The Assault Continues...

Reading this reminds me of an event that happened yesterday I watched an older man (and I'm 62) catch and release three trout he caught on bait. He dragged each out of the water to a comfortable level (for him) and dry handed them before releasing them. Normally I might have tried to educate him, but since he had already encroached (as in completely fish through my drift) I decided verbal interplay might not be a good thing, and moved on.
 
As a very young man I loved to fish. I use bait to fish for trout for years and I became well good at it. I would catch trout when others would not. Also I would rather fish for trout than eat trout. So I tried to return just about every trout I caught. I set the hook early and would rather lose a trout than gut hook a fish. Simply said I was very careful with the trout but I still had a significant mortality rate. Partly based on this personal experience from sixty years ago, I question the fish commission studies suggesting that bait fishing has the same low mortality rate as fly-fishing. Especially since the average bait fishermen that I see on the water is more concerned about the catching and less concerned about being careful. I have also seen data from other fisheries biologist over the years that suggest something very different. That there is a significant mortality rate that accompanies bait fishing. It just seems the commission is intent on come up with data to support their special regulations programs that have no tackle restrictions. Programs like All Tackle No Kill (Bait fishing no Kill). It is not were the science leads them. Rather it is where they try to lead the science with their study design and conclusions.

FCP
 
Hey folks, I almost forgot. Remember when we tried to get C&R on the Tully?

First thanks for all your support, but the PAFBC have to my knowledge still NOT decided whether to grant pur request or not. We were told that they were working on new "special regulation" criteria. We submitted our initial request last January. I had to push at the Q3 meeting last year to get my non answer.

From a brief conversation with Mike K. a short time ago those new regs are coming out soon, but he had no idea whether the Tully would meet the criteria for any special regs.

I can only guess where that is going.

Just remember, more stocked fish means more licenses sold....WOW!
 
Another point:

The only litter I see along artificial only special regs streams is bait containers left by those individuals who broke the law. Look at stream banks after opening day on AT water. No wonder why people post their property.
 
"Look at stream banks after opening day on AT water. No wonder why people post their property."

Referring back to the earlier claim in this thread that bait fishing doesn't lead to significantly greater mortality than flies or lures, I'd ask how many of those leaving their bait containers behind employ "tight line" techniques so they can release their trout unharmed?

We need not only unbiased studies, but unbiased analysis and application of studies.
 
Maybe we should start to push for allowing fishing but no harvest in all waters, like is done for bass before June 16 or whatever date that is.

And maybe a protest is in order. You have to get these people's attention.


Syl
 
Based on the article, the study in Pa is apparently a private study. No mention is made of the PFBC.

Opie, I made no mention of DH areas.



.
 
This constant "bait bashing" is giving me heartburn. I guess everyone here was born with a fly rod in hand. The pigs will be pigs, be it bait or fly. I've seen both. No one here can ever convince me one is better than the other. I pick up just as much garbage left by fly guys as I do bait on my creek. Get off your high horse. I've owned stream front property for years. You all are pigs!!!
 
This constant "bait bashing" is giving me heartburn. I guess everyone here was born with a fly rod in hand. The pigs will be pigs, be it bait or fly. I've seen both. No one here can ever convince me one is better than the other. I pick up just as much garbage left by fly guys as I do bait on my creek. Get off your high horse. I've owned stream front property for years. You all are pigs!!!

I couldn't agree more. The last guys illegally fishing in my backyard were fly fisherman. The last guy I saw with a fish out of water flopping on the bank for well over 3 minutes was also a fly fisherman. The morality test based on hook size is another joke. Am I to feel guilty for fishing a size 12 nymph vs a size 18 or 20? Shall I go to confession for fishing a size 6 stonefly? Does the bait fisherman with a size 10 hook hold the moral high ground over the 4 inch long articulated streamer fly fisherman? I thought we were supposed to be harvesting the stockies anyway...
 
I was a catch and release bait fisherman during my childhood and teenage years. I didn't use the terms then but in pond fishing I was a passive fisherman and in stream fishing active. I can't think of too many passive stream fishermen that were successful enough to cause a significant amount of harm. Most fish were hooked deeply in the ponds and very few were on the streams. I see very little difference in bait fishing and nymphing on a stream.

