Washington Fly Fishing Forum banner

C&R Mortality

2K views 26 replies 17 participants last post by  GAT 
#1 ·
Nothing really new here, but well written blog on something we should think about. How we are practicing C&R.
 
#5 ·
So we should all do our best to reduce mortality and use proper fish handling techniques. Observational studies have shown that the average time out of water for released fish where the angler was unaware they were being observed was significantly less than a minute - I think average was around 20 seconds. Further study done on Yellowstone Cutthroat trout (even during times of higher water temperatures) showed that fish could be out of the water for up to a minute with no increased mortality. The caveat is that the study was on only Yellowstone Cutthroat in one area.

There are other studies that show some other results, but also had some questionable methods (in my opinion).

Here's my personal philosophy for how I handle fish. Endangered or threatened species stay in the water with as little touching as possible. Wild fish that have healthy populations may get a picture taken if it's a big fish. Hatchery fish get handled respectfully if they're being released, but I have no problem bonking them.

Some of the fish handling police present on the internet take things way too far. There are also plenty of instances where educating anglers on better handling is warranted.
 
#8 ·
I only read the abstract of the study and blog post, so correct me if I am wrong, but I did not see one aspect addressed I have always assumed would have a large impact on c&r mortality: gear used. In particular for fly casters, light tippets and long fights. Going under gunned and landing a beast is good fun, a challenge and I enjoy it. I have been much more aware in the last few years though of my chances of hooking a beast and how I'm geared. The less time from hook set to net has to factor in here.

That said, I'm completely on board with the grip and grin (if you must) being wet and short. Clearly that effects outcomes.
 
#9 ·
I only read the abstract of the study and blog post, so correct me if I am wrong, but I did not see one aspect addressed I have always assumed would have a large impact on c&r mortality: gear used. In particular for fly casters, light tippets and long fights. Going under gunned and landing a beast is good fun, a challenge and I enjoy it. I have been much more aware in the last few years though of my chances of hooking a beast and how I'm geared. The less time from hook set to net has to factor in here.

That said, I'm completely on board with the grip and grin (if you must) being wet and short. Clearly that effects outcomes.
I wonder about gear a lot as well. I wonder what is better/worse for the fish... Fishing a heavier rod and leader, landing the fish quickly, then taking a quick picture with the fish out of the water for say 20 seconds, or fishing a lighter rod/leader, fighting the fish substantially longer, but never taking them from the water and releasing them untouched with no picture.

Often I see people say things like "just release them. No need to stroke your ego with a picture" etc. But then I see these same people talk about targeting various fish using super light gear and I wonder what is really worse.
 
#14 ·
The vast majority of anglers I see use good technique. The poor handlers of fish tend to be newbies. Hopefully with some experience they will join the majority. There will always be a few novices as well as the odd bleeder, so having a low mortality associated with C and R is the price to pay for having a fishery.
The fishery of by gone era of killing your limit every time out had a 100% mortality rate, so I would say we have made progress in that regard.
 
#20 · (Edited)
Steve,

My criticism of the blog is that it cherry picks the data and even then there is no citation of the "study". Most studies place C&R mortality at about 4% on the low side and 4.5 % on the high side. Even lures with barbless TREBLE hooks have mortality rates BELOW 5%. Barbed flies have mortality rates of about 4.5%.

There is no significant difference between barbed or barbless flies in catch and release fishing. The small difference does not affect the trout populations since the natural mortality is so high. The objective of C&R fishing is to keep the trout population at the carrying capacity of the stream or river, and the survival differences between single hook or treble hook, barbed or not makes no difference when fish are properly released.

Here's a study by the Henry's Fork Organization which is a fly fishing conservation group:


"When taking into consideration all types of gear, current literature suggests that mean catch-and-release mortality rates are between 3 and 4.5% for rainbow trout...trout caught on size-1 Mepps spinners having barbed or barbless treble or single hooks. The trout were caught on the mainstem of the Bois Brule River in Douglas County, Wisconsin. The mean length of landed rainbow trout was 157 mm TL (97-378 mm). o Short-term mortality averaged less than 4% for rainbow trout, and short-term mortality was not dependent on hook type."

Only the most noteworthy research on wild trout are selected for publication in the Wild Trout Symposium. The best scientific study on barbless vs barbed hook fly fishing mortality is the following summary article on pg. 72 of the 1997 Wild Trout Symposium below. This was over 20 years ago and still fly fishers cling to outdated beliefs about hook types, C&R survival, and population effects.

http://www.wildtroutsymposium.com/proceedings-6.pdf



Barbed Hook Restrictions in Catch-and-Release Trout Fisheries: A Social Issue: by Schill and Scarpella

"For flies and lures combined, mean hooking mortality was 4.5% for barbed hooks and 4.2% for barbless hooks. Combination of test statistics from individual studies by gear type via meta-analysis yielded nonsignificant results for barbed versus barbless flies, lures, or flies and lures combined. We conclude that the use of barbed or barbless flies or lures plays no role in subsequent mortality of trout caught and released by anglers. Because natural mortality rates for wild trout in streams commonly range from 30% to 65% annually, a 0.3% mean difference in hooking mortality for the two hook types is irrelevant at the population level, even when fish are subjected to repeated capture. Based on existing mortality studies, there is no biological basis for barbed hook restrictions in artificial fly and lure fisheries for resident trout. Restricting barbed hooks appears to be a social issue."

