Winter spring fishing on fire!!!

[fishin_magician]

quote:Originally posted by Hurston

quote:Originally posted by Poppa Swiss

I dunno i gotta say if you are catching that many undersized fish and only a small chance of anything of decent size then you are essentially fishing for undersized fish.

In my opinion subjecting that many undersized fish to all that stress is just not worth it. Just think of how many undersized fish will eventually die just from members on this board.

I read one report of over 40 undersized fish caught, I don't know what the percentage might be, but a number of those fish will certainly die.

Keep in mind this is only my 2 cents, many probably have a different opinion but it seems wasteful to me.

It could be viewed as wasteful, but where do u draw the line.
You head out in the morning to catch a fish for consumption (oh wait u can buy fish at a store so why even bother[?]).
U catch 5 undersize fish right off the bat, do u head in?
U catch 10 more, do u head in?
U catch 10 more + 1 nice legal, so now u have 1 fish to eat between 2 families, do u head in?(Oh wait your not fishing for food anyways cause u can buy fish[xx(]).
So when do u decide that what your doing is wasteful?
Many believe the native fishery is wasteful, along with the byproduct catch from commercial boats.
How about charters, does their economic benefit justify them catching limits of fish for non Canadian residents?
Maybe we should start culling seals in local waters to help alleviate the drain on our fishery.
I appreciate your opinion but come up with a better argument on what's wasteful and what's not.

Jason

Ah...well..this is an interesting debate. Both of you have valid points.

In speaking with some fisheries people I know...they're looking at raising the minimum size limit from 45 cm to 70 cm coastwide...and putting in hook restrictions other than barbless...with minimal impact on the economics.

They're also going to add more conservation tip to the regs advising on using larger hooks, larger lures, larger fish..etc..

I think moving the size limit up from 45 is LONG overdue.

 

[Hurston]

quote:Originally posted by fishin_magician

quote:Originally posted by Hurston

quote:Originally posted by Poppa Swiss

I dunno i gotta say if you are catching that many undersized fish and only a small chance of anything of decent size then you are essentially fishing for undersized fish.

In my opinion subjecting that many undersized fish to all that stress is just not worth it. Just think of how many undersized fish will eventually die just from members on this board.

I read one report of over 40 undersized fish caught, I don't know what the percentage might be, but a number of those fish will certainly die.

Keep in mind this is only my 2 cents, many probably have a different opinion but it seems wasteful to me.

It could be viewed as wasteful, but where do u draw the line.
You head out in the morning to catch a fish for consumption (oh wait u can buy fish at a store so why even bother[?]).
U catch 5 undersize fish right off the bat, do u head in?
U catch 10 more, do u head in?
U catch 10 more + 1 nice legal, so now u have 1 fish to eat between 2 families, do u head in?(Oh wait your not fishing for food anyways cause u can buy fish[xx(]).
So when do u decide that what your doing is wasteful?
Many believe the native fishery is wasteful, along with the byproduct catch from commercial boats.
How about charters, does their economic benefit justify them catching limits of fish for non Canadian residents?
Maybe we should start culling seals in local waters to help alleviate the drain on our fishery.
I appreciate your opinion but come up with a better argument on what's wasteful and what's not.

Jason

Ah...well..this is an interesting debate. Both of you have valid points.

In speaking with some fisheries people I know...they're looking at raising the minimum size limit from 45 cm to 70 cm coastwide...and putting in hook restrictions other than barbless...with minimal impact on the economics.

They're also going to add more conservation tip to the regs advising on using larger hooks, larger lures, larger fish..etc..

I think moving the size limit up from 45 is LONG overdue.

I totally agree on changing the size limit although in this case it wouldn't have helped. I would also agree with a fishing license fee increase (I'd pay $100 a year for a license)as long as the money went to enhancement programs and not governmental B.S.
As for the conservation tips we tried averything yesterday to try and get away from the small fish, different area's, different speeds, depths and some big 6'' spoons with large hooks on them but all to no avail.
Should they close the winter fishery all together[?][?][?], who's to say but I'm positive that would help undersize fish mortality rates.

Jason

 

[scott craven]

So what your saying Poppa is don't go fishing cuz you might catch
one that is undersize ?

