Print

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

[Golfer]

Does not have a huge difference in mortality but the increase is still there.

http://nativefishsociety.org/wp-content/uploads/barbed-and-barbless-hooks-lit-review-408.pdf

Since we are on the topic of controversial rules, I would much rather see the bait ban lifted on the cap during September and October to greatly reduce an unethical fishermans need to snag and floss, than allowing us to use barbs.

Edit: I don't mean that using roe is unethical when it is allowed, I meant that it would be better for them to be allowed to use roe than resort to other methods, because they can't be bothered to learn how to fish spinners/spoons/blades.
For the record i don't fish roe

[A Frayed Knot]

Does not have a huge difference in mortality but the increase is still there.

http://nativefishsociety.org/wp-content/uploads/barbed-and-barbless-hooks-lit-review-408.pdf

Since we are on the topic of controversial rules, I would much rather see the bait ban lifted on the cap during September and October to greatly reduce an unethical fishermans need to snag and floss, than allowing us to use barbs.

This is true but its also about the handling of the fish and the gear as well which all add up to something. But still barbless hooks goes a long way at least as a start, I don't know if banning betties are a good idea. when we're at work Bouncing Betty makes  a great code word! 

[skaha]

--Okanagan lk just added a rule to allow barbless treble... the reason... large single barbless sywash hooks used trolling for trout kill kokanee which at the time were supposed to be released.
--Customize the rules for some areas with reasons given for the intent. If results are not conclusive remove the rule or do proper studies.

--In many cases rules are made to limit fishers or fishing success. Loto or quota can do the same job where the fishing resource is over utilized. 

[clarkii]

I would much rather see the bait ban lifted on the cap during September and October to greatly reduce an unethical fishermans need to snag and floss, than allowing us to use barbs.

I have serious issues with these kinda things, mostly the mentality that certain rules take out the only "good" choice for whatever, be it catching fish, in a rugby game, doing a forestry site plan etc... 

It would kind of be like a timber shortage in the interior caused by the lowered allowable annual cut causing companies to lobby the government to pull areas out of protected reserves.


Wait a minute....Thats actually going on right now....

[A Frayed Knot]

Governments messed up, BC sells half our hydropower to the states. So we can what? Get charged more?

I mean...I agree with Clarkii.

[ThatDeafGuy]

I'm not a hunter but as far as I know you have to take and pass a course before your granted a hunting licence. 

The same could be done for fishing if education is to ever work on a larger scale.

IE: Identification of fish species
    How to release a fish properly
    Understanding the regulations
    Fishing ethics in general
    Enhancement and effects of leaving debris in our water systems etc. etc. etc
 
 Its just a thought but I believe it's better than to start banning certain items from local stores.  Having said that you will always have certain individuals  who decide once they have their licence that snagging is the easier option than to fish ethically.

What it might do is give the younger generation (New Anglers)  some basics on  how to make and keep fishing a far more rewarding and satisfying  venture in the future.   

This is an idea that I would totally go for, one time course examination for all fishers regardless of how long they've been a license holder for.  Given how much trouble it would be to obtain a license, I think they would value the regs more (snagging, misidentifying their catch, fishing ethically etc).  Businesses would probably suffer just a little bit for it, I don't think it would be too big of an impact, maybe at first, but over time it would get better.  If you look at the CORE instructors, many of them are also shop owners, guides, and so on.

The fees could be self sustainable and nothing for the government to be concerned about in regards to doling out more tax dollars for this idea.  I'm sure many of us are willing to pay a little extra to be able to hire a few more officers to monitor our rivers.  I personally go fishing 2 or 3 times a week and I have not seen a CO in the past 3 years.

Rodney's right, we do need to be more involved with our organizations that we have here in BC to express our ideas and push for changes.  Flytech, great discussion to open up.  Now we can turn words into action.  We can rally together and push for changes.  Get the media involved, talk to your MLAs, talk to your local government, talk to the DFO, Ministry of fisheries.  I am a government employee and I believe some of us here may be.  We can push for internal change while we have external pressure as well.  It can be a two-fold strategy that will be effective.

[Dryfly22]

It's to bad everyone just doesn't fly fish. The world would be a better place. LOL

[Golfer]

I have serious issues with these kinda things, mostly the mentality that certain rules take out the only "good" choice for whatever, be it catching fish, in a rugby game, doing a forestry site plan etc... 

If this directed at my mentality, I in no way believe roe is the "good" choice, i have never fished roe on the cap. Allowing it under certain circumstances where it is currently prohibited, would in my opinion be the lesser of two evils, the blatant snagging or flossing be the other.  Obviously the best option would be to  severly punish/ get rid of the problem makers but that is not always possible.
But hey, that is just my opinion

[clarkii]

It was, you'd have to push for it.

Why not take the extra energy and push for more enforcement.

Would do the whole province/country good.

More then just lifting a bait ban on a hatchery system

[Golfer]

Why not take the extra energy and push for more enforcement.

Because I am 18 and a full time UBC student, I don't exactly have an abundance of time or resources at my disposal.  Once I get on my feet, I will be more than happy to get involved.  My comment about the bait ban was just my thoughts and nothing I was pushing or pursuing for.  It is a river filled of 3lb hatchery clones, I am not sweating over it.  I was however happy to a see conservation officer there this morning before I bombed it across town for my lectures.  I am sorry if I sparked a nerve, take my comments as a grain of salt and nothing more.

Owen

[clarkii]

Good to see you care Owen, im 20 ,and third year NRS up at TRU.  Not sure what your degree is but the above fact is good.

Reasons I have issues with the lesser of two evils approach is they are a ....(not being an arts student means i dont know the fallacy I want...) anyway they dont really fix anything except change what the issue is..

Though I admit it would be an interesting study to see how many would still snag if the ban was lifted.  However both the animal welfare protocols and the human rights commission or w/e at my school probs wouldnt approve it.

And apologies if I came off harsh, but im much more relaxed now I have 1 midterm on Halloween left to write and not three plus a report like I did 48 hours ago!

Doug

[RalphH]

Does not have a huge difference in mortality but the increase is still there.

http://nativefishsociety.org/wp-content/uploads/barbed-and-barbless-hooks-lit-review-408.pdf

the differences are very small. The numbers quoted do not include measures of statistical significance such as the Chi square test that can tell us the likelihood that the result is do to experimental error.

It also fails to consider the fact that barbless hooks, hook more fish as the resistance of the barb reduces penetration. So it may be more of a wash on that basis alone.

Since we are on the topic of controversial rules, I would much rather see the bait ban lifted on the cap during September and October to greatly reduce an unethical fishermans need to snag and floss, than allowing us to use barbs.

exactly how would renoval of the ban stop angler who snag and floss from doing that? FWIW the roe ban was intended to protect summer steelhead.

[Golfer]

exactly how would renoval of the ban stop angler who snag and floss from doing that? FWIW the roe ban was intended to protect summer steelhead.

I would imagine that these people could probably catch their coho of springs with a blob of roe on their hook, but once you take that way from them they don't know how to otherwise catch their salmon because they will not bother to learn how to fish other methods like spoons, spinners or blades, some might just choose the easy method or the one they see other "fisherman" doing. 

I have no clue what percentage of the people who snag or floss fish, used to fish roe when they allowed, it is probably not very high.  Please just take it as my thoughts, and not a blanket statement.