Uh, no. It's the bait user group period.

I'm curious why no one has commented on the birth control harming salmon link I posted.

Could it be that is one of the big factors of declines? Any place you have large population centers, this could be a cause. Look at the population areas on Vancouver Island that have suffered huge declines.

Given that bait fishing is a multi-million dollar a year industry in this state, if the bait fishermen were being singled out, I think you would see much more of a stink raised that a few threads on a couple Internet BB's.

Plus I just dont see it...the previous studies quoted do state that bait creates serious mortality amongst juvenille salmonids...you can not deny it.

Anyways...I think that is about all I have to say on this issue for now.

They better not ban bait. If they do there better be a ban on nets in the rivers too. Goeduck; The only fish I have seen die from being hooked by bait is when it gets bonked in the head.

Holy smokes batman, this thread just blew up
Anyways CFM,
I did leave out a few details, no my friends were not killing smolt after smolt, even though they insisted on staying with spinners they did do the "right thing" and switch to barbless single points. And yes I would be VERY quick to remind anyone fishing and killing smolts to do the same. I knew someone would catch that but I took my chances as I am not one post a short novel.
The whole point I was trying to make is that bait alone does not kill smolts, and I think several posters here have made that point so I wont harp on it anymore.

Rob,
You said that there are summer runs in the river year round in response to my gripe that the proposed bait ban is too long (APR-DEC). Thanks for the education but I already knew that. What I was trying to say is that during the months of Sep,Oct, Nov most folks arent targeting summer steel, they are after salmon. Besides that the smolt issue is not that big a problem during these months....so yes I still think the proposed ban is too long and sorry for any mis-communication.

There, Ill check back later tonight when this thread is five pages long. :rolleyes:

"They can have my eggs when they pry em from my cold dead hands"
RL

Quite frankly I think the main problem with bait fisheries as far as smolts are concerned is people going"trout" fishing on June 1 and making easy limits of smolts.

One thing all the hooking mortality studies showed was that most mortalities occurred as the result of serious hook injuries because the fish were hooked deep...

Rob..finally I agree with you on something....I really think you are correct here. It isn't the vast majority of serious fishermen who endanger the smolts as much as it is the rookies and little kids with their worms.

When I trout fish it is in selective fisheries where artificial lures with a single barbless hook are the only thing allowed..no scents either. I always see the Power Bait people breaking the law but for the most part we all catch and release safely.

I noticed while helping with a couple of kids fishing events this year that many of the parents were insisting on catch and release as they held the squirming trout in the air by the leader with the hook buried in the fish's stomach. They were trying to teach little Johnny and Mary that releasing fish is the way to go. They just weren't educated. They were really going through the motions of being politically correct without a thought of releasing the fish unharmed. Just don't keep it. That is what they understand C&R to mean. Do not keep a fish. Even if it is a hatchery trout. So there are so many of these people around the rivers now that maybe strict laws have to be tried. The quality lakes I fish now are loaded with float tubers and pontoon boaters with their fly rods...wall to wall..so it isn't the solitude anymore...I think that is reserved for pay to fish ranches.

i think you hit the nail on the head. a lot people who fish bait don't know how to release a fish(not to say a lot of artificial using people don't either). don't mean to stereotype, but these guys are usually in the crowd that you see at local lakes who use 9 foot surf rods and 20lb test to thow 2oz sinkers with a giant gob of power bait several hundred yards...to catch a 9" trout

i went trout fishing on the deschutes river(thurston co) yesterday, using worms for bait. i caught several trout/smolts, none were hooked deep. i would bring the fish to the bank, wet my hands, and slide the hook out gently. i think the problem with mortality is that a lot of people don't know the proper way to release a fish, especially sensitive young smolts.

Geez, it took me long enough to read all the posts. I fished the Cowlitz last week, actually drifted, using spinners and caught alot of smolts and some sadly were bleeding profusely. I did mangage a hatchery steely on a spoon. My point is the real world often does not jibe with the science. Ive grown up on the Cowlitz and ill say ive really noticed no difference. Usually when im bait fishing im using a single hook, and when im using hardware i usually use a treble so whats worse? By the way it seems that 4 salt argues for the sake of arguing.

so aunty m could you please tell me what the heck is anadromous highways ive never herd this term before please explain this to me.