 

[Last Chance]

quote:Originally posted by saltybeaver

Yup lots of fish .only one taken home. We were useing lighter rods so some of the 5lbers seemed pretty big only to laught when they got to the boat. spoons with no flashers for most of the day.
fun drive home to nanaimo in the snow.

It was definatley on at Becher Bay this morning, aside from the drivign snow and the rain. We didn't get out untill around 9:30, but we did good, kept 5, they were good sized today, not so many littluns.. Thank GOD for cabin heaters.

 

[Rum Buddies]

hey I'm not saying you shouldn't use the fishery, you certainly are entitled to.

I'm just trying to bring up a point that a lot of undersized fish are probably dying from the strain. I wasn't really criticizing anybody or condemning the fishery, just posing a point for debate that I think is a valid one.

quote:U catch 5 undersize fish right off the bat, do u head in?
U catch 10 more, do u head in?
U catch 10 more + 1 nice legal, so now u have 1 fish to eat between 2 families, do u head in?(Oh wait your not fishing for food anyways cause u can buy fish).

I see what you are saying and yes I personally I would head in, to me thats just putting too many fish under strain for 1 or 2 very small springs. You don't have to agree with me, nor do I think you are a bad person if you stay out.

The big question would be, how could you enjoy the fishery while imposing as little impact to the smaller undersized fish? Beats the hell out of me, I don't have a solution for that one. I just hope most people aren't netting and handling these fish.

Does anybody have any stats on the mortality rate for released salmon?

quote:1 nice legal

By the way, 6lbs is not a nice legal fish, thats a large trout.

 

[Tsquared]

Re the undersize springs. I think if the gov is not going to put in regulations then we have to do it ourselves.It is possible. When I commercial trolled, people would get on the VHF and let others know that certain areas were alive with undersize fish and MOST people would avoid those specific areas. This wasn't the gov making us do this, just common sense. I think the same principle should apply here. I say this as someone who fishes for winter springs on a regular basis. For example, last weekend I tried fishing the west side of Becher Bay but I could only find 4 lb fish so after a couple of tacks I moved over to Whirl and found a couple that were decent sized with a minimum of undersized fish. I personally would not stay fishing in an area where the fish were predominately shakers. Please do not get me wrong: this is NOT a "holier than thou" post. I think if we use good, localized info about where the shakers are and aren't, we can continue to enjoy a year round fishery.
T2

 

[Morty]

quote:

It could be viewed as wasteful, but where do u draw the line.
You head out in the morning to catch a fish for consumption (oh wait u can buy fish at a store so why even bother).
U catch 5 undersize fish right off the bat, do u head in?
U catch 10 more, do u head in?
U catch 10 more + 1 nice legal, so now u have 1 fish to eat between 2 families, do u head in?(Oh wait your not fishing for food anyways cause u can buy fish).
So when do u decide that what your doing is wasteful?
Many believe the native fishery is wasteful, along with the byproduct catch from commercial boats.
How about charters, does their economic benefit justify them catching limits of fish for non Canadian residents?
Maybe we should start culling seals in local waters to help alleviate the drain on our fishery.
I appreciate your opinion but come up with a better argument on what's wasteful and what's not.

Jason

Here's what's wasteful: Going out fishing(in some ' cases every few days)KNOWING that,on average,you are going to kill 10-15
3 lbers in order to POSSIBLY keep one 6-8 lber?I don't even want to think about how many springs were floating around Sooke yesterday.
And yes,I guess in comparison to some of the attrosities(?) going on out there, 15 dead shakers per trip per boat is just a drop in the bucket,right?Lets see...17 boats out Sat.@ 15 each = [:0]
I killed enough 2lbers last winter-I think I'll skip it from now on.

 

[Rum Buddies]

http://fish.shimano.com/publish/con...ent-0004-DownloadFile.tmp/SSFI Salmon.pdf.pdf

Here's a report published by Shimano that puts the mortality rate for small chinook at 23-30% - some food for thought. I of course can't comment on the validity of the study or the methods used, just thought it was relevant to the discussion.

 

[JuandeOne]

quote:Originally posted by Poppa Swiss

I dunno i gotta say if you are catching that many undersized fish and only a small chance of anything of decent size then you are essentially fishing for undersized fish.

