Hey all. I’ve been using iNaturalist for almost a year now but only recently have I started getting involved with the Forums. I figure this would be another good place to ask this question.
I am an avid recreational fisherman, and I practice catch-and-release 99% of the time I go out. So you can imagine I’ve had to contend with people who call me and my actions cruel and abusive to fish. They cite statistics that claim even if the fish are handled properly the trauma they have after being released causes them to starve to death (iirc the number is 1-3% mortality rate). And then there’s also the whole animal cruelty side of the argument, ethics and morals and whatnot. Which of course leads me to a quandary - am I really being respectful to nature if I have such a profound effect on the fish I catch?
Of course, these people are activists with little to no credentials in the fields of biology and ecology, but I know there are actual scientists who have decades of experience using iNaturalist, or at least people who look into these issues with actual scientific depth. I’m curious to know what the members of this community think of this issue.
Catch and release fishing is totally fine in my opinion as long as you handle the fish properly. Some fish species are more delicate than others. Trout for example are delicate so I try to use barbless hooks and a net. Bass and panfish are more sturdy so I use barbed hooks. Fishing is a ton of fun because of the all different species you can catch and the places you go to catch them.
I’m not a scientist, but my personal observations in 10 years of fishing is that pinching down the barb helps, but it can still be difficult to remove hooks, and sometimes the fish still thrash right when you touch the hook, seemingly in response to pain from moving the barb, which doesn’t happen with hooks that you buy barbless (these can be ordered online, most tackle shops don’t have them)
I also don’t use trebles, on crankbaits I take the trebles off and just put a single barbless hook on the front split ring (I’ve had issues with swallowed hooks when I put the hook on the rear), or wherever the treble was attached if there was only one treble to start
On lures with 3 trebles I put the single hook on the middle split ring, but having never had a fish go after a lure that size, I can’t really attest to the effectiveness of that set up
As for the risk of death after release, I think this is largely just a matter of careful handling, and avoiding those species that studies have shown are not really suitable for catch and release due to high mortality rate (certain salmon on the ocean, hammerhead sharks, and anything that has a swim bladder and lives really deep)
I’ve got no problem with fishing as long as it is done sustainable. I have no data to fall back on, but the introduction of catch and release has been a welcome thing. I also don’t have a problem with duck hunting - they recognised a long time ago that if they wanted to continue that practice, they would have to practice conservation as well. Enter Ducks Unlimited, which really does great work at restoring wetlands. Mammal hunting I consider so-so. Limits are set, but (at least in some parts of Manitoba) moose and elk populations are dodgy.
I guess my message is just do it sustainably - make sure you know how to handle the fish safely so they will be sure to survive. I don’t, so I would not resume fishing until after I found out how. I don’t hunt, so that’s not an issue for me. You should get some decent answers here.
The original purpose of fishing was to catch fish to eat, and it’s a bit strange to me that this is often not the case. My suggestion is that if you catch another brook trout, you kill it, process it and eat it. That way you’re managing an invasive species, but not being wasteful and killing for no other reason.
I’ve never understood catch and release. That’s got to mess up the fishes day, frightening, painful. It’s just not a “sport” to me when it’s another creature.
There are rules and regulations in fishing and hunting, for good cause. Invasive species and diseases, keeping healthy herd numbers. Many well considered reasons.
Hunting and fishing aren’t games to me, but a source of food. There is no reason to fish or hunt if you are not able to handle the death of your prey.
I do hunt deer.
FWIW I grew up in a catch-and-release household in Hawaii. My dad was for it because he wanted the fish to still be around to breed. I do feel odd about it, though, I agree it’s a weird thing to do to a fish.
Regardless, let’s make sure we’re here to understand each other’s perspective, even if we don’t agree with each other.
I have no problem with other people catch and release.
Most of them friends who are fine with including me for the friendship and fun. Quiet trips, I can read and still be there…
That seems like a strong word. Sadistic usually means that the sadist enjoys the pain of others. In the case of my father and may other sport anglers, I don’t think they find direct enjoyment fromt he fish’s pain, but enjoy the overall experience of fishing. Making the fish suffer is not the goal.
I’m not into fishing in general,but let’s please not immedately label a group of people. Instead, let’s recognize that there’s a lot of nuance.
Angler here; it has crossed my mind occasionally, but I admit I do prefer to not think about it. For better or for worse, I tend to rationalize it by saying (not entirely untruly imo, but I’m open to y’all’s thoughts of course) that without recreational fishing, I fear there would be much less funding and certainly less public interest in local fisheries and fish conservation. Living in Washington, the local salmon fishery is a big example. I’m not as familiar with this one, but I think it’s fair to say that the striped bass fishery is a good example as well.. Though it is worth nothing that the linked website also admits that teaching safe catch and release is important. There is also the issue of them in California which to my understanding hasn’t been great for the local ecosystems (especially for salmon, I’d imagine). Would love to hear some local/expert opinions on the latter example especially.
I‘m opposed to it. At least when done with a hook instead of a small net.
I just cannot imagine having a hook pierce the fish and it then being dragged by that wound (sometimes with significant force) to be anything but painful.
I personally could not justify doing that to an organism for any reason apart from depending on it for food or for environmental protection. And due to the popularity of recreational fishing, I find some of the practices surrounding it quite perverse (e.g.: „Restocking“ overfished waters by dropping fish from planes, just so they can be fished empty again).
Hmm okay you have lost me. Catch and release is a sport, a hobby - lost me again. However if you catch the ‘invasive alien’ fish and kill them - that is sciency - and I am with you.
And for more science - research on the fish caught for human food - which contains … caffeine … pharmaceuticals … microplastic. If you fish is in a lake or river downstream from town / city sewage works the analysis would be interesting?
I have a friend who has always loved fishing. And now he’s just finishing his PhD on something fish-related and will doubtless go on to a job that helps protect our oceans.
Conversely there is much official fuss where I work whenever we want to go out and show young people all the marvellous invertebrates (“but what if you accidentally kill something rare?!!” - hmm how will you even know if anything rare is there or indeed how to identify anything if you don’t look?).
So I think you have to bear in mind the big picture? If fishing promotes an understanding and respect for nature in individuals (and leads to people doing things in its interest generally), and you do the best you can to Respect The Fish (or invertebrates or whatever) - then I think the overall effect is positive, isn’t it?