Print

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

[dennyman]

It is amazing how every year this topic gets debated to death.  Listen I am not a die hard flosser but some of the logic used here has to make one step back and shake one's own head.

For instance, "When fishermen floss they do so with the intent of connecting the hook with the fishes mouth (same as any fishermen using bait or a fly or a lure). The reason they don't want to hook it anywhere other than the mouth is that they are required to release the fish.....   

Additional facts about flossing are that the CO's allow it. They wouldn't they allow it if it was illegal. They are there to enforce the laws!

What is snagging in your books is totally irrelevant to how the law reads and how the flossing technique is regulated.  Roll Eyes".

Flossing/lining a fish to me is simply getting a long leader drawing it through the fish's  mouth, and bingo, bango, bongo, fish on!
Fishing shops love it because it takes very little skill to learn how to do it, and if a person can cast a spinning rod, they can catch a fish with this method. Twenty pound mono or braid line, plus bouncing betties fly off the shelf and life is good again especially in a tight economy.  But let us not fool ourselves, if you think you have control over that 10 to 12 foot or even longer leader, then I have some swampland I want to sell you. It is IMHO, refined snagging. The person is not deliberately reefing back on the hook, but deftly getting it in the fishes mouth and then contact is made.
However, let us not confuse this with fly fishing. When I am nymph fishing for trout, there is no way I am lining the fish. I have seen underwater videos of this, and the fish without hesitation moves to the fly takes it in its mouth, and if the fisherman is awake it is fish on. Without a doubt totally different than flossing a salmon.
And for those who really want to see flossing in action, wait until Peg Leg appears later this summer, some of the stuff you see will leave you speechless.

[alwaysfishn]

It is amazing how every year this topic gets debated to death.  Listen I am not a die hard flosser but some of the logic used here has to make one step back and shake one's own head.

For instance, "When fishermen floss they do so with the intent of connecting the hook with the fishes mouth (same as any fishermen using bait or a fly or a lure). The reason they don't want to hook it anywhere other than the mouth is that they are required to release the fish.....   

Additional facts about flossing are that the CO's allow it. They wouldn't they allow it if it was illegal. They are there to enforce the laws!

What is snagging in your books is totally irrelevant to how the law reads and how the flossing technique is regulated.  Roll Eyes".

Flossing/lining a fish to me is simply getting a long leader drawing it through the fish's  mouth, and bingo, bango, bongo, fish on!
Fishing shops love it because it takes very little skill to learn how to do it, and if a person can cast a spinning rod, they can catch a fish with this method. Twenty pound mono or braid line, plus bouncing betties fly off the shelf and life is good again especially in a tight economy.  But let us not fool ourselves, if you think you have control over that 10 to 12 foot or even longer leader, then I have some swampland I want to sell you. It is IMHO, refined snagging. The person is not deliberately reefing back on the hook, but deftly getting it in the fishes mouth and then contact is made.
However, let us not confuse this with fly fishing. When I am nymph fishing for trout, there is no way I am lining the fish. I have seen underwater videos of this, and the fish without hesitation moves to the fly takes it in its mouth, and if the fisherman is awake it is fish on. Without a doubt totally different than flossing a salmon.
And for those who really want to see flossing in action, wait until Peg Leg appears later this summer, some of the stuff you see will leave you speechless.

My favorite type of fishing is lure fishing for coho in the fall. They aggressively nail the lure, not because they are hungry but they attack the lure because they instinctively see it as a threat. Often the coho is hooked out side the mouth.

The point is there are countless ways of catching fish. Flossing sockeye may  be offensive to some folks, but to continue on about how you feel it is not a pure form of fishing is getting old. I know a fly fisherman that only fishes with a floating line and dry flies. He doesn't have a lot of respect for fly fishermen that use sinking lines and shrimp or leech patterns. Does that make the sinking line fly fishermen lesser fishermen? Of course not!

Slagging fishermen who floss won't get these fishermen to change, so come up with a new approach to get them to change their technique. Most of you who are so strongly opposed to flossing have admitted that at one point you used flossing to catch fish. Why not rather share your experiences as to why you stopped using flossing? Keep in mind that most fishermen flossing sockeye just want to put meat on the table. They don't mistake it at all for sport fishing. The very small number that take the technique to other rivers just need to be talked to. Most people respond to logic and personal stories. Few folks respond favorably to being slagged.....