In my opinion subjecting that many undersized fish to all that stress is just not worth it. Just think of how many undersized fish will eventually die just from members on this board.

I read one report of over 40 undersized fish caught, I don't know what the percentage might be, but a number of those fish will certainly die.

Keep in mind this is only my 2 cents, many probably have a different opinion but it seems wasteful to me.

I'm not sure what to think about this. The Fall coho fishery in Renfrew must of killed literally thousands and thousands of grilse caught incidently. With this winter spring fishery its hard to argue the math in terms of hooked/released mortalities.

Put in plain terms, 3-4 morts to every keeper killed for the dinner table sounds ****ty! That's alot of 20-40# spawners not available in a couple of years for angling opportunities or procreation.

As PS stated, I'm not condeming those who participate in this fishery (I have occasionally in the past 15 years) but the #'s do warrant concern.

 

[drhook]

Great debate and everyone is behaving themselves so far.
I agree with you pappa swiss and this is why I DO NOT think that the regs should be changed from 45 to 70 cm. I just keep my 4 legal fish and go home. Saturday we spent over 2 1/2 hours driving to and from Becher Bay and only 50 minutes fishing but we only had to release one fish that was truly undersize.
By changing the regs it would force me to release 40 or so fish in days outing and come home with nothing but probably killing half a dozen or so in the process.

 

[Morty]

quote:Originally posted by Morty

quote:

It could be viewed as wasteful, but where do u draw the line.
You head out in the morning to catch a fish for consumption (oh wait u can buy fish at a store so why even bother).
U catch 5 undersize fish right off the bat, do u head in?
U catch 10 more, do u head in?
U catch 10 more + 1 nice legal, so now u have 1 fish to eat between 2 families, do u head in?(Oh wait your not fishing for food anyways cause u can buy fish).
So when do u decide that what your doing is wasteful?
Many believe the native fishery is wasteful, along with the byproduct catch from commercial boats.
How about charters, does their economic benefit justify them catching limits of fish for non Canadian residents?
Maybe we should start culling seals in local waters to help alleviate the drain on our fishery.
I appreciate your opinion but come up with a better argument on what's wasteful and what's not.

Jason

Here's what's wasteful: Going out fishinging KNOWING that,on average,you are going to kill 10-15
3 lbers in order to POSSIBLY keep one 6-8 lber?I don't even want to think about how many springs were floating around Sooke yesterday.
And yes,I guess in comparison to some of the attrosities(?) going on out there, 15 dead shakers per trip per boat is just a drop in the bucket,right?Lets see...17 boats out Sat.@ 15 each = [:0]
I killed enough 2lbers last winter-I think I'll skip it from now on.

SORRY if I ruffled any feathers - too many bevies last night[:I][xx(]

 

[Rum Buddies]

quote:I DO NOT think that the regs should be changed from 45 to 70 cm

Thats a tough one for me. On one hand i think 45cm is a tiny trout like Chinook and I think its kinda sad to cull a fish that small when I know how big it can get.

I guess there is the arguement that a fish is a fish and you only get so many year, so its up to the angler if he wants big fish or tiny fish.

On the other hand, could you imagine the slaughter that would happen if guys could only keep a fish over 70cm, you'd be hard pressed to find a legal fish out there right now.

Interesting debate though.

 

[Pablo2079]

Rather than 70cm, why not make the Chinook min. measurment 62cm like it already is on much of the inside waters?

 

[Slabby20]

Our size limit for winter feeders here in Washington is 22 inches (55.88 cm). It used to be 20 inches several years back and they raised it to 22 inches which I agree with. 20 inches is too small to be a keeper. Your 45 cm is just short of 18 inches. That seems way too small to be considered legal. My opinion is that it should be raised to 58 or 60 cm (22" to 24") That's big enough to be a good dinner fish but not too big so as to have to cull fish after fish waiting for something bigger. The suggested 70 cm seems way too big for a winter fish and would lead too many fish having to be released. Just my opinion.

Slabby

 

[Rum Buddies]

but slabby that would only exasperate the current issue I brought up. Even with a limit as low as 45cm anglers are catching dozens of fish that are undersized, just to find a 6lb "keeper".

