30 lb steelhead on the hoh

Jergens

AKA Joe Willauer
#16
akpowdermonkey---whether or not a fish is deeply hooked, its chance of survival automatically become 0 when it is bonked. many deep hooked fish do survive, so unless it was dead upon landing, killing it is by definition reducing its chance of survival.

also, i don't know where you got your statistic about 36 inch steelhead....that simply doesn't jive with any of the data i have seen on steelhead. The NOAA status reviews that designated the ESU's looked at many populations and found that most in WA had less than 20% repeat spawning rates (many less than 10). Regardless, studies have shown that second time spawners are more successful than first time spawners, so leaving the repeat spawners in the river is especially important (see Todd Seamons work on the mating system of steelhead for more on this subject).

-Tom
iagree, and on top of that, how many steelhead do you hook deep fly fishing? I have spent a significant amount of time nymphing for them, which i would think to be more likely to result in a deep hookset, and NEVER hooked one deep enough that i thought it was going to injure the fish.
 

SpeySpaz

still an authority on nothing
#17
there are plenty of reasons that people kill fish, perhaps it was injured or hooked deep and in the gills. If I caught a steelhead that was legal to keep and I was pretty sure it was gonna die upon release I'd probably keep it. Perhaps we should react to the story instead of passing judgment on internet rumors.

The good news is that something like 95% of steelhead bigger than 36 inches are multiple spawners.
OK, I'll give it the BOTD. maybe it was gill-eye-deepthroat hooked.
good point. Hard to tell, I wasn't there. If it was bleeding badly, I may have bonked it myself.
 

Jeremy Floyd

fly fishing my way through life
#19
I have only hooked one steelhead in my life that I was 99% sure was going to die from the hook. That was a hatchery hen last year on the Stilly that took the hook straight down and between the gill rakers. Had she not been pumping blood out the side I would have sent her back.

IMHO the venting of anger should be pointed at WDFW for allowing people the opportunity to legally kill our wild stocks.
 
#20
Get in context.

Do you fish for steelehad?

There's a 24 hour grace period to repair dumb-ass remarks; I've used it many times, maybe you should too. :thumb:

I am in perfect context, if you are the rulemaker, i'll oblige and offer more.

First of all we dont know if it was native, most likely it was but still we dont know all the facts.

Frankly the facts dont matter, it is within his right to kill the fish. And by doing so, dont kid yourself that your C+R behaviour is better than this guys.

I do fish for steelhead, only in rivers with hatchery populations. And i only fish with the intent of keeping one or two when i need them, and that is not often. - goes for all species for me.

Who's smoking what here. Take some time and really really think about what thrill you get from C+R and at what expense to everything involved. It plain and simple is wildlife harassment, there can be no argument against that. I'd like to hear one intelligent point that argues that fact????

You are so concerned with steelhead that you would call - hooking one, fighting one to near exhaustion, taking it out of water, then letting it go LOVE.

Just in the realm of philosophy that is interesting to me.

Look, i will release most fish i catch but that is not my intention in the sport, i am not out there to catch as many as i can. The point i was trying to make is that we shouldnt feel more righteous than this guy, this could be the only fish this guy bonked. Maybe you have C+R 100 fish and 10 of them died as a result - who is better?
 

TomB

Active Member
#21
IMHO the venting of anger should be pointed at WDFW for allowing people the opportunity to legally kill our wild stocks.
I agree that the resource managers deserve alot of blame Jeremy, but I also believe we each are responsible for our own decisions, and if someone decides to kill a wild fish, legal or not, I don't think it is unfair to hold them accountable. With the state of wild steelhead populations on the Hoh (and most other places), intentionally killing one is, in my opinion, unethical and deplorable.
 

ak_powder_monkey

Proud to Be Alaskan
#22
also, i don't know where you got your statistic about 36 inch steelhead....that simply doesn't jive with any of the data i have seen on steelhead. The NOAA status reviews that designated the ESU's looked at many populations and found that most in WA had less than 20% repeat spawning rates (many less than 10). Regardless, studies have shown that second time spawners are more successful than first time spawners, so leaving the repeat spawners in the river is especially important (see Todd Seamons work on the mating system of steelhead for more on this subject).
I got the data from ADF&G's comprensive trout managment plan for southeast Alaska, if 20% of the fish are repeat spawners and 10% are over 36 inches then this all makes sense...
 