[jeff]

I don't think its a small number of people taking the flossing method to other smaller rivers, ever seen the train bridge on the vedder in the fall.

[dennyman]

Hmmm....so it seems the debate has come full circle. And who was the one who opened up this can of worms, oh my gosh at post #1, it was alwaysfishn.  To me it is an ethical question, and most people know after using this method what they are doing. Call it what it is and if it is only allowed during the sockeye season so be it.  Perhaps education is the answer maybe not. For example, I know this topic has been discussed to death on this forum. People can do a search on it, and see varying views on this type of fishing method. However, to me it comes down to the individual. Fisherman are smart enough to figure out what is going on, and at the end of the day you have to decide yourself whether this fishing method is ethical enough to use on other river systems,  aside from the Fraser during sockeye season. Just my two cents worth.

[iRobertO]

I wonder if people are answering the question from the right perspective. I can see the skill argument causing people to disagree with flossing, as everyone pretty much admits that it's a less skillful form than other fishing methods, but ethics; what does that even mean?
I have a question; do those that feel it is unethical eat store-bought beef? Any hunters think it's unethical? Humans eat fish, meat etc to survive, so I respect that people purchase ground beef from Safeway, but have you seen how a cow is slaughtered? Is that ethical? Shooting a deer from behind a tree, ethical?
I think maybe the anti-BB crowd is just trying to say that it is a less skillful way to fish and using ethics (the wrong argument) to get the point across.
My two cents.

Rob

[dennyman]

Last post for me on this topic, but that is what the original question asked by the person who started this thread, ethical or unethical. Flossing is seen like it or not as an acceptable way to harvest sockeye on the Fraser. Plain and simple that is what it is. However, take this method to the Vedder, and start using it. That is where the problem starts, smaller system and people start trying to snag salmon in the canal, for instance.  One could argue the ethics of right and wrong about a mulititude of other topics, but that is not what was asked. Simply put is flossing an ethical way to fish, not to  play games, but it comes down to the individual. You have to decide whether this is an ethical and acceptable way  to fish.

[BBarley]

I'm going to chime in on this thread,

I frankly could care less about what people are throwing in the river in regards to tackle. If something outperforms another, and catching fish is all that matters, then fill your boots.
I've used my spey rod to "hook" sockeye till the cows come home, I know I'm flossing, but I usually take my fish and get out.

My problem lies with the amount of idiots that come flying out of the woodwork and their blatant disrespect towards others when the meat fishery is opened, and sometimes even if it's not.....
To acquire a hunting license in this Province, or almost any other Province in this country, you need proof of taking a outdoor education course, and passing a test on the material.
To acquire a fishing license in this Province, or almost any other Province in this country, you need money, that's it.....plain and simple.

And while I understand that hunting can be viewed as much more dangerous than fishing most days, that still shouldn't count as the only reason fishermen shouldn't require proof of education in regards to the sport.

If it really bothers you that much that fellow sports fishermen/women are tarnishing your sport or the resource with what gear they throw in the river, maybe you should open your eyes and look at the absolute BS that other user groups get away with. Let's keep in mind, we're all fishing for the same fish.....

[speycaster]

Without doing any research except what I read in newspapers and on forums, I would say that there are more people killed fishing than hunting, so I would say fishing is more dangerous. Or maybe Mr. Darwin just finds more  choices of stupidity on the water. Easier to clean the gene pool there.

[Bhinky]

Ethics is in the eyes of the beholder. It all depends on where you stand in the spectrums of things.

If you were a fish - do you like your killer more because you become his meal with a hook in the mouth than from the side?   Do you deserve to die more because you just want to eat a meal?

If you were a eagle, a bear, or all sorts of life forms which have to depend on the annual return of salmon for substaining them to live through winter (and therefore the survival of their species) - what? you crazy humans, you mean we have to bite, claw or beak the salmon in the mouth before we can deserve the fish    

If you are among the starving people in the 3rd world - this debate is for you idiots of the rich and spoiled people of the industrialized world? Want to change place for a day?  

If you are buddist or a PETA member - do you think it is ethical killing a fish, even for a meal? You murderers and killers..... murder, murder murder, kill, kill, kill.  

If you are a flyfishing purist - the debate on your crude and unsophisticated way of fishing is a joke? Want to try weightless flossing which is lead free?  

