fishing for meat

Discussion in 'Saltwater' started by martyg, Mar 29, 2006.

  1. martyg Active Member

    Posts: 981
    The world at large
    Ratings: +74 / 0
    It looks like April will see Ling Cod and Halibut open. Is there anything worth pursuing in the S. Sound? Even if it involves hucking a big herring on a 3 once weight I wouldn't be opposed to some fresh, non salmonoid fish.
  2. chadk Be the guide...

    Posts: 5,057
    Snohomish, WA.
    Ratings: +41 / 0
    No much for butts, but should be some lings. Only problem is finding them and those who know the good spots are tight lipped. Find the right rocky structure and you may do alright.
  3. Smalma Active Member

    Posts: 2,799
    Marysville, Washington
    Ratings: +654 / 0
    Since lings and halibut are all wild fish how do folks feel about taking them for the table?

    Always interested in folk's preception on what is acceptable fisheries management for various species .

    Tight lines
    Curt
  4. Anil Active Member

    Posts: 1,054
    Tacoma, WA, USA.
    Ratings: +205 / 6
    I personally have a hard time killing a fish that has a 30+ year lifespan, such as a Lingcod, particularly, in areas with limited numbers. Almost all ‘trophy’ lingcod are breeding females to boot. I choose not to keep them, and urge others to do the same.
    As an added deterrent, an apex predator that has lived in polluted water for a dozen years or more probably has quite the collection of toxins in its meat. Besides, there are absolutely no Lingcod in the Puget Sound. ;)
    Anil
  5. martyg Active Member

    Posts: 981
    The world at large
    Ratings: +74 / 0
    Good feedback. Thanks.
  6. crazysalmon New Member

    Posts: 31
    Bellingham, Washington
    Ratings: +0 / 0
    What is wrong with keeping something for the table if the season is open, you have your license, you bought a boat, you put fuel in it, all the gear. I could go on. I wouldn't keep a large halibut of 50+ they are breeders and most likely female. The flakes of meat are large and grainy. Lingcod on the other hand, I don't keep just because my wife has seen the color of their meat before it is cooked (blue, green) and wont touch it. I on the other hand would love to have a 15 pound ling for fish-n-chips once in a blue moon. I wouldn't try to scare someone from pursuing them with toxins or lack of fish. Martyg they are out there look for rocky pinnacles. The halibut are in the Straits halibut bank, salmon bank, and hein bank. Few places to start.
    I caught an eleven pound blackmouth Tuesday in area 7. It was delicious, hope you guys don't hate me. It was a hatchery fish. Most if not all blackmouth are.

    Get out have some fun and feed the family once in a while.:)
  7. Jim Wallace Smells like low tide

    Posts: 5,652
    Somewhere on the Coast
    Ratings: +540 / 0
    I ran out on the S Jetty at the entrance to Grays Harbor today about an hour before noon, tossed a leadhead plastic and caught a juvinile Lingcod about 20", which I released. If it had been a keeper, I would have kept it. I only kill one or two lingcod a year for the table. Season opened out here on the 18th. Did bring home one nice black rockfish for dinner. Then I had to run back in and go to work.

    Jimbo
  8. Jeff Dodd Active Member

    Posts: 1,576
    Langley, WA
    Ratings: +356 / 0
    Curt,
    If I catch a halibut in Mutiny bay I plan to keep it. But that's a pretty big IF.

    If I catch a Ling cod in the San Juans this spring, I'll keep it too if legal to do so.

    If I catch a Ling down by the Langley marina I'll release it, because my guess is this population is not very strong, and maybe, someday, my son can fish for them because the population has rebounded.

    If Coho runs are healthy enough to keep wild coho in my home area, I don't see why I wouldn't keep one now and again to share with my family. But how am I to know the answer to this question? Should I assume all wild salmon runs are unhealthy runs and they should all be released? If so, I'll make that suggestion during next years comment period.

    Last season I released wild coho and ended up not catching ANY hatchery coho - so we ate Pinks, and I don't like to eat pink salmon.

    My intention are good and I never keep more than 10 or so fish a year. My opinion on keeping fish to eat, however, may be in the minority.
  9. gigharborflyfisher Native Trout Hunter

    Posts: 741
    Gig Harbor, Wa, USA.
    Ratings: +1 / 0
    One problem with bottom fish in the S. Sound, a lot of them tend to be very wormy. It is not as bad as it used to be, but should be taken into account. You are probably much better of head out to the Strait or Ocean.
  10. Smalma Active Member

    Posts: 2,799
    Marysville, Washington
    Ratings: +654 / 0
    Crazysalmon -
    What is wrong with keeping a fish for the table? I see nothing wrong with it at all. A fish for the table are an important of our angling heritage.

    Jim -
    I hear you about the ling cod - I think they are one of the best eating fish that we have here locally and I typicall keep several a year. I do select those that I keep (like fish in the 30-32 inch range and from waters that I don't feel are heavily poluted).

    Jeff -
    I to will be out on Mutiny Bay looking for that elusive halibut. If my partners or myself are fortunate enough top catch one you can bet it is destined for fish and chips. I also agree that the odds are long that we'll get one but hey it is a fishery that is different from my normal haunts and that makes an enjoyable day on the water.

    Yes I even keep some salmon while most are hatchery some wild fish do end up on the table.

