bait bans.....good or bad

Please educate me on the merits of bait and/or the banning of bait. I don't use bait mostly because I'm a terrible drift fisherman but I do dislike the mess and the killing of hens just for the eggs. Just looking for insight here.

Bait is a excellent lure for fish. It can be lethal when used improperly because the fish will swallow the bait. But then again so can any kind of hook. I use bait regularly and personally have no trouble with deep hookings. Oregon has a minimum hook size so the smolts can't swallow the hook. I use large hooks and still kill smolts on accident with and without bait due to there sharpness. It is fishing that kills fish with or with out bait we have a impact on our environment. I would like to see some studies done with circle hooks for salmon and steelhead using bait to keep fishing opportunities open. A circle hook doesn't get caught in the stomach when swallowed. It gets caught in the corner of the mouth as it slides out.

------------------
Marty
Steelheader.net marty@steelheader.net

You will find hard-liners on both sides of this debate. On any given day, bait is probably the most effective bait you can use. I use it almost exclusively for steelhead....salmon eggs being the number 1 choice.

Some feel fish are much more likely to swallow bait thus causing bleeding in or around the gills and that this is bad in catch and release fisheries....that's why bait bans are sometimes in effect on catch and release waters.

I also know that that is partially a cop-out because any given lure can be lethal to a fish. For example, I have landed fish that swallowed spoons and spinners...try retrieving those and maintaining a healthy fish. I have seen plug-caught fish where both sets of treble hooks were inside the mouth thus clamping the fishes mouth shut or one set of hooks wrapped around the gill plate causing severe bleeding.

The point is any lure can and will harm fish from time to time...nothing is 100%.

As for myself, I will continue to fish bait as my #1 choice where legal to do so.

P.S. 95% of the fish I catch DON'T swallow the bait...part of the reason is knowing when to set the hook.

Well bait is by far the most lethal tactic to use in rivers for steelhead,chinook and silvers and I would love to speak with or fish next to someone who believes differently. I don't believe a bait ban is necessary in any sort of situation. Eggs are the main reason people want bait bans, because you have to kill females to get them. There are many of ways you can get eggs though. You can purchase them from indians or from certain hatcheries where there is a surplus amount of fish to harvest where most of the eggs are sold to overseas and used in sushi.
In my eyes I've never noticed a high mortality of fish when hooked and released with bait. How many times have you been on a river and seen dead fish laying on the bottom of the river that were released. I rarely have seen fish die because of bleeding for example what about all the fish you catch with gashes in there sides from sea lions and nets they still seem to make it back to there home grounds where when you catch them they still are full of piss and vinegar. I've personally hooked and released fish that were bleeding and caught them a day or two later with my hook that I had cut off still in there gills. Once again they are agressive enough to bite again, fight again and live through releasing them one more time. Ive caught fish with 3to 5 hooks in so called vital areas.
I guess if they ever ban bait they will ban me from fishing, because I will always fish eggs and bait only for the rest of my life.

------------------

Personally, I would support a bait ban from Feb-Oct for steelhead (maybe allow bait in the terminal areas such as Reiter year around) and barbless hooks throughout the year. I believe it would no doubt decrease the mortality, especially with the smolts. The wild fish are aggressive enough that bait isn't really needed.

I agree with Eric, either method is not 100 percent. I've caught fish after fish after fish on bait, all hooked in the jaw; and I've hooked fish on pink worms that were really deep. I can't recall to many winter hatchery brats ever to have have swallowed my bait; although a few summer brats have. I'm sure some of the natives I've caught would have swallowed bait (by the intense pick-up), but all of the native fisheries I fish are baitless/barbless.

And if you're in smolt infested waters, you usually either give up using bait or run out before you do much damage.

Because of this, I would think a bait ban would be necessary only on native fisheries, just to make sure you're on the lower end of average as far as hooking mortality goes. I would also think a bait ban would be useful during periods of downstream smolt migration.

Wit,

There are tons of studies regarding hooking mortality associated with bait, artificial lures, and flies. The issue tends to be debated most by those who have already made up their minds and aren't open to thoughtful persuasion.

One thing is certain. No hook and line fishery is risk free as far as hooking mortality goes. If a particular fishery is open to angling, C&R, no bait, artificials or flies only, then the manager must accept a degree of risk of losing fish to hooking mortality.

Equally certain, but less popularly accepted, is that there is a definite gradation in hooking mortality associated with bait, then lures, then flies. Barbs make a difference in studies of trout fishing, but are less of an issue with steelhead and salmon, due to the size of the fish. Barbed hooks don't make much difference with large fish.

