Catch-Release Angling Injures Fish

[steve pitts]

Hi Ken

The research was carried out by the Cape Eleuthera Institute.

 

They are sponsored by Bonefish and Tarpon Unlimited or by the Fisheries Conservation Foundation either directly or under subcontract to Carleton University in Canada.

 

Also Scientific Anglers (fly lines and reel manufacturers) and Temple Fork Outfitters ('destination' fishing organisers and suppliers of tackle / clothing etc.)

 

They appear to be well-funded and have a dozen staff, a research establishment and four boats, including a 40 footer

.

Oh - there is a vacancy there too!

Edited August 27, 2007 by steve pitts

[Snatcher]

Flatten/remove the barb.

 

Simply shake off - works a treat. Deeper hooked tope/skate will need surgical removal of said object. It seems to work well.In sixteen years never heard of one of Ian Burretts tagged tope/skate being reported found " belly up"

 

I think Ian may have it well sussed The way to go team

[corydoras]

Flatten/remove the barb.

 

Simply shake off - works a treat. Deeper hooked tope/skate will need surgical removal of said object. It seems to work well.In sixteen years never heard of one of Ian Burretts tagged tope/skate being reported found " belly up"

 

I think Ian may have it well sussed The way to go team

I thought we were talking about bonefish?

[H.A.]

I thought we were talking about bonefish?

 

Sand Tiger's original post referred to some slightly obscure research about bonefish.

 

Some mischievous character came along spouting Latin at us and bringing all manner of other species into the discussion - marlin, tarpon, bass, mullet .........

the inference seemed to be that there was little point in returning fish captured by rod and line since there were 'general' fatalities.

 

Are you surprised that DaveB and myself became a little irkesome at this?

 

I suggest Corydoras become more focused on his own statements and subject himself to some audi alterem partem unless of course he wishes to be interpreted as de minimis non curat lex. ('de Minnie Mouse non curat Rex' ) We do not concern ourself with trifles.

 

Edited September 2, 2007 by H.A.

[corydoras]

Sand Tiger's original post referred to some slightly obscure research about bonefish.

 

Some mischievous character came along spouting Latin at us and bringing all manner of other species into the discussion - marlin, tarpon, bass, mullet .........

the inference seemed to be that there was little point in returning fish captured by rod and line since there were 'general' fatalities.

 

Are you surprised that DaveB and myself became a little irkesome at this?

 

I suggest Corydoras become more focused on his own statements and subject himself to some audi alterem partem unless of course he wishes to be interpreted as de minimis non curat lex. ('de Minnie Mouse non curat Rex' ) We do not concern ourself with trifles.

 

Post #3

Ian Burrett brought skate, pollack, tope, cod and haddock.

 

Post #6

the dogs mentions trout.

 

Post #7

Norrie mentions spurry

 

Post #10

then dave b makes very ininformed post (imo)

makes personal attack on researchrs

argues from personal incredulity about monitoring bonefish post release

 

post #11

Colinw makes personal attack on researchers

 

post #18

jrt brings tarpon into the topic and makes personal attack on researchers

 

Post #19

ha adds tope, spurdog sole and flounders to thi mix.

 

Post #22

jrt brings bass into the thread

 

Post #25

I mention mullet, but only in repose to jrt's post about bass

 

Post #26

ha argues from personal incredulity, and makes personal attack againt researchers

 

post 28

ha argues from autority by stating his academic qualifications

 

post 39

thebigman mentions blue sharks

 

 

What was my crime exactly, apart from asking for a bit of structured argument and asking people to actually READ a little bit before making uninformed posts?

[H.A.]

No crime ....

 

just don't take yourself so seriously!

 

Speaking English to the 99.9% of anglers who don't read or understand Latin phrases might help!

 

[corydoras]

No crime ....

 

just don't take yourself so seriously!

 

Speaking English to the 99.9% of anglers who don't read or understand Latin phrases might help!