I have four young children who are learning to fish. They get some fly rod time but most of their fishing is done on ponds with bait. They only catch stocked fish. We release quite a few. More often than not, they are hooked deeply. The line gets cut and the fish swims away. I would have suspected a higher mortality rate than what is seen. At most of the locations it is difficult to know what happens after the fish are released. One location, however, is a small private pond on which a private kids' Derby is held. Fish are stocked each spring but there is a large population of holdovers. During the derby, the vast majority of fish are hooked deeply. The rules are strict; the fish are kept wet and lines are cut. Hook removal is not attempted on deeply hooked fish. This pond is closley monitored. Very few fish are found dead after the spring derby or even after a mid summer event when temps are marginal.

I love fly fishing and have little desire to ever bait fish for trout. The attitude of superiority of many fly anglers drives me crazy though. There are good bait fishermen and bad. The same goes for fly anglers. I have to wonder which group kills more wild fish. I bet it is fly anglers in many situations... evening summer hatches, overplaying fish. Let's face it, for the most part, it is the fly and spinner guys out there harassing the wild and holdover fish. The bait guys are far more keyed in on the stockers. I'm not denying that, under identical situations, bait fishing has a higher mortality rate. That rate can be minimized through careful handling by all angling groups. All fishing has a mortality rate attached to it. If you're that concerned about it, don't fish... hug a tree instead, just don't squeeze too hard.

From my experience, the spin fishermen that frequent special reg areas are not the typical slob fisherman. I really don't see how opening water up to them is going to have a statistically detrimental impact. I know it burns some guys up to see the guy upstream tightlining a wax worm with a spinning rig while they're high sticking Walt's worms but really what is the difference? Both are more fish friendly when done on an April morning than fishing the green drake hatch with barbless coffin flies after the June sun has been warming the stream all day.

Get over it. FFO exists as a management tool. If the same goals can be met by opening the special reg water to all tackle, so be it. The "caving to politics" thing is kind of amusing. Everything is political. Everything. Resource First is an idealistic notion that no government agency can truly adhere to. The fault I see with the PFBC is in adopting that motto, not in not living up to it as viewed by different user groups. Aspiring biologists are taught that concessions must be made and that management decisions will not necessarily be what is best for the ecosystem. That doesn't mean that good management cannot occur. It also doesn't mean that opening up more all tackle c&r/dh is necessarily a bad thing. It is a fine line to walk.

The best thing for the ecosystem is no fishing. Biologists are much better at taking precautions not to spread invasives, after all. Controlled harvests could be made when natural predators did not do their jobs. With enough funding, teams of biologists could manage our waters to have not only the correct biomass but also biodiversity and age class structure. One couldn't fish for them but we could all rest easy knowing that the stream had the ideal fish population in each pool, riffle, and run. Now, who's going to foot that bill? Obviously not the fishermen.

To all those vehemently opposed to all tackle special reg areas, have you fished waters that currently have these regs and noticed an increase in mortality? Or is it just because bait fishing is known to be evil? Or maybe it's the conclusive research paper that documented the ill effects of changing the regs on a statistically significant number of streams? Please forward that one to me. Until then it just sounds like one angler group wanting more water to themselves.
 
When I used to bait fish for trout I thought that wax worms not only caught more fish but the fish were also much more easily released than fish caught with night crawlers. The trout didn't slam the wax worms as hard but it could be that I used a more tight line method with wax worms, much like nymphing now that I think of it.
I believe it is note worthy to mention how many FFers I see fight fish way to long(prob on a 3 weight), struggle to get the fish to hand and then must take a picture holding the 13 in fish before kissing and releasing. I think the use of nets in catch and release trout fishing is a no brainer. Cuts down on the fight with the fish, usually never have to touch the fish or take it out of the water. I mean if your going to be a catch and release enthusiast FF or bait you should take it as far as possible.
 
My brother Mark Nale (column author and part of the study) and Mark Jackson could not post here, so they asked me to post this for them. There are many details to the study that Mark Nale could not include in his brief column. The study authors hope that this will clear up any misconceptions about the research. Mark Jackson wrote this clarification -- so here goes.