Flyborg

Active Member
#23
I am in perfect context, if you are the rulemaker, i'll oblige and offer more.

First of all we dont know if it was native, most likely it was but still we dont know all the facts.

Frankly the facts dont matter, it is within his right to kill the fish. And by doing so, dont kid yourself that your C+R behaviour is better than this guys.

I do fish for steelhead, only in rivers with hatchery populations. And i only fish with the intent of keeping one or two when i need them, and that is not often. - goes for all species for me.

Who's smoking what here. Take some time and really really think about what thrill you get from C+R and at what expense to everything involved. It plain and simple is wildlife harassment, there can be no argument against that. I'd like to hear one intelligent point that argues that fact????

You are so concerned with steelhead that you would call - hooking one, fighting one to near exhaustion, taking it out of water, then letting it go LOVE.

Just in the realm of philosophy that is interesting to me.

Look, i will release most fish i catch but that is not my intention in the sport, i am not out there to catch as many as i can. The point i was trying to make is that we shouldnt feel more righteous than this guy, this could be the only fish this guy bonked. Maybe you have C+R 100 fish and 10 of them died as a result - who is better?
Who cares if it's harassment? We're men, they're fish, that's what we do. The point is, without catch and release, we won't be able to continue harassing them.
 
#24
Cough, Cough, gotta remember guys where the retaining the one wild rule came from. If you don't like it you can probably head to Pike Place or to the local Haggens store and buy one. Hell at $25 a whale the 50 percent overage of catch would probably add up to $.35 Forks mayor, guide service, WA gov? You guys can figure it out
 
#26
Just think about it. Had he just taken a pic and then let it go he would have been a fly rod hero. He chose to bonk it, even though its legal on certain rivers, he's become a pariah. To each his own. He made the choice to kill it. I doubt that he'll post pictures anywhere as he knows that he'll get flamed.
 

inland

Active Member
#27
"I do fish for steelhead, only in rivers with hatchery populations."

Then you are the one who is causing more damage. Through solely supporting THE VERY mechanism that legally allowed/continues to allow the near extinction of wild stocks.

What I don't get is your harassment angle. Angling to kill which is harassing a fish in order to be reduced to camp meat. So that is OK? That makes you morally superior? While fishing purely for fun isn't? I will take my odds of a MAXIMUM 1-2% wild incidental fish kill. Considering the state of wild fish right now its going take a while before I kill too many of them.

The most intelligent suggestion would be for you to stop fishing. Would cause you less internal conflict. Your complete support of fish culture pretty much kills any point you had. Let alone your hypocritical "I release most of what I catch" comment.

William
 
#29
Manimal, my point is that based on the discussion on the gear forum which included a couple posts from folks who had seen the fish, it was wild. Now, from what I read (so far) nobody knew whether it was deep hooked and bleeding out or what... who knows. I'm in no way judgmental towards the angler in question, I wasn't there. My comment was simply that the statement
Manimal said:
look lets face it, catch and release is no more ethical than catch and kill, in fact it may be worse.
is kinda ridiculous. That's what I mean about thinking it all the way through. If you get a wild fish take great care and release it so its genes are spread - and bonk the hatcheries. It's selective C&R there is just a little more to it. And it's fishing. w00t
 

SpeySpaz

still an authority on nothing
#30
well, there's this whole objectionable "fish as penis size substitute" thing that bothers me.

Of course, being hung like a donkey, I am more than satisfied with little fish:D and have much less to prove than our douchesickle peninsula wild-fish psycho-bonker.
perhaps he should consider an implant of some sort...or take up a different hobby.
 

Latest posts