OK JJ,
Can you please post the scientific data that you have that proves that bait catches more smolts than other methods?? Without that data the mortality rate science means nothing.

Good point Duroboat. I'm not aware of any studies on this.

It would be a difficult study to do given that the anglers skill plays a such large part in how effective a fishing rig is.

It also depends on the size of the rig. Obiously a smolt will have a tough time eating half a skein of eggs or a horse herring, but a sandshrimp tail or single egg or worm is different. Same goes for hardware.

When you fish really small rigs you will catch a lot more smolts

If on average bait and artificials are equivalent in fish catching ability (which I doubt). Then baits is killing 3-10 times more released smolts than would the equivalent hardware.

If bait is twice as effective as artificials then you're talking 6-20 times more dead released smolts.

I agree with grandpa2, that trout fishermen fishing worms are a large part of the problem as far a smolt mortality goes. If you could figure out how to stop that, then maybe this bait ban wouldn't be necessary to protect smolts.

Geoduck


You say: "One thing I know about science is that when there is an abundance of studies saying the same thing and none in disagreement, the thing they agree on is almost always true."

Don't you find it a little bit strange that the persons who paid for the studies always seem to get the results that they had paid to get? It all falls back to how the protocols were set! The other side of that coin is; that sport fishermen who "like to harvest" have historically been to darn cheap to spend the money on studies to counter the studies that the other user groups have done.

You say;" So show me some studies that says bait doesn't cause higher hooking mortalities."

Like I had just said; i.e. sex, you get what you pay for!

Again you say; "All the many studies are in general agreement fishing bait causes increased hooking mortality on released fish."

Gee, I wonder why? Where was the science that showed that it "wasn't" both the combination of handling and hooking that caused the mortality? We are talking about smolts here. Any handling of these fish during their smolting process can kill them! Like I said earlier, I have raised hundreds of thousands of them and it doesn't take much handling to really screw them up (plus hooking). You know as well as I do, its all in how you designed the study protocols that determines how the outcome of a study will be!

And you say again; "The science is clear, bait kills smolts." Yep you're right, but there is also clearer science that says; every other method of fishing kills fish too! So if they can justify closing these areas to bait fishing, then they should also be closed to all types and methods of fishing and yes that even means c&r too! This sounds like a court case begging to happen!

Finally, you said;
"Despite enjoying bait fishing now and again, theres only one way to find out. Lets do the experiment on at least a few rivers for a few fish generations. Maybe the skagit or the sky and one of the penisula rivers."

Not a real bad idea, but are you willing to be the one who tells these fishermen that their river is now closed for bait fishing experiments?

Geoduck, you seem to be a pretty smart guy, but I have my doubts about using science when the protocols have been preset to achieve a preordained conclusion. I got my fill of this one sided science during the 6 years of almost weekly if not daily meetings dealing with fish and environmental studies. I leaned just how well a study can be arrange to get the results that are wanted. Other then that, we are not that far apart on our thinking.

Thanks for not getting too excited when I question or disagree with you on this subject.


Sparky:

You said that "The Washington Council of Trout Unlimited is about the most conservative state council in all the country...they came damn close to not supporting statewide wild steelhead release." Let me share a little history with you about TU and how screwed up they really are. During the relicensing of the Tacoma Cowlitz River Projects, we (CPR-Fish) worked together with Friends of the Cowlitz (FOC), TU, and American Rivers (AR). While we (CPRF) and the FOC) "thought" that we were all working together, TU and American Rivers were silently working together behind the closed doors with Tacoma to cut a deal that would allow TU and AM to have much more control over the future of the Cowlitz hatchery production then any other sport fishing organizations. Kind of sounds like WT doesn't it?