    My point is that where biologically sound there this nothing wrong with harvest a few fish now and then. However we as a community seem to go nuts if some one attempts to harvest a wild trout or steelhead. From a biologically presepctive there really is not different in killing a say a wild sea-run cutthroat from a healthy population than a ling cod from the San Juan Islands. I agree that CnR fisheries for the cutthroat makes some good sense but that is based on my social value of the fish/fishery - too much fun to catch than eat. My pevee is when we attempt to take those social values and attempt to impose them on others based on some biologicial arguements that we are more than willing to ignore with another species.

    Just something to "chew on" so to speak.
    Curt
  11. Jeff Dodd Active Member

    Posts: 1,576
    Langley, WA
    Ratings: +356 / 0
    Curt,
    Thanks for the response - I appreciate your line of thinking.

    Good luck on April 9th!

    Jeff
  12. Dick Warnke was Pram-Man

    Posts: 761
    Federal Way Wa
    Ratings: +2 / 0
    My way of thinking is that if I really need a fish for the table these days I'm more apt to opt for Safeway, Albertson's, Johnny's Seafood. etc. Bottom fish in the Sound are becomming rare and it is definetely due to over harvest. Whens the last time anyone has caught a nice True Cod in the Sound?. I personally don't think any of these fish are going to rebound or make a come back. The damage is done. :(
  13. Jim Wallace Smells like low tide

    Posts: 5,652
    Somewhere on the Coast
    Ratings: +540 / 0
    Pram-Man, Yeh, I figure that 2# rockfish cost me about $50 in "opportunity loss" at work...as there is no end to work for me at this time of year (being a "yard guy"..."Git 'er done!"), but it was almost T-shirt weather out there yesterday, and the high tide was just after noon...had to go answer the siren's call!
    Damn...things are drying off here now and i've gotta go hack lawns.

    Jimbo
  14. Dick Warnke was Pram-Man

    Posts: 761
    Federal Way Wa
    Ratings: +2 / 0
    Jimbo, My concerns arn't really with the coastal or ocean stocks for Sports Fishing harvest on bottom fish. I think seasons and limits and individual constraint will help in over harvest by the rod and reel guy. I,m mainly talking about Puget Sound. All though it has been written that commercial ocean harvests of all fish stocks have depleted them up to 90%. How that will ever be able to rebound or recover is way beyond my comprehention. :confused:
  15. polepole New Member

    Posts: 53
    Seattle, WA
    Ratings: +0 / 0
    Does it change your thinking if Lingcod actually have a 20 year life span and reach sexual maturity at 4 years (20" male) and 7 years (24" female)?

    -Allen
  16. hikepat Patrick

    Posts: 1,804
    Des Moines, WA, USA.
    Ratings: +12 / 0
    A little off subject but any one know if they are still trying to plant hatchery raised Ling Cod in the Narrows. I remember getting wind of it a few years ago and have not really heard any thing about it since then. Have they had any luck with it or was it just a bust?:confused:
  17. ChrisW AKA Beadhead

    Posts: 493
    Seattle, WA.
    Ratings: +0 / 0

    I believe the spawning potential of large fish is much much greater. And yes, ling cod can recover quicker than some other species, like rockfish. Some species of rockfish are not mature until they are 12-15 years old and can live 80, 100 or even 120 years, sometimes ranging not more than a few feet their entire life. They are also very easy to catch making them vulnerable to over harvest. I think its ok to harvest these species if the populations are healthy and pressure is light but when they get hit hard they are slow to recover.

    We also need to be aware that rockfish caught at depth are not likely to recover from C&R. I have seen rockfish hauled up from 200-300 feet that were undersize, had to be released, and then floated on the surface like beach balls. I'm not sure where this line of depth is, and its probably out of the range of flylines. 30' might be safe and 60' might be pushing it, perhaps soemone else knows? In any case if you haul a rockfish up from the depths (most likely with gear) it may be better to keep it and quit fishing than release a bunch of them.

    I still have yet to find black rockfish on the surface or otherwise but they are on my short list.

    And yes there is nothing tastier than a fresh rockfish cooked on the BBQ on the back of a sailboat as I watch the sunset...:beer2:

    CW
  18. gt Active Member

    Posts: 2,616
    sequim, WA
    Ratings: +6 / 0
    rockfishs, in all of their varieties, cannot deflate their swim bladder. when you haul them to the surface, they bloat and float. i don't know of any means to get them back to depth so you don't kill fish you can't keep.

    this has much to do with the regulations in place which let us fish for them but then not keep them. i have written WDFW several times regarding this exact issue and they do admit that the swim bladder is an issue, one which they are not going to address!
  19. crazysalmon New Member

    Posts: 31
    Bellingham, Washington
    Ratings: +0 / 0
    I have pulled rockfish up from 90' off the downriggers while salmon fishing. They would take a couple of seconds and down they would go. From the 120' range it seems to be a little tougher on them. Their bladders do deflate when the eagles put their talons into them. Those birds are smart, they know where to hang out when the boats troll by.

    Tight lines




    t
  20. ibn Moderator

    Posts: 1,885
    Federal Way
    Ratings: +10 / 0
    I've only seen 1 rockfish caught fly fishing where the swim bladder was an issue upon release. That fish was caught while we were eating lunch floating in over 100' of water, we just let the entire fly line out and then some and put the rod in the rod holder.

    99.9% of the rockfish we catch fly fishing are taken in 0-40 feet of water or so, they release just fine.

    As far as eating bottomfish from the Puget Sound, I wont do it, I'll harvest em from the straits or the pacific, but usually don't take more then 1 or 2.