In no way was the intention of my post to shame you into never fishing bait or lures with treble hooks again. I have caught many thousands of fish that way in the past. I posted just as information, and my point was that I injured a lot more fish with bait and lures than I now do with flies. As a budding fly fisherman, you may be surprised at how many fish you can catch on a fly rod and the great satisfaction you get from fooling the fish - give it a try.
I agree with Jay, bait or lures are okay for stocked fish if you are going to take home some fish. You should be prepared to take home a few fish in that situation. A real waste is releasing injured fish to die in the stream or lake.
Wild trout streams are a different story, IMO. I’ve seen many small wild fish killed by being deeply hooked or impaled on a treble hook, and released to die in the stream. Truly a waste we cannot afford, again IMO.
In no way was the intention of my post to shame you into never fishing bait or lures with treble hooks again. I have caught many thousands of fish that way in the past. I posted just as information, and my point was that I injured a lot more fish with bait and lures than I now do with flies. As a budding fly fisherman, you may be surprised at how many fish you can catch on a fly rod and the great satisfaction you get from fooling the fish - give it a try.
I agree with Jay, bait or lures are okay for stocked fish if you are going to take home some fish. You should be prepared to take home a few fish in that situation. A real waste is releasing injured fish to die in the stream or lake.
Wild trout streams are a different story, IMO. I’ve seen many small wild fish killed by being deeply hooked or impaled on a treble hook, and released to die in the stream. Truly a waste we cannot afford, again IMO.
pcray1231
Well-known member
IMO, a quality trout fishery is one that you have a reasonable expectation of catching trout. To me, what changes with the seasons is the number of quality fisheries available. Streams with wild fish have several advantages, generally including year round "quality" status, and the very nature of wild trout being more enjoyable to fish for and catch than stocked trout. But I won't say that a stocked stream cannot be a quality fishery, it most certainly can. Here are the numbers:
Class A: around 460 streams.
Supports Nat. Reproduction: around 1500 (includes class A)
Stocked streams: 746
Stocked Lakes: 128
Now, the hard part is the interpretation. A large number of stocked streams support natural reproduction in the headwaters, perhaps even class A numbers, so those are on two lists. Sometimes these sections are close to one another or overlap. But in other cases, they can be miles apart. Take the Allegheny River, it goes from wild brookies, to mixed wild brookie/brown/stocked trout, to a large stream with pure stocked trout, to the Kinzua tailwater with fingerlings, to a mouth of tributaries fishery. Is this one stream? The Tully is similar, is the limestone stream well above the lake the same as the tailwater? For the sake of analysis, we'll consider these situations to be one stream, though its important to recognize the value of a huge fishery like these over a tiny trickle that may have a quarter mile of decent trout fishing. Also, of the non-class A wild trout streams, a large number of them are brookie streams that probably support Class A populations in certain areas or in certain years, but are more susceptible to things like drought than the class A streams. In addition, I've found a number of streams with good populations of wild trout that aren't on the fish commission list, how many are there? This analysis is also pure numbers, if you canceled streams found solely or mostly on posted property, the numbers go down considerably. The following is broken down by season, and are just my guesses/estimates:
Spring: 1000 quality wild trout streams, 750 quality stocked or mixed stocked/wild quality trout streams, 128 quality lakes.
Worst part of the summer: 800 quality wild trout streams, 150 quality stocked or wild/stocked streams.
Fall: 1000 Quality wild trout streams, 250 quality stocked or wild/stocked streams. Plus whatever fall stocking is done.
Winter: Numbers similar to fall, but regulations limit where you can fish.
Yeah, I'd say there's lots of opportunity in this state. Harvest and fishermen killed fish play a small role overall in the number of opportunities, but that effect can be major on some streams, generally the more valuable and therefore popular ones. The bigger effect of harvest and fishermen killed fish doesn't cancel a stream from the "quality" category, but makes the average fishermen catch 3 or 4 instead of 10-15 fish.
Class A: around 460 streams.
Supports Nat. Reproduction: around 1500 (includes class A)
Stocked streams: 746
Stocked Lakes: 128
Now, the hard part is the interpretation. A large number of stocked streams support natural reproduction in the headwaters, perhaps even class A numbers, so those are on two lists. Sometimes these sections are close to one another or overlap. But in other cases, they can be miles apart. Take the Allegheny River, it goes from wild brookies, to mixed wild brookie/brown/stocked trout, to a large stream with pure stocked trout, to the Kinzua tailwater with fingerlings, to a mouth of tributaries fishery. Is this one stream? The Tully is similar, is the limestone stream well above the lake the same as the tailwater? For the sake of analysis, we'll consider these situations to be one stream, though its important to recognize the value of a huge fishery like these over a tiny trickle that may have a quarter mile of decent trout fishing. Also, of the non-class A wild trout streams, a large number of them are brookie streams that probably support Class A populations in certain areas or in certain years, but are more susceptible to things like drought than the class A streams. In addition, I've found a number of streams with good populations of wild trout that aren't on the fish commission list, how many are there? This analysis is also pure numbers, if you canceled streams found solely or mostly on posted property, the numbers go down considerably. The following is broken down by season, and are just my guesses/estimates:
Spring: 1000 quality wild trout streams, 750 quality stocked or mixed stocked/wild quality trout streams, 128 quality lakes.
Worst part of the summer: 800 quality wild trout streams, 150 quality stocked or wild/stocked streams.
Fall: 1000 Quality wild trout streams, 250 quality stocked or wild/stocked streams. Plus whatever fall stocking is done.
Winter: Numbers similar to fall, but regulations limit where you can fish.
Yeah, I'd say there's lots of opportunity in this state. Harvest and fishermen killed fish play a small role overall in the number of opportunities, but that effect can be major on some streams, generally the more valuable and therefore popular ones. The bigger effect of harvest and fishermen killed fish doesn't cancel a stream from the "quality" category, but makes the average fishermen catch 3 or 4 instead of 10-15 fish.
