Troutnut Forum > Fly Fishing Discussion > Ethical / humane question?
| Chris_3g | August 21st, 2007, 12:03 pm | |
| Ithaca, NY Posts: 35 | Some of the streams I fish are tributaries to our lakes which often receive runs of rainbows and / or brown trout. These same tributaries, however, also receive stocked trout via the NY DEC, and these are the fish that I assume I am targeting when I fish them. I practice catch-and-release fishing, and as of late, I have been very mindful to de-barb my hooks. That being said, I recently had the misfortune of hooking a particularly small rainbow (still with parr marks) around the eye. Anyway, I did what I could, but it was clear that I had messed this little rainbow up pretty badly. I released the fish, and aside from an intense feeling of guilt that has lasted for a couple of days, a lingering question has remained as to whether or not I should have released the fish or killed it, in order to be more humane. Do any of you have an opinion or a similar experience? A further question that I wanted to ask is whether or not it is ethical to fish particularly inviting holes in streams where you know that juvenile trout exist, but where you expect larger fish should be holding. I really enjoy fly-fishing, but I am not particularly fond of maiming the trout in the process, especially wild juveniles. I understand that if a wild population exists, there will likely be juveniles present, but there is no way to inform the juveniles to stay home while I fish for their big brothers / sisters. I have fished these tributaries, off and on, most of the season with the idea in my head that the stocked fish will have spread out and moved into the various holes throughout the stream. Out of all of these outings, however, I've only caught two or three trout that I considered to be reasonably sized, and these were mature wild trout. It's not that I don't like catching wild trout - I just don't want to harm the juveniles in the process, because a wild, reproducing population is a very good thing! Thoughts, or am I over-thinking things to start with? Chris. | |
|
These advertisements will disappear if you register. | ||
| Softhackle | August 21st, 2007, 12:54 pm | |
| Wellsville, NY Posts: 145 | Chris, Don't beat yourself up about this. Trout are survivors, and that trout will probably do fine. Remember that trout use other senses, other than their eyes to detect food. Their lateral line is one such way they do so. I once read of a trout that was blind on one side, but that was surviving well. The fisherman that caught and released it knew this because when the fly was cast slightly beyond the fish, it would not take the fly. The trout did take the fly that was fished to it on the close side. Other than the injured eye, the trout was perfectly healthy, and went back to the water to continue its life. There is no way, as far as I know, to fish for trout where you are not going to catch some immature trout, and this is especially true if natural breeding is taking place. Trout face a number of problems as they grow, especially predation--even by larger trout. Many do not make it, but a certain number do--thank God. If you can locate a copy, I'd suggest a video called "The Way Of A Trout". It's an oldie but goodie and was issued by Trout Unlimited which originally released it as a film to show to chapters, etc. My best, Mark | |
| "I have the highest respect for the skilled wet-fly fisherman, as he has mastered an art of very great difficulty." Edward R. Hewitt Flymphs, Soft-hackles and Spiders | ||
| Davez | August 21st, 2007, 12:57 pm | |
| Pennsylvania Posts: 59 | you felt guilt for a few days? yikes, i think i might consider quitting fishing. kidding. yeah its cruel, there will be casualties, however you are making right by fishing debarbed hooks, heavier tippets and not playing them to death. fish bigger flies in those holes. the big fish will eat them, the little guys might hit them, but not hook themselves. good luck. | |
| Jmd123 | August 21st, 2007, 1:21 pm | |
| Posts: 148 | Chris, Dave, and Mark: I MYSELF once caught a rainbow trout already missing it's right eye. Before I found this out, two things about this fish befuddled me - first, I could SEE IT crystal clear, but it didn't seem to care that I was there; and second, it only reacted to insects floating by on it's left side. It took me an hour and a half and several fly changes before it finally struck hard enough to get itself hooked. When I brought it to hand, I discovered why it ignored everything on its right side. While holding it, I thought about taking it home to eat - I was much more into eating my catch back then than I am now - and as I contemplated this it promptly jumped out of my hand and back into the river. So I though, it has survived THIS long with only one eye, so why not let it go? It seemed to be healthy otherwise, nicely colored and no other injuries. I have told this story before, so I'm now wondering if it somehow ended up being the story that you heard! There's an awful lot of similarities, that's for sure. Then again, I can't imagine that this is a unique experience... I once accidentally killed a juvenile largemouth in Missouri while fly fishing a local stream, and it died right in front of me and sank to the bottom in plain sight. Made me feel like SH*T!! It didn't stop me from fly fishing though, not that day or ever since. There will always be the occasional casaulty, so long as it's not happening to EVERY fish you catch. Besides, the crayfish have to make a lving, too.. Jonathon | |
New features!