The Assault Continues ………….. First and foremost, I love to fish for trout with all methods including bait (minnows), artificial lures, and flies (March browns, sulphurs, light Cahill, slate & green drakes, caddis, and of course the Patriot. On the wet side, I enjoy nymph fishing and occasionally having fun with a Woolley Bugger or Green Weenie”). I have had the good fortune to fly fish with guys like Charlie Meck (he taught me the Tandem Method) and to Spin Fish with the likes of the Nale brothers and their homemade spinners. We are blessed with some outstanding waters here in the state of Pennsylvania. I too believe there is a need to having more special regulation waters to allow for those wanting to have reusable stream and fish populations that create additional quality angling hours and opportunities. I also believe that our Class A Wild Trout Waters should be considered for “no harvest” or “Catch & Release” regulations. With all of that being said, I am one of the organizers of the Bald Eagle Creek Trout Tournament Mortality study. The other study organizers include the nationally known and highly respected Dr. Robert Carline (principal author) and Mark Nale (Retired Biology Teacher and recent President of the PA Outdoor Writers Association). Bob is a fly fisherman and Mark is a Spin Fisherman. All three of us are members of Trout Unlimited and Life members of the Little Juniata River Association. Others participating in helping with the study include people like Cecil Houser (Retired PFBC Chief of the Cooperative Nursery Program), George Jackson (Retired PFBC Fish Culturist and Pathologist), and William Voigt (Long Time Volunteer Coordinator of the Yellowstone National Park Fly Fishing Program).



After reading a number of the posts from yesterday’s article, I felt it important to provide some additional clarity about our study.



1. First and foremost, the fishermen (including men, women, and children with all different skill levels who participated in this study were not pre-selected and in year one had no idea that they were going to be part of a trout mortality study. What they signed up for was fishing in the Bald Eagle Creek Trout Tournament, which is now in its 18th year. A majority of these participants already knew from prior years events and fishing in other similar events, that the primary objective was to catch tagged trout and bring them back into the check in station in “Live Condition”. The incentive is that the trout were worth money (Approximately $17,000 it total prize money paid by local business and individual sponsors for this fundraising event). So, every effort was made to keep the trout alive until they were checked in. Certainly a different mindset than fishing special regulation waters but very similar in regards to the care exhibited by the fishermen with the handling of the trout. So, the participants only became aware of the study during the actual tournament. You cannot get much better than that for an unbiased study!

2. Secondly, the participants were not limited to any tackle or hook restrictions and were able to fish with what they thought would make them successful in catching tagged trout.

3. Trout used were subject to extreme amounts of handling stress both before, during, and after the event.

4. I fish a substantial amount of time on two World Renowned “All Tackle” trout streams in Central PA including Spring Creek and the Little J. In addition to those who enjoy fly fishing on these waters, there are many of my friends that fish both with live bait and artificial lures. In fact, a previous study conducted by Dr. Carline conducted on Spring Creek revealed that in the Benner spring section, which had good public access, 38% of the anglers used bait, they accounted for 52% of the fishing pressure, and 52% of the total catch. Their catch rate was 1.25 trout/hour. In Fisherman's Paradise, the catch rate was 0.77 trout/hour. The Benner Spring section supported a higher density and more trout longer than 13.5 inches than did Fisherman's Paradise.



5. More recent stream based (moving water) bait fishing mortality studies in a handful of states including PA, ID, CT, MD, and WI, have provided overwhelming evidence of much lower mortality from bait fishing (when done properly like in a Special Regulation Area) that supports the notion that more “All Tackle” Special Regulation waters should be considered. Many of the older studies were conducted in raceways or in lakes or ponds.

6. I would suggest that we all take time some time to learn more about these recent mortality studies that have taken place and that it is time for all of us (Fly, Spin, and Bait Anglers) who care about the resource to work together on preserving it.



In closing, The real “Assault” is on the clean-water environmental regulations that affect all of our fishing. Going forward, why not have all fishermen work together to push for more catch & release special regulation waters for all to enjoy regardless of tackle methods?

 
I'm definitely in favor of keeping bait out of delayed harvest streams. Even I fish with bait from time to time on rivers and lakes but it's nice having a section of my local creek where you're only allowed to use artificials, which makes it all the more fun and challenging to me! I love heading down in the spring and fall for Rainbows and Browns with streamers and "jig-flies" and then in the hot days of summer to target Suckers and Carp with nymphs.
 
Where can one get a copy of this study?
 
Opening sections of streams that have for years been under FFO or ALO to bait fishing opens up these streams to more poaching, especially when anglers find out how good the populations of trout are. Dead is still dead.
PFBC has to consider other factors than studies. PA has some of the highest use streams in PA, and on wild trout streams especially they cannot support that heavy use and still be great fisheries regardless of what surveys tell us. I don't believe any survey has been conducted that measured multiple catches of the same fish over a season or several seasons on hooking mortality.

