Fish welfare - or just OTT

[BobH]

Good morning,

 

Another Crip type mat is the Chub and a friend of mine recommends it at his well known Carp Fishery.

 

http://www.chubfishing.com/en-gb/products/carp-care/unhooking-mats/

 

The euro-xtra protection cradle/mat are for Carp and it's pure speculation that they will be required for other species, but if it helps with fish safety, I'm all for that !!

 

Bob

Edited November 5, 2014 by BobH

[Dick Dastardly]

The Burkester makes a good point about session fishing in that when compared to all the other gear we take a cradle isn't that much more. Also as most session fishing is fairly static its not an issue. For mobile anglers Im sure one of the simple roll up type are no bother at all just clipped to your bag. So I personaly see no excuse for not being able to take one or use one when necessary....................

 

But surely "when necessary" is more pertinent to this discussion than the practicalities of carrying one? I think we will undoubtedly see some fisheries bring in a "must have cradle" rule. Some will be well founded in this and others will do so through ignorance. Hopefully there wont be to many. But of course just the one is to many if its your water!

 

"Vote with your feet" again fine in principle but by doing so you are losing out and at the same time letting the ignorance roll on. "discuss with the bailiff/manager" has to be the way but sadly don't expect all to listen (or even sadder appreciate the fact you do have an alternative view!) BUT those that will listen will then also be in a very difficult position! Even if they can see the logic and agree how do they legislate? As the Burkester says it has to be "one rule for all" and it is simply so difficult to both word rules correctly and for bailiffs to enforce them if they are not simple. At Wingham we recently had this issue where a rule had to be brought in to protect the fish. We discussed the best way to do this for many hours amongst management/bailiff team. In the end it simply had to be a blanket ban on the method in question. Definitely upset the non carpers (my self included) but ALL could see there was no other alternative (for management) and all took on this new rule accordingly.

 

So if we cant influence management and management are somewhat dictated to by the fact of having to allow for the "lowest common denominator" (I will use that instead of the word "idiot" as on SOME waters many wont be idiots but simply unexperienced anglers who know no better) where does that leave us? I've long "preached" EDUCATION and by this I mean educating anglers. Trying to explain to carpers (by carpers I mean anglers who fish ONLY for/ have ONLY ever fished for carp) that there are other species and that these other species require different considerations would fit in with my EDUCATION theme but sadly these days I feel its a lost cause as the vast majority of these people simply wouldn't be interested as for them other fish simply have no place in their waters and anyway they don't need educating as they all ready know it all.

[gozzer]

If we have to legislate for the "lowest common denominator", then surely the health and safety of the angler must be considered as well as that of the fish. A trained first aider, and qualified lifeguard at every fishery, no open platforms, guide lines for lifting heavy objects posted at every peg, proof must be displayed that you are a competent swimmer before being allowed to fish,

and many, many other things too numerous to mention here. Or do you think that might be a bit OTT?

 

 

Another thing that puzzles me a bit, is that when having their photo taken with a fish, anglers prefer to hold the fish up so that they are in the pic. I know it's usually only a couple of feet but surely if the welfare of the fish is paramount, then a photo of it on an unhooking mat, or in the cradle would be much safer. If the angler feels that no one will believe that he actually caught the fish, crouching down beside the fish would be better, safer, and with less handling.

 

John.

[Vagabond]

Another thing that puzzles me a bit, is that when having their photo taken with a fish, anglers prefer to hold the fish up so that they are in the pic. I know it's usually only a couple of feet but surely if the welfare of the fish is paramount, then a photo of it on an unhooking mat, or in the cradle would be much safer. If the angler feels that no one will believe that he actually caught the fish, crouching down beside the fish would be better, safer, and with less handling.

Yes, the majority of my fish pictures (and Tigger's) show fish on the mat or in the net. The reason I take pictures that way is that I like to remind myself of that particular trip, So a picture of fish on the mat and another of the swim recalls the pleasure of that day. I don't need a picture of myself each time as I have a mirror in the study which would remind me of what I look like should I ever need that information. .

 

The only downside of "on the mat" pictures is that if you fill the frame with the fish (or crop the picture) , you end up with pictures all of apparently the same size of fish, photographed adjacent to reels,rods,net frames,spring balances, etc etc all of a multiplicity of apparent sizes. However, as I very rarely weigh my fish, and don't much care what the exact weight is (unless it looks close to a life PB or a PB from that particular venue) that does not matter to me.

 

I never could understand why some anglers weigh every fish they catch.

