Why do people put fish on rocks for pictues????

[The_Sasquatch]

Ohhhh! Gotcha! I just meant they may be ignorant on what playing them to the point of exhaustion and then releasing them back into warm water would do to a trout's long-term survival. So for myself, I thought, "Oh the fish swam away...he's fine!"

 

[wbranch]

Sasquatch wrote;

I thought, "Oh the fish swam away...he's fine!"

I have two short anecdotes about releasing fish back into the river after unhooking and reviving. No pictures were taken of either fish.

A couple of years ago I was wading on the main stem Delaware and had just landed a 15" rainbow. I netted it, put the rod under my arm and took the hook out while holding the trout over the net. I held the fish in the river a few seconds and it seemed ready for release. I let it go and it started to swim away and as it swam into the 5' deep water a striper of about 12# came out of nowhere and grabbed that 15" trout like it was a minnow and swam away with it. I was totally shocked. That striper most likely saw that trout fighting on the line and was attracted to the commotion. While I thought the trout had fully recovered it hadn't and fell prey to the striper.

The other episode was while wading on the Missouri River in Montana. They are many flocks of pelicans on the Missouri and they often can be seen flying over the river searching for a trout that is exposed so they can swoop down for a meal.

I had landed a heavy 19" rainbow, removed the hook, cradled it with both hands in the river to revive it and in a brief time it swam away down river. By the time it had gotten only about 60' down river a pelican swooped in and dove right into the river and grabbed that trout and as it came out of the water it was already in the process of swallowing it.

Other times I have had to purposely break off trout there because the pelicans are flying overhead and can see the commotion of a fighting trout and swoop right down into the river to capture it.

My point is that sometimes when we feel we have revived the trout they still are not at 100% potential and are an easy meal for a blue heron, and eagle, or a weasel or otter.

 

[salmonoid]

There's value in providing feedback to anglers about what good fish handling etiquette is. Or maybe rather than placing a value judgement on someone's fishing handling (and calling it "good" or "bad"), help educate* why a dry hand might hurt, or a heart squeeze might hurt, or why a fish that flops on the ground might incur damage when it whacks the ground with such force that it causes internal organ damage. Then the angler can make a choice about what they do with a fish. Or maybe they'll feel so bad that they become a former angler, because fishing by it's very nature is always potentially detrimental to a fish's well being.

But it is not an "either/or" proposition when it comes to conservation; one can educate about proper fish handling as well as advocate for access and proactive stewardship of the resource. And whatever other stressors might exist in a fish's environment (like water temperature and the relationship to dissolved oxygen and why low DO is bad for trout), or the build up of lactic acid that occurs during any fight (but especially how that might be fatal when some esteemed flyfisherperson decides to fight a trophy for 20 minutes on 7x in 70 degree water), or why fish are stacked up in front of a small tributary during the summer (hint - thermal refuge!).

FWIW, I don't advocate rough handling of fish. But I have had situations where I handled a fish rougher than I may have wished. And I have had occasions where I caught that same fish one or two or even three times again. They're tougher animals than some flyfishers give them credit to be.. And maybe the fourth time I handled the fish, it did succumb and that's why I didn't catch it the fifth time. Or maybe it got whacked by a heron or a merganser or washed away in a flood, or froze to the bottom in anchor ice, or starved to death.

Which causes more damage to trout in Spring Creek (Centre County)? Anglers? Or development in and around State College and University Park?

*educate as in not brow-beating about how much of a simpleton someone is because they do this that or the other thing, but tactfully and diplomatically helping a person understand whatever point an individual is trying to make

 

[tomgamber]

geangler wrote:
Because their there, released unharmed.

they're there...

sorry, couldn't resist.

I don't take pics any more. If its s good fish, I'll remember.

 

[ryansheehan]

troutbert wrote:
The problem with laying trout on the rocks or on the ground is that they flop around, because of their natural escape instincts.

Flopping around on a hard surface they are getting battered.

If you briefly lift a trout up to take a photo, then return it to the water, there is none of that battering taking place.

So the two things are not equivalent, and not close.

Exactly! There are much safer ways to take a picture than putting a fish on rocks, wet or dry.

 

[ryansheehan]

Maurice wrote:
I was going by your last comment. about the thermal refuge fishing...If someone knows they can catch fish on 7x tippet and and that fish are in a thermal refuge. They are not ignorant.

Q: Whats the difference between ignorance and apathy?

A: I don't know...and I don't care.

As Troutbert indicates, we have all improved our practice of C&R through education. And through education, right or wrong, I believe we are getting a little overly sensitive about the effect of placing of a fish on a rock or in the grass for a quick photo.

Like I said, I think the landing and extended handling during the "hero shotting" of large trout does far more damage than the loss of a little fish slime when biologically the fish are producing an extra layer just because of the stress from being caught and played.

It bugs the OP to the same degree that seeing that dead mackeral eye in all his hero shots bugs me. But I ain't making a thing about it. Its his fish for the day, if it dies, it dies...

I think skillets are more detrimental to trout than any rock or bed of grass.

So let me get this straight, you think putting a fish on a rock is a better way to take a picture then lifting them out of the water for 2 to 3 seconds for a hero picture? Wow. As far as the dead mackeral eye do you have any basis for that? I have a picture of a fish after I bonked him on the head, guess where he's looking, down. Fish often look out and then down I saw it today when I was on the river.

 

[krayfish2]

I use a rubber net and try to keep the fish in the water .....until the photo opportunity. Anyone that's fished with me knows the camera is ready and you have enough time to pick it up, smile and release it. Usually

 

[troutbert]

This video shows the correct C&R technique:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OdnHGm5VGwM

 

[salvelinusfontinalis]

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OLFlyY-Lmj4

 

[FarmerDave]

tomgamber wrote:

I don't take pics any more. If its s good fish, I'll remember.

We agree again. What's up with that?

And I figure if I get to the point that I can't remember the fish, I won't remember the picture, either.

 

[pete41]

never took a picture of a fish in my life-if it whipped me,couldn't and if I whipped it ,didn't wanna gloat.

 

[acesedgley]

I remember when I first got into fly fishing finding a pod of trout at the mouth of a tributary and having a blast trying to catch them.
I had no idea at the time why they were there. There are those of us that did not have the knowledge when we first started out. We needed time for the right information to get to us, however that happened.

 

[bigjohn58]

I am going to go so far as to cutting my hooks at the bend this year so all I get is the quick sudden tug on the line. No holes in the fish, no fighting so no stress, quick release, fish never leaves the water, and I can tell everyone it was a monster! Oh and I am going to go strictly synthetic with my flies so I am not using any animal products! Vegan flies!

 

[steveo27]

make sure your synthetics are free range and gluten free too.

 

[tomitrout]

Also too, no petroleum based synthetics...

 

[FarmerDave]

If you are going vegan, silk line is also out. It exploits little worms.

Bamboo rods would be acceptable, but just about everything else must be hemp based.

 

[bigjohn58]

Oh boy...I am going to have to rethink this Vegan thing again!

PS I just bought a pair of Merrell shoes that were "vegan" and it cracked me up! I was like what the heck is a pair of vegan shoes? Guess its no leather but I figured since it was all mesh and foam for the most part it was pretty self explanatory.

 

[FarmerDave]

With a name like Big John, you should rethink it.

Or is that kind of like me being called Tiny.

 

[ryansheehan]

Vegan shoes are made from the finest vegans on the planet.

 

[krayfish2]

Is Merrell still running the special where you get a free Merkin with every pair of shoes purchased?