If you are a catch & release purist - we are more ethical because we are going to put the fish through hell, then kiss it good bye & say 'thank you buddy' for a great fight to make my day a happy day'. What? It is unethical to build your fun on others' suffering? Na! Get lost! 

If you are a bar-fisher, do you think it is ethical to fish with a ton of lead, polluting the river and its near shore ecology (forget about where the hook is located), as it is much more unethical and much worst to the fish and its habitat to flood the river with unretrievable lead bombs so that you can eat your fish.  

Alwaysfishin is right. Fishing was originally a way of collecting meat to feed the family in the ancient days, much like hunting for games. As long as you are fishing for food, using the most efficient and legal method is good and ethical. People of old used the most efficient methods which won't harm fish stock much, because they were not killing fish massively which made fishing sustainable in the past. Even when nets were used, they were small cast nets or dip nets, or spears, never the mighty fish killing machine like the drift/gill nets and seine nets of today.

So, I am happy to fish a legal and ethical method which is the most efficient method for a fisherman with one rod and one hook on the Fraser. In the smaller systems, it is a different story, as other methods are more efficient and it is foul hooking too many fish in the body other than the mouth. It should be banned or discouraged.

Awesome post.

Flossers are eating their fish. Are you anti-flossers also anti-hunting?  The animal doesn't have a choice whether or not it is going to be brained.  Hey Chris, don't you hunt?

[Gooey]

In reading BC's regulations and definitions online, it appears to me that the definition of snagging is very watered down.  I think that is a huge issue.

Just for interest sake here is Washington State's definition of snagging: "Attempting to take a fish with a hook and line in such a way that the fish does not voluntarily take the hook(s) in its mouth.  In fresh water it is illegal to posses any fish hooked anywhere other than inside the mouth..."  The key is voluntary.  I do believe that if a fish hasnt bitten the hook, it has been snagged...as we discussed earlier, we all agree that if I reef back on my rod and hook a fish in the belly,its snagged.  If I climb on top of a log jam, lower a jig under a fish's jaw give the jig a yank...that fish is snagged too.  the key element is the fish was involuntarily hooked (ie snagged).  Koko and Likestofish...dieing to hear a response here: DO YOU THINK A FLOSSED FISH VOLUNTARILY TOOK THE HOOK?

If you answer is no then you by default must agree the fish is snagged.  If you answer yes then you're in denial!

Guys who don't openly acknowledge that flossing is snagging are just fooling themselves and thats a huge part of the problem.  Flossing evovled from a dirty water fishery on the fraser.  If socs bit regularly, peple would fish em that way but unfortunately the only efficeint way to fish em is to floss em.  Look at springs that take roe and glows eagerly...people bar fish em.  Koko, likesto fish, you both claim sockeye bite...do you do anything but floss em?  I bet not, flossing makes fishers lazy...why work for a strike when you can force feed a fish a 4/0 hook!

All I want is for flossers to acknowledge what they are doing: snagging fish.  treat the technique (and fish) with respect and use it when appropriate (IMO only for the fraser).

[Gooey]

Bhinky, I guess i'm just old school...I learned to fish when snagging was frowned upon...I guess you and your buddies are a different generation of fishers?

[Bhinky]

Bhinky, I guess i'm just old school...I learned to fish when snagging was frowned upon...I guess you and your buddies are a different generation of fishers?

I am a sportfisherman. I flyfish, I gearfish. I obey the law and my set of ethics (which fall in line with most other people's). I recognize that BB'n on the Fraser is a meat fishery.  I'm out there to try and harvest a little meat for the freezer. Like you said, I realize that flossing is a form of snagging. I would never SNAG a fish nor would I floss one in any flow other than the Fraser. I am young but I have been taught to fish ethically.  A lot of people think that flossing is unethical, I do not (as long as the law isn't being broken).  As long as I am allowed to, I'll take my 2 fish and then put the flossing gear away.

[alwaysfishn]

In reading BC's regulations and definitions online, it appears to me that the definition of snagging is very watered down.  I think that is a huge issue.

