Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[nosey]

On the lighter side of all this salmon closure in the Fraser is the fact that Steelhead are not closed and mid August is when the Thomsons start to show up, there are also a few rare summer runs out there too, I know a lot of people out there seem to know no other way to fish except that long leader method so here you go. Bottom Bouncing is still not illegal and to target steelies you have to use a little lighter betties  1 1/4 to 1 3/4 ounce is ideal and pink wool bubble gum pink seems to work best but experiment see what works best for you. Try a little bit slower and deeper water than when you are targeting salmon I'm sure the DFO will understand when you explain this to them and don't forget to wade out deep, preferably about 2 feet past your top button on your shirt. Just remember bottom bouncing is not illegal just fishing for salmon is, good luck and tight lines.

[bbronswyk2000]

Are you serious? 

[Fish Assassin]

Troll

[Gooey]

he's being sarcastic but it is such a touchy subject that I can't believe either that he is making a joke out of it...nosey you are doing nothing more than adding fuel to the fire.  grab a life.  I for one want to use this momentum to see if DFO will really clamp down and make it illegal.  What I am talking about is a blanket regulation to set a maximum leader length of 30 inchs... (makes it a reg just like single barbless in fresh water).  If sock returns warrant a sports opening then that restriction is lifted for that opening.  

A reg like this would ake flossing an exception to the rule...not the standard practice it now is.

I would also like to see the verbage changed on the regs to change the phrase "hooked in the mouth" to something like a fish must be "induced into a strike" or something to that effect.

I would like to start a petition to collect support for that type of change...I willl keep the board updated as to how they can provide support.

[Old Black Dog]

I would also like to see the verbage changed on the regs to change the phrase "hooked in the mouth" to something like a fish must be "induced into a strike" or something to that effect.

You might want to evaluate how you expect this to be addressed by a court of law.
What you are proposing is not going to fly.
Further,it takes 3 years to have a change of regulation.

[Gooey]

AH and why is that...what specail knowledge do you have?

So why wouldnt it fly...making a generalized statement with nothing to back it up is rediculous.

3 years to change the regs...I dont think so, I see no reason DFO why couldnt make a change like that for next season. Your wide sweeping statement must have some basis or is it just more trolling and internet BS.

if you ccant back up yur words with facts piss off and stay outta the way of people who want to make a positive impact.

[chris gadsden]

he's being sarcastic but it is such a touchy subject that I can't believe either that he is making a joke out of it...nosey you are doing nothing more than adding fuel to the fire.  grab a life.  I for one want to use this momentum to see if DFO will really clamp down and make it illegal.  What I am talking about is a blanket regulation to set a maximum leader length of 30 inchs... (makes it a reg just like single barbless in fresh water).  If sock returns warrant a sports opening then that restriction is lifted for that opening.  

A reg like this would ake flossing an exception to the rule...not the standard practice it now is.

I would also like to see the verbage changed on the regs to change the phrase "hooked in the mouth" to something like a fish must be "induced into a strike" or something to that effect.

I would like to start a petition to collect support for that type of change...I willl keep the board updated as to how they can provide support.

You might want to consider saying caught 'Inside the mouth"

[lucky]

This has got to be one of the most ridiculous posts Ive ever read, what a waste of my time reading it. Nosey if you really want to make changes this is not the place to do it! take that big chip on your shoulder and start a committee or write letters or do something that will actually help the situation. As for the regulation changes that people seem to be calling for? that is definitely not the way to go, people will always find a way to "cheat", if bottom bouncing was outlawed you dont think there would be line-ups of spey fisherman at pegleg during a sockeye opening? You may also want to consider buying some circle hooks to try with your spinnglos, because that will be one of the first regulation changes that would take effect. If the river ever opens up again I will be fishing a spinnglo without a hook, that way if a fish is hungry enough to bite down on it and hold onto it till it gets to shore, I will know that it has been a fair catch and it will feel all that much more sporting

[Old Black Dog]

AH and why is that...what specail knowledge do you have?

So why wouldnt it fly...making a generalized statement with nothing to back it up is rediculous.

3 years to change the regs...I dont think so, I see no reason DFO why couldnt make a change like that for next season. Your wide sweeping statement must have some basis or is it just more trolling and internet BS.

if you ccant back up yur words with facts piss off and stay outta the way of people who want to make a positive impact.

