Jump to content

Catch and release study


Norm M

Recommended Posts

What you find to be obvious isn't necessarily so. In fact, in this case it's simply not true.

 

"Rough fish" have no inheret tolerance for handling. If you value experience , then consider my experience with thousands of hours electrofishing, seining, gill netting, fyke netting, lab culture, pond rearing and hook and line fishing. I can tell you that gizzard shad, suckers, most minnows, and all darters are often less tolerant of handling than smallmouth bass. For every thick-skinned common carp there's a gizzard shad or a silver redhorse that dies when you look at it sideways.

Compared to surgically implanting a radio-transmitted EKG in a fish and monitoring it's responses to stress in a controlled laboratory setting, what field experience do you have that would cause you to reject this paper? Personally I haven't seen Cory's paper to know if it merits defense. I do think applying a four minute time limit derived from bonefish is too broad for smallmouth, but I'm not convinced that's what he said.

 

If Jonn's professor intended to convey that scientific studies were all biased and therefore not useful, that professor is doing his students a great disservice. Bad studies do occur, but science is designed to root those out over time. Even in criticizing those papers, the professor in question was engaged in that process. If he were merely trying to convey the need for critical thinking and skepticism where science is involved, perhaps then he would not be leading his students astray.

 

If we have to chose between the field experience of some one who has worked diligently for months and possibly years under the supervision of trained professionals to address a specific question, and some one who has a vauge intuition about something they've never lifted a finger to research, I think the choice about who to believe is rather obvious.

And this is why catch and release is a questionable conservation strategy for some of those larger species. One study showed that a very high percentage of tarpon (a species with unavoidably long playing times) become exhausted during handling and are eaten by sharks after being caught and released. Bag limits may actually kill fewer fish and be the more reasonable way to go in some cases.

I don't understand the rational behind your statement re bag limits.Please clarify. Also I'm sure a study of bluegills(a member of the same sunfish family as the smallmouth) would conclude that none could possibly be alive after being out of water for 45 minutes but this spring I personally experienced that it is possible.In this hypothetical situation the choice of who to believe for me would also be rather obvious.Too often a study with one conclusion is contadicted by another study whatever the subject(fish,human health etc.) .Therefore I think they should be taken with a grain of salt and rejected if they do in fact conflict with our own personal experience.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest One More Cast
Also I'm sure a study of bluegills(a member of the same sunfish family as the smallmouth) would conclude that none could possibly be alive after being out of water for 45 minutes but this spring I personally experienced that it is possible.

 

If I remember correctly ronk, you had a fantastic day of Bluegill fishing. I remember some pictures that you showed us.

 

Were those pictures from the same trip you describe above?

 

Joseph

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand the rational behind your statement re bag limits.Please clarify. Also I'm sure a study of bluegills(a member of the same sunfish family as the smallmouth) would conclude that none could possibly be alive after being out of water for 45 minutes but this spring I personally experienced that it is possible.In this hypothetical situation the choice of who to believe for me would also be rather obvious.Too often a study with one conclusion is contadicted by another study whatever the subject(fish,human health etc.) .Therefore I think they should be taken with a grain of salt and rejected if they do in fact conflict with our own personal experience.

 

Ron, you're right in a way. Studies do often reach contradictory conclusions and we shouldn't shut down our minds just because scientists tell us something. But, science is based on data, not on newspaper articles. Scientists take extreme efforts to collect accurate data and we're missing out on a tremendous resource if we fail to take their efforts seriously. The proper criticism of most science should be focused on the conclusions drawn from data.

 

Conclusions based on scientific data may contradict intution for several reasons:

 

1. A study may actually be wrong because of flawed methods or a poor design. Much more rarely a scientist will actually lie. When the lies happens, you generally read about it in the news and that's the end of the scientist's career. These are not common problems for studies that enter peer reviewed literature. Reports by state agencies and consulting firms struggle with these issues more.