Just for interest sake here is Washington State's definition of snagging: "Attempting to take a fish with a hook and line in such a way that the fish does not voluntarily take the hook(s) in its mouth.  In fresh water it is illegal to posses any fish hooked anywhere other than inside the mouth..."  The key is voluntary.  I do believe that if a fish hasnt bitten the hook, it has been snagged...as we discussed earlier, we all agree that if I reef back on my rod and hook a fish in the belly,its snagged.  If I climb on top of a log jam, lower a jig under a fish's jaw give the jig a yank...that fish is snagged too.  the key element is the fish was involuntarily hooked (ie snagged).  Koko and Likestofish...dieing to hear a response here: DO YOU THINK A FLOSSED FISH VOLUNTARILY TOOK THE HOOK?

If you answer is no then you by default must agree the fish is snagged.  If you answer yes then you're in denial!

Guys who don't openly acknowledge that flossing is snagging are just fooling themselves and thats a huge part of the problem.  Flossing evovled from a dirty water fishery on the fraser.  If socs bit regularly, peple would fish em that way but unfortunately the only efficeint way to fish em is to floss em.  Look at springs that take roe and glows eagerly...people bar fish em.  Koko, likesto fish, you both claim sockeye bite...do you do anything but floss em?  I bet not, flossing makes fishers lazy...why work for a strike when you can force feed a fish a 4/0 hook!

All I want is for flossers to acknowledge what they are doing: snagging fish.  treat the technique (and fish) with respect and use it when appropriate (IMO only for the fraser).

I question whether putting Voluntary in the regs would stop the practice of flossing. The opposite of voluntary is to be forced. No one is forcing the fish to take the line and hook. The fish is voluntarily taking the line in it's mouth and then the hook....   However we argue that, these are Washington regs not BC regs.

As long as the sockeye fishery is open to sports fishermen, they will be innovative enough to come up with a technique to catch them. The law recognizes that, and as a result have not made any attempt to add more rules.

[Gooey]

Someone questions me calling the average flosser clueless and then alwaysfishn proves my point!  "The fish is voluntarily taking the line in it's mouth "....you cant be serious.   

You think the fish swim up and grab the mono?  that is utterly rediculous and your ignorance to what you are actually doing is so evident to anyone with a shread of knowledge!

when you cast out and sweep the bettie in across the river in a 45 degree arc, the line and hook hang out behind the bettie trailing it.  Fish swimming up stream with the mouths open (so the can breath) have the line run into theiur mouths, the bettie pulls the line and the hook is drawn into the side of their face.  If you look at a flossed fish, point it up stream and the the hook will always be in the far side of the fish's face/body. 

"The fish is voluntarily taking the line in it's mouth "...ya thats a good one I almost wet my pants laffing so hard.

[alwaysfishn]

Someone questions me calling the average flosser clueless and then alwaysfishn proves my point!  "The fish is voluntarily taking the line in it's mouth "....you cant be serious.   

You think the fish swim up and grab the mono?  that is utterly rediculous and your ignorance to what you are actually doing is so evident to anyone with a shread of knowledge!

when you cast out and sweep the bettie in across the river in a 45 degree arc, the line and hook hang out behind the bettie trailing it.  Fish swimming up stream with the mouths open (so the can breath) have the line run into theiur mouths, the bettie pulls the line and the hook is drawn into the side of their face.  If you look at a flossed fish, point it up stream and the the hook will always be in the far side of the fish's face/body. 

"The fish is voluntarily taking the line in it's mouth "...ya thats a good one I almost wet my pants laffing so hard.

I actually had a good laugh as I was writing that up as well!

However,I really don't find it funny when you suggest I am ignorant. It may be true,  ....   but it's very disrespectful on your part to actually suggest that! It also minimized the impact of any good points you may have made....

You need to take your blinders off Gooey..  You are so focused on how the technique doesn't fit your definition of fishing that you lose sight of the reason fishermen use flossing to catch sockeye.

If you've ever bought wild salmon in the super market you must know that it wasn't caught by a sports fishermen who waited till the fish bit his hook......   These fish were caught by an efficient net. If you buy beef in the market it's not a very pretty sight that transpired before it got there. As a hunter I don't try and give the animal a sporting chance. I try to use whatever devious means I can think of (as long as they are legal) in order to kill that animal so I can eat it.

Catching a sockeye is exactly the same thing. As fishermen looking to put meat on the table we are going to use the most efficient legal technique available in order quickly harvest our daily allocation. After we do that 99% of us leave the river and usually return the next day to do it all over again till the season is closed.

That should remind you of a commercial or native fishery because the only difference, is the gear we use...