First, clean up your mouth.
Second, if you actually did some homework on this subject you would find out that I am correct.

[allwaysfishin]

Gooey,
your suggestions are very valid but i'm afraid DFO will most likely not agree. Not trying to shake your tree...
When I worked at Berry's, I dealt with local DFO fairly often as I was the voice of the telephone fishing report for a few years. I did not hold back in my thoughts on current management and regulation as most who where familiar with the report will remember.... controversy and calling a spade a spade were where I "came into my own".
The question arose one day while talking to a senior fisheries manager, I asked... why do you guys not change regulations to limit leader lengths for certain fisheries. At the time I was addressing the mayhem on the vedder and what was happening down at the infamous K.W. Bridge.
The response I got was that they do not have any mandate to regulate leader length. There are too many fishing methods used to put a blanket leader length restriction on any fishery and to police such a regulation would be futile at best.

Myself, I have bottom bounced over the past few years.... 5 to be exact (not counting 2007 of course)..... I found a shorter 6foot leader to be actually more effect on fraser springs than a longer leaders used for sox.
Trying to regulate leader length is .... and should be the last thing DFO should be worrying about.
I personally use leaders surpassing 30 inches quite frequently when targetting in river coho and steelhead (not the fraser but other waters). A leader approaching 3 feet is often required to properly fish some presentations in some waters and as mentioned above, fly fishers use 6 to 9 foot leaders... then tippet as the norm.... we can't very well ban flyfishing because the leader is too long.
I wholly understand that you feel that this type of regulation is required.... and in some ways i agree with you, but I feel your efforts would fall on deaf ears at DFO.
HOWEVER, if this type of change is something you wish to try to bring to the table with DFO, good for you, at least it shows you care about the crap going on out there.... Your idea is one that I would support if presented properly.

[nosey]

The only part that was serious about that was the wade in 2 ft deeper than the top button of your shirt part please pull this thread if you like Rod.
 

[THE_ROE_SLINGER]

Why start the thread and now want to pull it

Definatley no need for this especially with the other 1000000000 topics about bottom bouncing.

[Stratocaster]

Nosey, you should get a life! Can't believe you haven't been banned already.

I talked to the hatchery manager at the cap a few years ago and asked him whether a leader length restriction was something that DFO would consider.  He said that it probably would not happen.  First of all, you need to define what a leader is.  Is it the length of line from the swivel to the hook? or is it the length of line from the weight to the hook?  What about using split shot?  In certain water conditions, I like to use 4 or 5 split shot up my line to give my roe a better presentation.  If the bottom split shot were to fall off, I may be fishing with a leader that is too long.  It would be rather difficult to enforce and someone will always find a way to get around it.  Also as has been mentioned, how would you deal with fly or spey fishing?

As for putting in a rule where it says that fish has to be induced into a strike, how can you prove this in a court of law?  You would need underwater cameras to prove that the fish was flossed.  Just because the fish was hooked from the outside of the mouth in may not be sufficient proof.  Think hard about the many ways that a fish can get hooked and you can see that someone would be able to present an argument in their favor.  I have hooked fish where I saw the chase and strike but somehow ended up hooking him in the nose or under the mouth.  

We have enough rules in place already.  What we need is ENFORCEMENT of the existing rules.  Its simple really, the goverment takes you seriously if you have a large group with one collective voice.  If you want Ottawa to put more money into the budget for enforcement, then you must be important to them.  We are all potential voters aren't we?  If the recreational sector all got together instead of the constant bickering amongst ourselves, maybe the government will take us seriously.  

[ever_hopefull]

The problem with DFO putting in restrictions on leader length is not the will of some staff or the time it takes to introduce, it is due to the Sports Fishing Advisory Board telling DFO to 'stay out of the tackle boxes'.  Their message to DFO was to put restrictions on the species, size, number, or area fishing is to be allowed, but not on the gear type.  There are some exceptions, such as barbless hooks, but other aspects are taboo.  I also understand that some people from the Upper Fraser Valley Sport Fishing Advisory Committee may be thinking of putting a motion to the SFAB asking for regulations on the bottom bouncing dilemma (i.e. maybe limiting leader length)  If there is interest from the sport community on this, contact the UFVSFAC, as getting the SFAB on side is the best way for change will occur.  It is up to you.

[Fish Assassin]

Good post Doug. Something to think about.