Print

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

[Carich980]

Change the local regs so that bottom bouncing is only acceptable during a sockeye run on the Fraser, Make certain areas Bounce free so guys can bar fish. All other local rivers should have discouragement enfored by fines to those flosssing/snagging.

DFO should get an education on those flossing and those that are not. Leader restriction isn't perfect but would be a start. The guys that are pocket flossing and intentionaly snagging should have the heaviest fines. Something needs to be done, in the last few weeks its unreal how many people are out snagging/flossing, killing wild fish. Call DFo and they dont care, pathetic what the river has come too. Thankfully they all go away around mid november.

Saw two idiots on the upper dressed in all Simms gear, sage rod, pocket flossing & snagging coho. Take those losers stuff away and auction it off as far as Im concerned.

[Rodney]

Say... Those who have commented in this thread, how many of you belong to an organization which has a representation at the DFO's sport fishing advisory committees?

[BBarley]

Really sad that there are so many anglers out there that think bottom bouncing is synonymous with flossing/snagging. Poke your head outside the encapsulating bubble that is the lower mainland fishery, and you'll find bottom bouncing is an approved, effective method of fishing.

Go to Alaska, northern BC, Washington, Oregon etc.... You'll see people with slinkies or pencil lead bottom bouncing away and they aren't snagging, they'd probably look at you funny if you told them they were. Drives me nuts to hear people condone "bottom bouncing" like its some kind of parasitic disease.... Learn to differentiate between bottom bouncing and snagging/flossing before you blanket the method as unethical and petition to ban it.

To answer your question Rodney, I was a member of an organization that had representation on the SFAC (on the Skeena I should clarify), I had to resign my membership when it became clearly evident they had their own agenda and anyone not following it fell on deaf ears.

[Flytech]

Instead of banning betties how about tackle shops selling river gear asking "Would you like us to pinch your barbs?"

Absolutely, that's a good one too.

[Flytech]

--in a hockey game there are 4 officials on the ice... vid review of dangerous play and thousands of fans voicing their opinion of the rules...with only 10 players on the ice.
--violation of the rules often occur and many are not enforced.

--In this case if we get a rule change we will still only have 1 official to cover several miles and a ton of people so why would we think any rule change would be effective.

Of course it wouldn't stop everyone, but the law abiding people would stop. That's a huge portion of the people bouncing, they just don't know any better.

[RalphH]

Agree but if betties are ban, they will use pencil lead or slinkies

actually bettys don't hang up less often than pencil lead and slinkys hang up far less often than anything else. Bettys cast farther and sink better than any of the alternatives. It's always amusing to read solutions to problems proposed by people who don't have any direct experience with the particulars of the practice.

You want to reduce illegal angling practices and fish retention of river like the Vedder pressure your MP and MLA to increase funding and get more enforcement on the water! Changing angling regs will do nothing if there is no enforcement.

You want to reduce the number of people on the water at peak fishing times; raise license fees to like $500 a year or charge a fee for daily tickets & limit the number of tickets for each body of water, reduce catch limits and cut or eliminate hatchery releases - return to a wild fish management strategy. Those are some sensible options that may make a difference. Trying to stop the use of bettys can do nothing.

[clarkii]

You want to reduce the number of people on the water at peak fishing times; raise license fees to like $500 a year or charge a fee for daily tickets & limit the number of tickets for each body of water.

British Columbia is not the UK or  in the rest of Europe.

In fact I believe at that point the tourists wouls outnumber the locals...

[RalphH]

this is true - in Europe the charge to fish a river like the Vedder would be several hundred $ a day and possibly several thousand for a week - and just that river for maybe a 100 to 200 foot stretch. But of course there's only be one or 2 anglers there. A higher $ annual license that permits an angler to fish any water in the Province for any species is a far better deal or a day charge of $10 to $30 a day is a comparative bargain.

[skaha]

Say... Those who have commented in this thread, how many of you belong to an organization which has a representation at the DFO's sport fishing advisory committees?

--I think the organizations that I belong to would put me on a rack...BCFFF and BCWF... I am a member of both and they sometimes/often have polar views.

--Not a spokesperson for either group but just a guess BCFFF might prefer fly fishing only... although probably not in this case as they would be more concerned in areas of low abundance or high by-catch. BCWF would likely not want any restriction where there is not a biological need.

--So In a way when there are enough fish for a harvest fishery the groups although their statements and philosophy's may be different probably would choose other areas of the province to draw lines in the sand.

--I would prefer to see regulations that are accompanied by a rationale... that is where the intent of the regulation is clear. So if there are areas that are intended for fish harvest at some times of the year and for some species the regulation should state that and clearly indicate that the regulation is intended to allow for harvest. It is basically a quota fishery so if the quota is not harvested by individuals it will just be added to other fisheries some of which many believe are even less selective...thus potentially do more harm.

[A Frayed Knot]

Instead of banning betties how about tackle shops selling river gear asking "Would you like us to pinch your barbs?"

Would be nice if manufacturers stopped crafting hooks with barbs in general.
I know in california they have regs against it, but I guess its just not enough yet to stop manufacturers but it would go a long way, and seeing a reduction in treble hooks. (for the curious https://law.resource.org/pub/us/ccr/gov.ca.oal.title14.html)

[Flytech]

Would be nice if manufacturers stopped crafting hooks with barbs in general.
I know in california they have regs against it, but I guess its just not enough yet to stop manufacturers but it would go a long way, and seeing a reduction in treble hooks. (for the curious https://law.resource.org/pub/us/ccr/gov.ca.oal.title14.html)

So many waters in BC allow it, not to mention around the world.

[RalphH]

there's never been a study that found barbed or trebles had significantly higher mortality than barbless singles. Why the Province has a ban on barbed hooks has always been a bit of a mystery. Trebles maybe just to make it tougher for snaggers.

[Flytech]

there's never been a study that found barbed or trebles had significantly higher mortality than barbless singles. Why the Province has a ban on barbed hooks has always been a bit of a mystery. Trebles maybe just to make it tougher for snaggers.

Ease of release is the answer for me. I rarely lose a fish due to the lack of a barb. I hate getting out a hook with a barb, always a struggle.

[Golfer]

there's never been a study that found barbed or trebles had significantly higher mortality than barbless singles. Why the Province has a ban on barbed hooks has always been a bit of a mystery. Trebles maybe just to make it tougher for snaggers.

Much less damage to the fish, when releasing a a deeper hooked fish, thus leading to more bleeding and higher mortality    Also, if you just miss a fishes eye, taking out the hooks with barb might just take the eye along with it.

[RalphH]

As I said there is no study that backs the claim of significantly lower mortality...none. In fact the rate is more or less the same for barbless single, single barbed and barbed trebles in dozens of studies.

longer handling time, additional injury etc may be true but these don't translate to higher mortality.

Some studies have found barbless hook penetrate deeper than barbed hooks and singles penetrate deeper than trebles perhaps explaining why there is little difference. In typical mortal hooking injuries such as gill hooked, hooked under the tongue or in the gullet, it makes no difference if the hook is barbed or not.

getting a barbed hook stuck in your finger or else were isn't a pleasant thing however.