 

OK I get your point. if critical thinking was on the National Curriculum I wouldn't have too. I just hate it when someone says "I don't understand this, so therefore it can't be true".

[Leon Roskilly]

And don't forget jewfish!

 

Chris Makepeace

 

Executive Officer

 

Amateur Fishermen's Association NT

 

08 8945 6455

 

0415 471 600

 

 

 

AMATEUR FISHERMEN’S ASSOCIATION OF THE NT

 

MEDIA RELEASE

 

 

For immediate publication 31 August 2007

 

 

NT JEWIES NOT SO TOUGH!

 

 

 

Results released today of a research project on mortality rates of line-caught black jewfish give a very clear indication that these fish are extremely susceptible to severe damage from barotrauma (pressure changes resulting from them being brought to the surface from depth).

 

 

 

The project carried out by Michael Phelan and a team from the Coastal Research Unit in the Department of Primary Industry, Fisheries and Mines, and with funding support from the Fisheries Research and Development Corporation, has conducted post mortem examinations of more than 100 jewfish caught at various depths and it provides very clear evidence that jewfish pulled from more than 10 metres of water have very little chance of post-release survival.

 

 

 

“Most fishers think of the jewfish as a big tough customer that can take a bit of handling but this research demonstrates that they are much more likely to suffer acute damage from barotrauma than we would have thought,” explained AFANT President, Warren de With.

 

 

 

“Even if caught in depths less than 10 meters, they are likely to suffer damage unless they are quickly returned to the bottom. The researchers also found that many fish hooked on traditional ‘J’ hooks were likely to end up gut hooked with the hook in a position where it could damage essential organs. On the other hand, more than 90 percent of fish taken on circle hooks were lip hooked and the rest were hooked in the mouth.”

 

 

 

“The research results mean that we can no longer really consider the jewie as a catch-and-release target unless we fish for them in relatively shallow water and handle them very carefully.”

 

 

 

“AFANT is recommending that fishers working in more than 10 metres of water either change to smaller hooks to target other species or move off the jewfish once they have caught the fish they need to take home as there is little chance of any released jewies surviving if they are pulled from this depth.”

 

 

 

“If you want to catch and release jewfish, only do it in less than 10 metres of water, only use circle hooks and use a suitable release weight to get the fish quickly back down to depth. Information on release weights will be made available at www.afant.com.au in the near future.”

 

 

 

“We need to do these things ourselves to ensure the future of our jewie fishing and we also need government to implement the recommendations of the Possession Limit Review conducted last year that indicated we should reduce the limit from the current five fish to two or three.”

 

 

 

“This research has provided very important information for recreational fishers and I congratulate Michael and his team on their work,” Mr de With said.

 

End

 

Media enquiries to Chris Makepeace on 0415 471 600 or Warren de With on 8972 1589

 

 

 

Caption:

 

 

 

The first of these xrays shows a traditional ‘J’ hook well inside a jewfish’s abdominal area where it is virtually impossible to remove and can significantly damage internal organs. More than 40% of jewfish hooked on ‘J’ hooks were like this. The other xray shows a fish taken on a circle hook. 100% of jewfish caught on circle hooks were hooked in the lip like this or in the mouth allowing easy release and minimal damage to the fish. (Xray photographs courtesy of NT Department of Primary Industry, Fisheries and Mines)

[Bob Jerunkel]

oh well thats it then.

Might as well pack up fishing altogether.

First they stop you killing fish to eat.

Then say that putting them back is bad as weel.

Sounds like a plan to me.

Probably from the anti.

[corydoras]

oh well thats it then.

Might as well pack up fishing altogether.

First they stop you killing fish to eat.

Then say that putting them back is bad as weel.

Sounds like a plan to me.

Probably from the anti.

Both the original post and Leon's were from the results of studies from pro angling or at least angling neutral organisations, not anti's. Edited September 3, 2007 by corydoras