The issue becomes a more visceral issue (gut level knowledge) as angler expertise comes into play. An accomplished bait angler can fish for steelhead for years and seldom allow a steelhead to swallow the bait. A less skilled angler may end up gut-hooking a fair number of fish. If there were data on this, it would get really skewed because skilled anglers with lots of expertise are going to hook far more fish than their less skilled counterparts.

From the reports I've seen and my personal experience I draw a few conclusions. I don't think bait or barbed hooks are a serious conservation issue when anglers are releasing salmon and steelhead. (Killing females for their eggs are potentially a serious indirect effect.) I do think that baitless and barbless are a good way to go when lots of trout, smolts, or juvenile fish are present. When I'm trout fishing, I only use barbless flies because data and personal experience both indicate that will have the lowest mortality rate.

An interesting dilemma occurs this time of year. A lot of us are or will be doing some serious salmon fishing the next two months. We'll be using bait, barbed hooks, and lures the size of our springtime lowland lake trout catch. And the peak of the sea run cutthroat run is on. And they hit anything and everything you can put in the water. My heart just sinks when I reel in a 16" cutthroat with a 2/0 salmon hook sticking out the side of its head. I'm as careful as I can, but I know that fish is facing real long odds at surviving until spawning. A bait ban, and even barbless hooks, don't keep me from having unintended adverse effects on fish I would not choose to harm.

What's a guy to do? I freely acknowledge that fishing is indeed a blood sport. I fully intend to kill some of the fish I catch each year. But for a long time now, I've choosen to always release wild steelhead and cutthroat because their populations are invariably small, and release keeps the overall impact as low as I can without giving up fishing. Add these thoughts to the collection.

Sincerely,

Salmo g.

Since all you are looking for is an opinion, I'll give my two bits.

I am in the process of transitioning myself from a bait fisherman to a flyfisherman. Much of my motivation for doing so is because I hate killing hens for their roe. If I could outlaw or limit the use of roe to a couple of days a week, I would do so.

No one can dispute that using roe is anything but bad for the fish. Consider the increased catches that have to be credited to roe, and the smolts that never existed because of the need for bait.

I haven't used eggs in many years. I only use prawns when I use bait and I don't have any problem catching any species nor releasing them for that matter. In years past the groups I have seen push the bait ban have been the same fly fishing groups. The ultimate goal, in my opinion, is a step towards creating a fly only fishery. Bait ban, lead ban, etc. But, what is so different between a commercial fishery targeted strictly at roe for profit versus the sports fisher who wants the eggs for bait? I don't agree with the "17 pound native hen killed for eggs" but wouldn't a better solution be to outlaw killing the nates?

A funny thing this board is. Just when you are ready to stereotype someone, they turn around and prove you wrong. Interesting

Just wondering, Just how many of you know or have seen serious steelhead fishermen fishing for egg's?

I don't know. I fish a fair amount. I guess I'm paying so much attention to what I'm doing that I miss alot. I can't recall, except for some Chum fisheries, anyone killing fish just for the eggs or saying that that's what they're doing. Eggs for me have always just been a bonus along with a fish I intended to eat. It would certainly disturb me to see someone actually catching a fish on a river, stripping the eggs and discarding the carcass, especially any stock that is threatened. That seems a waste to me, which is why the regs prohibit it, among other reasons. Certainly, anyone who would advertise that that is what they are doing has a screw loose.

I agree... The eggs are a bonus, and i believe thats the way MOST sportsman feel!

Hey wit45cal I have a solution for your not wanting to kill the hens just for the eggs; why dont you also kill them for the meat also? Now you dont have to kill them just for the eggs anymore.

I guess you westsiders need to know what goes on here on the east side of the mountains. Perhaps you guys always get to fish for fresh run fish.

Unless you really like to eat fish, or happen to get a fish as soon as it completes its 300 or more mile swim, the fish here are not worth keeping for their meat. A good number of people here keep the hens for their eggs, not their meat. On the Snake river tribs I fish, I rarely see hatchery hens released. Its typical to see bucks released. At the beginning of the run (October), my cacth ratio is typically 2/3 hens. By March it has turned to 3/4 bucks. I credit selective harvest for that.

Just a few thoughts on this subject. After many years of bait fishing with much success, I have recently switched to other techniques and have actually increased my catch rate. I fish exclusively with jigs or spoons for Steelhead and in the last two years have seen a dramatic improvement in my catch rate. Additionally I am always fishing legally in our ever increasing C & R seasons. I am not endorsing a bait ban, but rather just giving my 2 cents worth. You can catch just as many, if not more Steelhead with aritficial lures. Reading water and presentation are the keys to success with these methods. I believe my chosen methods allow me to cover a greater variety of holding water than conventional drift gear. In addition I am losing far less tackle than when I was drift fishing. Good fishing!