Spin fishers using spinners and releasing fish do NOT diminish trout populations! As fly fishers, we need to become more inclusive so that both fly fishers and spin fishers can work together to protect trout waters. One way we can cooperate with spin fishers is by supporting CPR = Consider Proper Release, which we do in Wisconsin TU Chapters. http://www.nutmegtrout.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/CPR-Brochure.pdf

Effect of Hook Type on Mortality, Trauma, and Capture Efficiency of Wild Stream Trout Caught by Angling with Spinners:

"This study assessed short-term (48-h) hooking mortality, eye damage, jaw injury, and capture efficiency of three species of wild stream trout caught on size-1 Mepps spinners having barbed or barbless treble or single hooks. …………. Barbless single hooks were quicker to remove than the other hook types, but the difference was insufficient to reduce mortality. Our results do not indicate a biological advantage with the use of single- or barbless-hook spinners when caught wild stream trout will be released.

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1577/M02-171.1

The USA's best trout researcher, Robert Behnke, recently passed away in 2013. Midcurrent Magazine called him, "one of the world's foremost authorities on trout and salmon species." He has written many times on barbless vs barbed hooks and his own research shows from a fish mortality standpoint, there is no advantage of barbless hooks over barbed hooks.




From About Trout: The Best of Robert Behnke from Trout Magazine

By Robert J. Behnke, PhD

http://tinyurl.com/99p94vz

"The fisheries research studies in Yellowstone Park have also helped to dispel some long-established beliefs. Contrary to popular opinion, it is not necessary to restrict catch- and-release fisheries to barb-less flies only. A large proportion of Yellowstone anglers have only casual interest in fishing and are not highly skilled or experienced. Many use large treble hook lures. The trout they catch are frequently left flopping on the bank while a camera is dug out and photos taken. Yet survival of the released trout is exceedingly high (99.7 per cent) based on the 1981 study. Most all detailed comparative studies on hooking mortality have demonstrated no significant differences in mortality between trout caught on single, treble, barbed or barb-less hooks."
 
#21 ·
Here in NJ, the regulations for fishing on Wild Trout Streams were changed a couple of years ago to require barbless hooks (these streams are artificials-only, not just flyfishing). At hearings, the state biologists confirmed no difference in mortality of barbed vs. barbless, but acknowledged that this was a "social" issue driven by the desire to minimize non-lethal injury to individual fish. I countered (unsuccessfully) that the logical extension of this is to ban all fishing, as that is the ultimate way to minimize injury, and that this is a step on a slippery slope playing into the hands of groups like PETA. My position is that we should let the mortality and biological data drive the rules/regs, and leave it to each person to decide whether they want to take additional steps to minimize their impact on individual fish.
 
#23 ·
We have a special "Early Season" for trout fishing in Wisconsin which is limited to flies and lures with the open waters decided by the cold water DNR fisher biologist for each county. This season opens in January and closes several weeks before the regular fishing season begins.

During the first few years, flies and lures HAD to be barbless. The wardens tested the flies and lures with a piece of cotton swabbing and if ANY cotton fibers stayed on the hooks, the anger was cited for using a "barbed" hook even if the point had been smashed down, although incompletely.

After several seasons, the DNR changed the regs so that barbed hooks could be used. They realized that ticketing an angler when there was NO demonstrable effect on the fish population had no basis in science and led to animosity between the fishing public and the DNR.


"Trout anglers, you've been dreaming about it since last year and it's finally here. The early catch-and-release trout season opens at 5 a.m. on January 5 and runs until midnight May 3.

  • Anglers are not required to use barbless hooks. Artificial lures and flies are still required."
 
#24 ·
Thanks, Silvercreek. Nice to see that common sense can prevail. The funny thing is that before the reg change here, I would have been likely to use barbless for most of the season, except for those colder months where the takes are light and slow and that barb is often the only way to actually get a hookup. I made the point that the change was going to make it less enjoyable to fish during the colder months (hate to spend hours in the cold with no fish brought to hand), but to no avail.
 
#27 ·
As I've mentioned many times before, I once had access to a private lake that held large rainbow trout. Some of the trout had markings that were easy to distinguish the fish from others. I would catch the same trout, take photos and release them many, many times and somehow, they survived for years.

Sure, you need to use common sense when handling a trout but they are not really as fragile as some folks believe they are.

And if you believe they are that fragile, the absolute only way you can guarantee you don't somehow hurt the fish is not to fish in the first place.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top