The Burden of Flyfishing?

[FlaFly 0]

Joe.... you made a good point. In my graduate school, I specialized in ichthyology (the study of fishes). Like any biological area, there are different kinds of ichthyologists. I did my master's thesis research studying the effect of nitrogen in eutrophic lakes on fish hemoglobin (short story, it makes it non-functional and kills the fish). Many ichthyologists though study fish populations by seining, trawling, or as you say, using rotenone and killing them outright, only to count and measure all the individuals and document how many of what (all the time in hopes of finding an unreported species). I remember going on RV expeditions, and emptying the trawl on the deck, then putting the fish in big jars full of formalin. What a way to die!

Since then my career was steered more at studying water quality, and if I ever get reincarnated (like our Buddhist friend), I definitely will not take any classes in field ichthyology! I am disturbed to find my fellow scientists, and professors to boot, so callous.

[josephcsylvia 0]

Flafly, thats pretty awesome to have studied fish and bodies of water, I bet you've got some campfire stories!.

 

My opinion on all this is that we are partaking in probably the least invasive class of recreational fishing thats been around for who knows how long? (Silvercreek probably does ) as a general almost unwritten rule fly fisherman and women are the most careful with they fish they do catch.

 

Sleep well at nite everyone the fish you hooked this morning is not laying around with a tooth ache its eating and spawning like its created to do!

[Decisions 0]

I don't believe fish feel pain in the same way we do.

Saying that, if a person is so concerned about his targets well being, they shouldn't be fishing for them in the first place.

I use to be an avid hunter as well many years ago. Shoot and release is not an option in that sport. I do miss hunting at times, if only it was legal to hunt with paint ball guns... A good friend of mine still supplies me with the odd moose roast and venison, I will never turn it down.

 

Cheers, Ron...

[josephcsylvia 0]

Catch and release hunting = calf roping lol

[mikechell 0]

Hunt and release = photography.

[FlaFly 0]

Mike is right. A photograph makes a great trophy. I have a good picture of a bull elk standing not 12 feet in front of my wife, and it's not in a zoo. Unfortunately it's not in this computer or I'd post it. Maybe later.

[JSzymczyk 0]

 

 

so they can kill a BILLION songbirds each year?

 

I'd rather fish for feral cats..... but it is widely frowned upon.

Although I agree that feral cats are a problem ... I have to comment. Cats, like all mammals, are a higher order of fauna than fish. Cats DO feel something closer to "pain" and react accordingly when injured.

Personally, if I saw someone using a hook on a cat ...

Well, lets just say ... I'd rather put a hook in, and play to hand, that person.

 

 

 

that's cool, I knew you would respond You don't like kids, I don't like cats. I still need you to be on my C-130 crew when I win the lottery.

 

BTW I've never fished for a cat. Even I wouldn't do that.

[JSzymczyk 0]

My neighbor's mother, practices a form of Buddism and she thinks his no kill fishing is terrible. Fish should only be fished for when you allow them to die and become food and complete their cycle. So her belief is no kill fishing denies the fish it's purpose in life.

 

 

THAT is an interesting point of view.

[Obie 0]

I'm not sure what fish feel, if anything, but I reckon they don't feel much from being hooked. And of all the ways a fish could go (otters, eagles, etc), a hook doesn't seem as threatening.

 

That said, for most fish species far fewer than <1% ever make it to catchable size, much less their first or subsequent spawns, and that larger fish produce more and better quality eggs. They're also an important component of the ecosystem; I was just reading an article about how populations of orcas on the west coast are driven by production of coho salmon in the Columbia River system-fish all the way up in Idaho wind up growing whales.

 

It's a judgement call- I wouldn't let the harm of hooking or playing keep me fishing, but I understand why it'd make other people uneasy and I respect that. To me the important part is respecting the resource, understanding fish (especially breeding-size individuals) aren't some trivial component of the population that can easily be replaced, and realizing when you're out on the stream- you're a visitor. There's other critters who actually rely on the health of the system- you're just a guest. Humility, I suppose.

[Cold 0]

 

 

That said, for most fish species far fewer than <1% ever make it to catchable size, much less their first or subsequent spawns

Is that from egg laid, successful hatches, or???

 

Unless you're talking in terms of eggs laid during spawn to adult, I'd be interested to see data backing that up...

[josephcsylvia 0]

It has to be from eggs laid, once a fish starts eating they are catchable!

[troutguy 0]

That figure of < 1% is all a stream could support.

 

If only 10% of the eggs laid grew to adult size, fishing would soon be more like picking strawberries in a commercial field. Brook trout lay between 100 and more than 5,000 eggs each spawn. Between 500 and 1,000 is the norm. Think about where you fish now and add 50 new adult sized fish per every fish already in the water. It would be wall to wall fish. Since there would not be enough food to support that many fish, hopefully they would eat feral cats, coyotes and small children (Mikechell).

[mikechell 0]

... hopefully they would eat ... small children (Mikechell).

Ah ... what a wonderful sentiment !!!

But you're reasoning is sound. It's why animals of all types have evolved high offspring numbers. The lower they exist on the food chain, the higher the number of offspring. Those species that didn't evolve to produce large quantities of eggs/babies ... don't exist anymore.

Critters that are better at protecting their offspring, can produce fewer each birthing ... since they are less prone to predatory demise.

[troutguy 0]

To digress even further from the original topic, Something we do here often........

 

 

I love to quail hunt. There are no large numbers of quail anymore and I live in South Carolina. People blamed coyotes. The increase in coyotes were eating everything. Truth was it was fire ants killing the young and changed farming practices and more damn Yankees moving south building new housing developments and destroying habitat. (Before FishingBobNelson causes crap yes, I moved down here too and I'm from New York)

 

The state of South Carolina did a study on deer. They tracked fawns. I was surprised by how many were killed by bears. Coyotes were below bears and falls as a cause of death.

[Dave G. 0]

I'm done hunting with the exception of maybe coyote and then with a rifle and red dot scope. It has to be a clean kill or I'm not interested. Photography, I should trade or sell off some wedding lenses for one good lens for wildlife besides my 70-200VR ( Nikon mount). That's a keeper.