Raising the size limit is only going to put more fish under stress for the angler to finally bring in a keeper. Although maybe with the chance of catching a keeper even less, some anglers would just leave these fish alone for a few months - I'm not so sure though.

 

[fishin_magician]

quote:Originally posted by drhook

Great debate and everyone is behaving themselves so far.
I agree with you pappa swiss and this is why I DO NOT think that the regs should be changed from 45 to 70 cm. I just keep my 4 legal fish and go home. Saturday we spent over 2 1/2 hours driving to and from Becher Bay and only 50 minutes fishing but we only had to release one fish that was truly undersize.
By changing the regs it would force me to release 40 or so fish in days outing and come home with nothing but probably killing half a dozen or so in the process.

Well hey now. This is where your "sporting" side comes into play. You use larger lures. Larger hooks, fewer hooks, and you fish SELECTIVELY. Your reward for fishing this way is catching a fish that is much larger than a 45 cm fish. It also means you're going to have more fun playing a more sporting fish.

Furthermore, if you want to fill up your license with 45 cm "keepers", that's ok..but why not catch a fish that is 70 cm?

Changing fishing behaviours changes the impact on the resource. Therefore, fewer fish hooked, more fish survive.

62 cm fish are kinda small as it is. A lean winter spring at 62 cms may only weigh 5/6 lbs. A chunky one, could go 8/9.

If we move the size up to 70 cms..that means a great number of fish survive to be BIG FISH.

Case in point. Winter spring fishing around Vancouver. Fish with 3.5 Coyotes..and it's a Grilse slaughter. Fish with 4.0 Coyotes, still catch plenty of shakers and weed through them to catch a "keeper". Fish with 5.0 Coyotes, catch the fish that REALLY count, and shake off less than HALF the number of under 62 cm fish.

Fish a 4 inch tomic---don't have to worry about undersize.

On the BEST days around Vancouver, you release "62 cm" fish because you can do better than that, and catch a 66 to 70 cm fish.

 

[Pablo2079]

Maybe the knotless nets should be the only ones allowed out there.... I've noticed that the old nylon/knotted ones beat the hell out of a fish. Lots of scale and slime loss. I always determine whether or not it's a keeper before I net it, but for some... they net first and ask questions later.

I figure if I can't tell it's a keeper before it's netting time (length/species), then it's not a keeper and the net stays in the boat.

Ever been yelled at by other fisherman for letting one go? I have... "If you didn't want it, should have given it to me...." or "Are you nuts? Last I checked, that's what we're fishing for out here...."

 

[knotoncall]

I would never believe that a individual would spend thous. on boat equip etc. plus all the time required to catch a fish for consumption. Not when we make all the money we do and fish is down right cheap in the store. Come on friends! We go fishing for fun. Right? We'd go fishing if the minimum size was 100 cm & just keep slaughtering fish because its something we enjoy. If we really fished for consumption we'd probably keep everything we caught which is what we should do. There shouldn't be a min. size but a min. weight of fish per day. If you catch it you keep it. What the blazes is the difference between a 35 er & a 45er but a few days older & a few more mouth fulls of food. Think of the reasoning of DFO when they say you can keep finned Coho but you have to release the wild. When about all you can catch sometimes is the wild!! So the wild mortality is high & the hatchery non existent. Go figger! Conservation! You got to love it!

 

[wetbeaver]

hey everyone, i was out of sooke on saturday the fishing was awesome but the fish were all SMALL and by small i mean small 2-5 pounders. Kept one that might have gone about 7 pounds, now reading back to the beginning of the month guys were posting about 6-9 pounders and the odd one in the 10-13 pound range, what is with this?were these different fish that i was hooking or what? mortality rate was low, not one of the 30 fish brought to the boat even left the water they were released with care and as far as i seen everyone was doing the same, as for size I only ever keep fish over 24 inches anyway.

 

[Slabby20]

I agree with FM's thinking. I don't know about your area but in ours there has been an unusual amount of shakers and sub legal fish. Most around here have gone to using 5" or 6" Tomics (603) and that eliminates 95 % of the shakers. It also means most fish caught are legal size or better. I also agree with Pablo, way too many people net undersized fish and this is a sure way to drive the mortality rate way up. It's very easy to release a fish without having to remove it from the water. I think the survival rate of those releases go way up.