Edited November 5, 2014 by Vagabond

[gozzer]

I don't have many fish pictures, even less with me in them, (I know what I look like, and don't need reminding). If an angler wants a picture, then why lift it up? Cradle it on the grass, on the mat, in a cradle, whatever, there is no need to lift it up. If as all these people say, "every precaution is taken to avoid damage to the fish", and then you lift the fish up, you're not being true to you're word. If fish are as delicate as some believe, then even a drop from a couple of feet is likely to cause some damage. It all seems a bit strange to me.

 

John.

[BobH]

Well here is the crux of the matter, unhooking mats/cradles have nothing to do with the taking of pictures, be that on a mat or with the angler in shot, they are there for the protection of the fish when unhooking it.

 

You can try to justify your argument for not using an unhooking mat by bringing in side arguments such as, why photograph the fish you catch, but that will not change the argument for using unhooking mats or cradles.

 

I once saw a 16lb fish dropped by a well know angler, breaking it's tail, the fish had kicked and the angler lost his grip, accidents happen and it was unfortunate, but do we blame the angler or the circumstances ?

 

It was a river fish, the banks were steep where he was fishing, he carried the fish in his landing up the steep bank and onto a flat area, he unhooked the fish on a lightweight unhooking mat, he then went to slide the fish into back into his landing net for release, but the fish slid out of his hand and flipped up onto it's tail, the damage was done.

 

This angler now takes a cradle with him and uses it for all the bigger species he fishes for, it's called fish care.

 

The taking of pictures can hold dangers, but so can sticking hooks in fish and pulling them to the side of a still water or river, it's called fishing, you have to judge for yourself if you have taken enough care of the fish !!

 

Having taken hundreds of fish photo's, both on the mat and with me holding the fish, none of which I believe have harmed the fish, I don't know for sure, because I am not a fish, just an angler and I take as much care of those fish as possible.

 

If I thought taking a photo it did any more harm to the fish I have caught above and beyond their capture I would give up fishing and find another hobby.

 

Bob

Edited November 6, 2014 by BobH

[Tigger]

Bob, if your m8's fish split it's tail there would be no real problem as fins will normally heal and can grow back from being bitten right back. Scales grow back also so if a few scales come off a fish it doesn't mean it's going to pop it's cloggs.

[Rusty]

I never could understand why some anglers weigh every fish they catch.

 

It's a little off topic but some like to keep detailed stats of their catches over the years particularly if they spend a lot of time fishing one river. From that they can see how patterns of fish sizes and species change over time. I used to photograph and weigh most fish I caught but as I've become more used to the weight/size of the various species only the special ones get weighed now. I do still photograph them though (usually in the landing net), I've got loads of folders on my PC each one of a different fishing trip and I enjoy looking back at at them.

[BobH]

Bob, if your m8's fish split it's tail there would be no real problem as fins will normally heal and can grow back from being bitten right back. Scales grow back also so if a few scales come off a fish it doesn't mean it's going to pop it's cloggs.

 

Tigger

 

The top half of it's tail was always bent over after the accident, it went on to 17lbs before being killed by an Otter !!

 

You can only do your best for the fish you catch and accidents do happen.

 

It left a lasting impression on the angler concerned and he has always carried a crib type mat since this happened, oh and it wasn't a carp !!

 

Bob

[Dick Dastardly]

Do we need to photograph/weigh every fish we catch? Interesting question with many (equally justified) answers. Down to the individual and situation really. Not something (that all though I personaly NOW chose not to photo or weigh a great deal) I would like to dictate to others. I would however ask all to consider "do I need to weigh/photograph this fish" rather than doing it automaticly. But surely the issue is that if people do decide to that it should be done with the least harm/potential harm to the fish? Not only does this mean having the correct equipment but using it correctly as well. My pet hate for some years now are the people "lecturing" us about welfare (be it cradles/mats/time out of water/rigs/Klinic or what ever!) and their trophy photos all show fish being held out at arms length! When I've challenged several of these people I've received some interesting replies- "Its ok its over a mat/cradle" or my favourite "I know when they are going to kick"! So it seems fish welfare is paramount..... as long as it doesn't interfere with an exagerated trophy shot! Im afraid that NO mat or cradle is going to save a dropped fish.

 

Of course though we need to be realistic and accept that (like it or not) as fishermen we must always strike a compromise between fish welfare and our sport... simply as if welfare was our paramount concern we simply wouldn't fish and just leave them be!