Recreational fishing is also a way to connect to nature : I have seen people posting catches on Inat (France) of non authorized fishes (rays in particular are not easy to differentiate). Pointing to them that this specie was on the banned list certainly helped them to be more responsible since (I believe most people are honest !)
As written in the FAQ, for What is iNaturalist?: āā¦a wide variety of nature enthusiasts, including, but not exclusive to, hikers, hunters, birders, beach combers, mushroom foragers, park rangers, ecologists, and fishermen.ā
I remember one observation of fishes where the discussion included the observer stating that they ate the fish after photographing them. So I added the observation field, āInteraction ā Preyed upon by: Human.ā That is an ecological interaction.
A couple of points:
- Donāt be guided by the ABA as their rules apply to not counting restrained birds for your personal life list - that has little to do with āscienceā and everything to do with listing.
- I know my local bird banding station will take photographs of restrained birds before releasing them and the pigeon you mention myself well have been from a similar source. Catch and release under those circumstances is (Iām a scientist) perfectly acceptable.
Interesting article. I donāt fish but would enjoy building a little tank to photo some fish in if I get the chance. Thanks for sharing that
Thatās a thing to add to a lot of my berry observations.)
I envy people with that fish problem, right now I canāt find some species of fish I saw a lot in my childhood, one is highly invasive, found everywhere, but not if youāre not fishing! So, as someone with no will to harass fishermen about their catch, such observations are pretty unique, now at least I have an underwater camera.
It is incredible how nature protection can be efficient : When I was young (the 70ā) I never saw a grouper in the mediterranean waters - an uncle told me then how he could easily spearfish groupers in north africa.
After decades of protection in Europe, look at the observation map of Epinephelus marginatus : a desert in north africa, plenty of them in northern Mediterranean, in a few meters of water !
We shouldnāt forget that many of those protective matters are based on exploitation of foreign lands, itās easy to save fauna around you when you can eat something fished further away.
Your remark is quite appropriate.
My own experience is that protection does not diminishes fishing but, in the contrary, largely increases catches (local fish markets in southern Corsica are opulent now vs the 70ā).
In my opinion the issue is more about short term vs long term, the capacity to enforce a protecting regulation and, of course, corruption in some countries.
We should not partner these behaviours, and importing from irresponsible country should be banned.
My intent was to use the ABAās guidelines as an example rule. I am not suggesting that iNat adopts a similar rule at all. Bird banding (something I partake in myself) is similar to catch and release fishing, but in my opinion it causes slightly less damage. Hope this clears up the confusion.
Worth mentioning that, at least for many bodies of fresh water, recreational fishing may not exactly be entirely āwildā since the fish that are caught are stocked from hatcheries, for example in California thereās Hot Creek Trout Hatchery.
Also, a somewhat related topic on the forum: Peopleās thoughts on duck hunting?
I have an extra ladies wetsuit, snorkel and fins if you need to borrow some gear :]
If you can freedive below about 4-5 meters, water clarity opens up tremendously, at least in saltwater.
where they do, enforcement is scant and easy to avoid.
Sadly Iām not good at it and not the best swimmer overall, but for now Iām trying to focus on freshwater species as Iām far more often near rivers than seas, I even created a list just to show which species Iād like to see in next ten years or so, (excluded different big carp-like species) sadly some are very rare, like sturgeons and salmons, but they did live here before, so thereās always a chance to see one. These are observations I got this year from underwater, I need to buy a mask to be able to focus normally and yeah, water is not clear, but thatās how these fish live.
Itās a similar kind of adrenaline to when youāre trying to catch a snake or lizard, and abruptly get your hands on it. At least, for that initial grab-and-yank of the bait. I never did any fishing that came with a fight, always with fish small enough that you reel them in right away. Excitement at success, probably a dash of āI caught the prey!ā from leftover opportunistic omnivore instincts.
Just wanted to point out that something like and 18% of fish caught and released end up dying. I think many people who practice this feel like it is a harmless and fun activity, but it results in a lot of mortality. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11160-005-2175-1
Sorry if that is behind the paywall for folks ā the key data are in the abstract.
I used to go line fishing occasionally, but after finding out the mortality rates of released fish, I quickly stopped. Plus, I was never very good at it anyway :P caught a couple Crescent Grunters (Terapon jarbua) and not much else. Iāll still dipnet in creeks for rainbowfish and sleepers occasionally. I have no issue with others uploading observations of their own line-caught fish though - itās all data, after all. If youāre gonna be catching fish anyway, why not inat them?
The range is crazy for this. It makes me think it depends a lot on the fish type and also how careful people are when handling them. I think it is 5% - 30% that die. If it were just 5, Iād feel a lot more comfortable. If it were just 30, Iād say it doesnāt seem worth the risk. Kind of an awkward range to have, if Iām remembering correctly. (I looked it up like an hour ago so if I donāt remember it right thatās pretty darn embarrassing.)
This topic was automatically closed 60 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.