So TU and AM cut the deal (the Settlement Agreement) with the devil (Tacoma Power) that would only allow TU to be the only voting none governmental member on the Fishery Technical Committee (FTC). By doing this they would be the "only" voice that would be representing the entire sport fishing groups in Washington. The FTC will have extreme powers and opportunities to cut back the future hatchery production in the Cowlitz River. So I believe that WT and TU are made from the same genetic stock! AS far as I am concerned, I wouldn't trust either one of them as far as I could through them and this opinion was formed AFTER working with TU for over 3 years! TU may have started out doing good things, but they have really gotten carried away now.


Cowlitzfisherman

I'm not sure that's relevant to the debate. The issue isn't so much whether bait catches more smolts than gear, it is whether it a) catches any significant number of smolts, and b) is significantly more harmful to the smolts than alternate gear.

And yes, Sparkey, I do have a sled. It is clearly possible to both own a sled and like to fly fish. I also own a box full of bait and plug gear. I am hardly a purist. I just want the fish to survive. Like you, I'm a little puzzled by this selfish desire to use a method that disproportionately kills immature fish, which any fisherman with any experience knows in their heart that bait does.

Some people just go through life with blinders on, I guess.

SH,
Its only not relevent if you dont want to do what is best for the fish. Otherwise the math is very important. It seem that alot more studys need to be done on this issue.

Look CFM,

You obiously are truly cynical about science and peoples use of the scientific method. Ethics is a big deal to scientists and I'm sure those that the vast majority of studies done are carried out ethically. Like any field, there are few bad apples. But even if half the hooking mortality studies are fatally flawed or cooked as you imply ( a huge overestimate I am sure). That still leaves the other half. And you still have presented nothing other than casual observation to support your position. Do you have any concrete evidence of your positions?

It is clear that no amount of scientific evidence would sway you. So I will not spend anymore of your time or mine trying.

What would you propose that we do to most efficiently manage our fisheries since science is meaningless to you?

Shall we rely on the casual observations of CFM to determine how we harvest fish?

Perhaps we should read tea leaves instead?

You can knock science all you like, but until there is a better alternative thats what we're stuck with.

If you've invented a better way to manage fisheries, we're all ears . . .

Geoduck,

I think you are right. No science will ever persaude some people. It never will be enough or it was done by the wrong group of people, etc.

Never mind any facts or studies from now on in the state of washington they are all too biased.


JJ

JJ,
Why havent you posted the facts you have that show true catch data to support the bait fishing mortality claim?? No where in this thread have I seen anything that proves more fish die from bait fishing than the other methods of fishing in a natural setting.I cant believe how many people will jump on the "ban bait" bandwagon without all the data needed to come to a positive conclusion. SH is right about some people having blinders on.The only thing your scientific data has shown as fact is that all forms of fishing has some mortality involved. And from only using the very limited data shown you would have to conclude that the rivers should be closed to all fishing when smolts are present and C+R fishing should be banned all togather due to possible mortality.

Remember folks, we went down this road not too long ago...(early January...5 months ago actually...Holy Sh*t, where the f*ck did the year go??)

Anyways, visit Drastic Times Call for Drastic Measures as there is excellent info to be had in that thread and if I get bored enough, I might just post some of the highlights.

As posted by Smalma:

Hooking mortality -
As pointed out by CWUgirl there is quite a bit of information available on hooking mortality. Especially for trout (applicable to steelhead parr and smolts) where mortaltiy of bait caught fish has been consistently found to be in the 30 to 50% range. When thinking about hooking mortality it is useful to divide your consideration on the fish being impacted. Hooking mortaltiy with bait on adult steelhead is generally lower than that for trout with values for winter fish typically pegged around 10%. For spawn-out steelhead (kelts) it is closer to that found for trout - they are actively feeding and the likehood of being hooking in critical areas about the same as trout (more than 30%).