 

2. A study may infer too much from the data it has collected. Over-reaching conclusions are a big temptation. Cory's data, for instance, only measures recovery rate. It says nothing directly about survival. If more data came along and showed that recovery times had no relationship to survival or health of caught and released fish, we would probably set aside Cory's data at that point. In the interim, it is more than reasonable to assume there is a relationship between recovery time and mortality and to strive to reduce handling time based on his findings.

 

3. A study may show an effect that is later found out to be strongly affected by other variables. Once a piece of information is uncovered, other studies generally refine our understandings of how that information can be applied. Cory and Steve have a long list of covariates they can now research that address the effects of hook size or species or whatever they feel is important to test.

 

4. Science often contradicts individual experiences because science often focuses on overall patterns rather than individual anecdotes. There's a big difference between the exception to the rule and the general rule. Anecdotes of how a fish survived in a puddle of water may be well outside the norm. I believe you when you say they survived that way (but I don't necessarily believe they were healthy after that experience). I would hope you wouldn't offer your bluegill in the tirewell experience as a best method for handling fish.

 

Science is replicated to show what happens over many cases. It is ironic (infuriating even) that by trying to be careful and thorough and replicate a study, in the eyes of some this actually degrades the results. The cliche about "Lies, damn lies and statistics." is an incredible lie itself. Not everyone has to be a statistician, but for the people who do study those things are well equipped to spot lies or "damn lies" in statistical reports. A misapplied statistical test will get a study tossed out of a journal faster than almost anything else.

 

Bag limits. If you catch and release 5 tarpon in a day but indirectly kill 3 of them because of long handling times, the tarpon population is better off if you just have a 1 fish take limit (after landing 1 fish, you're done fishing for tarpon that day).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bag limits. If you catch and release 5 tarpon in a day but indirectly kill 3 of them because of long handling times, the tarpon population is better off if you just have a 1 fish take limit (after landing 1 fish, you're done fishing for tarpon that day).

 

Nice points, Tim. "Indirectly" you remind us that we are talking about survival, not still being alive after a period of time out of the water.

 

Analogies with the trout world are imperfect; however, earlier this year, I read an entertaining account from an angler who was priviledged to fish some prime private trout water in Germany. When he arrived his host announced a 14 inch limit; so our angler assumed he would C&R till he got a 14 incher. Not so, the host club considered the stress of being landed sufficiently damaging that any trout he caught could not be returned. After landing a 4 incher, a 6 incher, and another 4 incher in less than an hour, he was escorted off of the water with his limit for the day and, it turned out, for the trip because all sections of the river were booked solid for the durationt of his stay. At least the beer was good day after day.

 

It used to be that "rolling up the score" was considered unsportsmanlike in HS and college sports. In 16" softball, they called the game when a team got 20 runs ahead. I like to think it still is so. Is there some equivalent point in fishing? I kind of wonder because I read reports of 20, 50, and 100 fish days. Just a question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It used to be that "rolling up the score" was considered unsportsmanlike in HS and college sports. In 16" softball, they called the game when a team got 20 runs ahead. I like to think it still is so. Is there some equivalent point in fishing? I kind of wonder because I read reports of 20, 50, and 100 fish days. Just a question.

Great question, Mike.

I've never caught 100 of anything in a day, so I can't help you there.

:huh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It used to be that "rolling up the score" was considered unsportsmanlike in HS and college sports. In 16" softball, they called the game when a team got 20 runs ahead. I like to think it still is so. Is there some equivalent point in fishing? I kind of wonder because I read reports of 20, 50, and 100 fish days. Just a question.

 

What if you catch 100 in one weekend, and only fish once a month, while others catch a half dozen or dozen a day and fish every weekend, or even some days during the week? I guess the only difference would be if the frequent angler fished in many different waters, thus spreading out the impact. Otherwise, I don't see a difference, other than those big number days can be a lot of fun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...