I believe Frank in his post is on the mark with his last sentence, In closing, The real “Assault” is on the clean-water environmental regulations that affect all of our fishing. Going forward, why not have all fishermen work together to push for more catch & release special regulation waters for all to enjoy regardless of tackle methods?"
 
From my brother Mark -

Chaz - I know that this goes against your beliefs, but here are the facts ...

An extensive angler survey was done by the PFBC and the Spring Creek Chapter of Trout Unlimited in 2014. Over 500 volunteer hours were involved. It found the Centre County's Spring Creek has one of the highest angler uses in the state (probably the highest). As you know the stream has All-Tackle Catch & Release regulations - bait and lure fishing is allowed. Spring Creek also supports one of the highest wild trout biomasses in PA - maybe the highest overall.

In my opinion, we should never make laws or regulations based on what "poachers" might do. A lawbreaker is a lawbreaker - if someone is going to break the law by killing trout in a C&R area, do you think that keeping it FFO will stop them from breaking the law?

And ... thanks for recognizing the importance of Mark Jackson's final comments.
 
If you read my brother's column you should know that the Bald Eagle Creek Trout Hooking Mortality Study is not complete - the third year of data collection will occur later this month. In science - the larger the sample size the more accurate the results. Mark is usually good about answering emails. His email address is printed with his column.
 
FrankTroutAngler wrote:
If you read my brother's column you should know that the Bald Eagle Creek Trout Hooking Mortality Study is not complete - the third year of data collection will occur later this month. In science - the larger the sample size the more accurate the results. Mark is usually good about answering emails. His email address is printed with his column.

Ahh, I did miss that the final collection is this month. I'll drop a note to see when it is expected to be published.
 
catch and release fishing a tight line cause acceptable mortality rates but how many of them do you think there are.

Answering johnw from page 1. I think it's the majority in many parts of the state, and the minority in others.

Having grown up fishing NW PA, I'd say 80-90% of all trout anglers most often employ tight line bait techniques. That said, there are very few fly fishermen in those parts.

Now living in SE PA, I see far less of the tight line baiting, and far, far more fly fishing and use of spinners. I think it's generally the same group. The experienced anglers who generally C&R. In some areas they turn to the "better" bait techniques, and in others they turn to spinners and fly gear.

Anyway, I have no doubt that bait fishers employing tight line tactics and wishing to avoid harm, have nearly as low a mortality rate as fly fishermen. I was such a fisherman for a significant period of time and still fish with many of them. The difference is the beginners and those that just don't care (I'll call them the a-holes, lol). With artificials, which includes spinners, it's downright HARD to deep hook a fish. You can still overplay them and handle them poorly but the deep hooking part goes away. With bait, it's pretty easy to "let them take it" a while to "improve your hook rate", lol. That's when they take it deep.

But I think that's the exception rather than the rule. Maybe not for those intent on keeping a stringer full. But for them, who cares, they're keeping fish anyway. But for those practicing C&R I think the vast majority keep mortality rates pretty low, and the study bears that out.
 
FrankTroutAngler wrote:
From my brother Mark -

Chaz - I know that this goes against your beliefs, but here are the facts ...

An extensive angler survey was done by the PFBC and the Spring Creek Chapter of Trout Unlimited in 2014. Over 500 volunteer hours were involved. It found the Centre County's Spring Creek has one of the highest angler uses in the state (probably the highest). As you know the stream has All-Tackle Catch & Release regulations - bait and lure fishing is allowed. Spring Creek also supports one of the highest wild trout biomasses in PA - maybe the highest overall.

In my opinion, we should never make laws or regulations based on what "poachers" might do. A lawbreaker is a lawbreaker - if someone is going to break the law by killing trout in a C&R area, do you think that keeping it FFO will stop them from breaking the law?

And ... thanks for recognizing the importance of Mark Jackson's final comments.
Frank, I more or less agree with not making laws based on what poachers would do, they will break the law regardless. But enforcement can be challenged by heavy use.
The survey on Spring Creek is 1 stream, and I believe the findings, but people are used to releasing the fish there, and many that fish it have fished it for years. It's the other streams I worry about. While I'm somewhat against making FFO water, I don't think bait should be used on wild trout water at all.
 
Back
Top