Absolute mortality form hooking mortaltiy is difficult to pin down in studies - are fish dying from hooking mortality or from the handling as part of the study. However when various aspects are compared the same study we can see how various gear etc comapres to each other (may not know what the mortlatiy maybe but we can see whether one is twice the other). A local study that may be useful here is one done by U of W and WDFW on sea-run cutthroat on the Stillaguamish where mortality from various size hooks and arificals. Bottom line:
Mortality with bait and # 10 hooks was 39.5%
with bait and #6 hooks was 46.5%
with bait and #2 hooks was 58.1%
with bait and #1/0 hooks was 40.7%
with spinner with teble hook - 23.8%
with spinner with single hook - 15.9%

The bait was night crawlers. The spinners were #2 Blue Fox etc with either #4 treble or # 6 siwash.

Another thing to remember is that during the summer there is a lot of fishing going on that is not targeting steelhead.

More excellent facts and some wonderful insight courtesy of Smalma (whats new?? ):


Stlhead -
I can appreciate your desire for consistent state wide regulations. However should the management be for the most conservative need or tailored to the needs of an individual system. For example in Sparkey's example on the Sky the early June closure was suggested becaused there are still numbers of fish still in the system. On the Sky wild winters begin spawning in early to mid-March, peaks in late April and continues into June. But that varies from system to system. On the Skagit the fish begin spawning in late March/early April, peaks mid-May and continues into July. On some coastal streams spawning begins in February,peaks in early April and ends in late May.

Do we have one size fits all regulation and keep all rivers closed until the 4th of July (protects the Skagit fish)? It seems to me if we want to balance resource protection with fishing opportunity then have some variation is desireable.

Sparkey-
Authors were Pauley and Thomas (U of W). If you can't find a copy give me a call. In another study the incidental steelhead parr caught were included and the mortality on them was the same (again over 30%). I choose to cite the above study as a variety of hooks sizes and lures were included in the same study and both issues seemed to be of concern in this discussion.

I don't know of any estimates of the number of incidental smolts being caught. However consider for a moment - there are about 80,000 steelhead fishers in the state. Lets say that 50% of those use bait (could be more or less) and each catch 10 juvenile steelhed a year that would be 400,000, applying a 35% mortality yields 140,000 dead fish. If those fish would have had typially over-winter survival (50%) than would be 70,000 smolts. Given normal (is there such a thing?) smolt to adult survival that would be the same as 7,000 wild adult steelhead - almost identical to the average number of wild steelhead killed annually state wide in the mid-1990s. Of course that is only an hypothical and the number could be higher or lower - you each can decide for example whether the estimate of 10 juveniles per year per angler is high or low. I also realize that with that number of fish being caught even with artifical lures there would be significant numbers of dead fish - just a whole bunch less than with bait.

In debates on this issue one aspect that is often ignored is the effectiveness of bait. We are passionate about keeping our "eggs" because they are so darn effective for most anglers. Here "eggs" really means all bait and/or scents. That means we are dealing with a situation with both high catch rates and high mortality rates.

Hope some of the above is useful.

Tight lines
Smalma

And JJ with some excellent facts:

I just dug out some more hooking mortality reports on trout.

1: Rainbow trout Bait 30% artificial 5-10% Fly 5-10%
Mongillo, PE 1984 A summary of slmonid hooking mortality. Washington department of Game, Fish management division

2: Rainbow trout Bait 21.6-32.1% Fly 3.9% No artifical numbers
Schisler, George, J 1995 Survival of Rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) caugth and released on scented artificial baits. MS Thesis, Colorado State Universit

3:Resident trout different species Bait 31.% artificial 4.9% Fly 3.8%
Trotter, Pattrick 1995Hooking mortality of trout. Fly Fisherman 26(3)16-27

4: Resident trout different species Bait 25% Artificial 5% Fly 5%
Wydoski, R. S. 1977 Relation of hooking mortality and sublethal hooking stress to qualy fishery management In RA Barnhart and TD Roelofs (ed.) Catch and Releas fishing as a management too. Humboldt State University.

Again these are the statsitcs I have found in Report by Hooton from BC in April 2001. I don't know about the individual experiments so I will let the numbers stand for themselves.

JJ