Catch-and-release is clearly here to stay and is becoming more entrenched every year. Starlo offers some interesting thoughts on the subject and explains how to optimise the survival rates of released fish.
Let’s make no bones about it — fishing is a form of hunting. Because (rather than despite) this fact, the sport strikes a deep chord in the human psyche and satisfies a primal need many of us still feel to go out and catch or gather food for our families or our ‘tribes’. I very much doubt that humans will ever completely lose that primal need, no matter how far we may ultimately ‘evolve’.
But modern recreational angling is also unique in the field of hunting. When a shooter or a spearfisher squeezes the trigger, or an archer releases an arrow, assuming his or her aim is true, the fate of the prey is effectively sealed. It’s dead meat. Not so in fishing. Anglers can enjoy the full experience of finding and stalking their prey, hooking that prey, playing a fish and landing it, yet still exercise the option of returning their catch to the water alive, with a high expectation that the fish will survive. This process is called catch-and-release fishing, and it is a growing trend in Australia, as elsewhere.
While catch-and-release has definitely become ‘flavour of the month’ here over the past decade or so (thanks in no small part to the example set by high profile television anglers like Rex Hunt), it’s always worth remembering that fishing is still a form of hunting, and that one of the most important motivating forces for many participants is the promise of a meal of self-caught seafood at the end of the day.
As I’ve said before, and will continue to say, there’s absolutely nothing wrong with keeping a feed of fresh fish, so long as you abide by the existing rules and regulations in the area where you’re fishing. Catch-and-release is a very positive trend, and one that’s to be encouraged in many, many fisheries. But we must never lose sight of the real pleasures involved in providing freshly caught fish for the family table, nor belittle those who hold this as their primary motivation for going fishing.
Fortunately, there’s still plenty of room in Australian recreational angling for a mix of both styles of fishing; catch-and-release and catch-and-kill. The trick lies in identifying which approach is more appropriate under a given set of circumstances, and then getting the mechanics of the process right, so that the fish we keep are killed humanely and those we release are let go with the highest possible chance of surviving. It’s this latter option I want to explore in depth in this article. WHEN THERE’S NO CHOICE There are occasions when catch-and-release is the only option available, and when keeping a fish might actually place an angler on the wrong side of the law and leave them liable to prosecution, confiscation of gear or a hefty fine.
The most obvious examples of instances when live release of the catch is absolutely mandatory include the following:
Fish that are shorter than the minimum legal length in force for that species in the area where you’re fishing.Fish that are longer than any specified maximum legal length, where such ‘slot size’ limits exist.Fish in excess of the per angler or boat bag limit for a particular species.Fish unintentionally taken during the closed season for that species.Protected or endangered species hooked accidentally while targeting other types of fish.
Fish caught in designated ‘no kill’ waters
In addition to these legally-enforceable instances, when it’s compulsory to return the catch to the water alive, there are a number of other circumstances under which catch-and-release makes very good sense and should always be practiced as a matter of habit. These include:
The capture of unwanted, surplus, undesirable or potentially poisonous fish.
Wherever a species can’t be accurately identified (and may therefore be toxic or protected by law).
Occasions when you don’t have the facilities or equipment to store and maintain the catch in good condition prior to eating it.
When competing in designated live-release or catch-and-release competitions, tournaments or similar organised events.
Beyond these legally binding and common sense scenarios, the decision between letting a fish go and keeping it becomes a matter of personal choice, ethics and peer pressure. WHEN IT’S UP TO YOU These days, it’s difficult to justify keeping any fish you don’t intend eating, or giving to someone else to eat. Rightly or wrongly, killing a fish purely for a photo, trophy, competition weigh-in or record claim is an increasingly unpopular action that’s likely to invite criticism from other anglers and the general public. You need to be aware of this fact and to bear it in mind when making decisions about keeping or releasing fish.
Similarly, keeping fish that are clearly excess to your current or short term requirements is neither smart nor particularly justifiable. Catching and killing fish purely to give away to others or to bury in the bottom of the freezer for a ‘rainy day’ doesn’t really make a lot of sense these days. Why not let them go instead, and catch fresh ones when you need them?
Today, with many fish populations under increasing pressure, there’s also a growing emphasis on preserving the brood stock of certain species by carefully releasing larger adult s (especially females). With some types of fish (flathead, bass, barramundi and black marlin are good examples), very large specimens are almost always females. With these species and many others, it makes much more sense to keep a couple of smaller fish for the table and let the big breeders go to continue spawning and maintain the population.
The same goes for slow growing species like Murray cod, bream and snapper, where exceptionally large individuals may be 20, 30 or even 40 years old. It takes a long time for these fish to be replaced naturally in a population, and for this reason, smart anglers are increasingly opting to release the bigger, older specimens and keep a couple of younger fish for the table instead (while still abiding by minimum size restrictions).
Finally, there’s the case of waterways with strictly limited fish populations. Tiny trout or bass streams that are only capable of sustaining a small number of adult fish, or man-made lakes where fish must be constantly re-stocked (often at the direct expense of anglers and other fee payers) are good examples. In such waters it’s counterproductive and unpopular to kill too many fish. Why not let fish go in these systems and take a meal from a larger, more open and sustainable body of water instead?
Members of the Amateur Fishing Clubs Association (AFCA) in NSW run foul of exactly this last scenario whenever they stage big freshwater competitions on public impoundments in that state. Despite sticking rigidly to the letter of the law in terms of bag and size limits and insisting that their members care for their catches, these competitions are almost universally disliked by non-AFCA anglers, local business people and others, simply because they result in large quantities of mostly stocked fish being killed over a short period of time and in a very visible manner. This is perceived by many as an unfair exploitation of public property in the form of hatchery-bred fish.
Again, we could argue until the cows come home about the right and wrong of this situation, but the fact remains that it’s unpopular and creates significant negative publicity for the AFCA, despite their noble efforts to do the right thing (even to the point of donating money to stocking groups and so on). For this reason alone, it’s no longer a justifiable exercise and is, in my opinion, doomed to extinction — as are all purely catch-and-kill tournaments or competitions. The only question is when they will disappear, not if they will vanish. GETTING IT RIGHT When fish are to be returned to the water alive — either because it’s compulsory to do so or you’ve made the personal decision to release them — it makes very good sense to optimise their chances of survival.
The best way to release any fish is never to remove it from the water in the first place. In a perfect world, you should bring the hooked fish to the boat or bank and use a pair of long-nosed pliers, forceps or a similar de-hooking device to grasp the hook shank and twist it free of the critter’s mouth, allowing the fish to swim away without ever touching it or lifting it from the water.
Using barbless hooks greatly facilitates this style of fast, easy catch-and-release (see the fact boxes hereabouts).
Sometimes, the ideal approach of releasing fish without touching them isn’t possible. Frequently, a fish will need to be netted or lifted from the water to allow the hook, lure or fly to be removed. Also, you may wish to photograph or measure the catch. If this is the case, make an effort to minimise the time the fish spends out of the water and to touch it as little as possible, especially with dry hands or hard, metal objects and rough surfaces. Have a game plan in mind and be organised in advance. Remember, time is of the essence. As a rule of thumb, you shouldn’t keep any fish out of the water much longer than you could hold your own breath. Two minutes should be regarded as an absolute maximum.
Wet your hands first, or use a damp towel or wet gloves to handle the fish, make every effort to avoid dropping the catch and never place live fish on hot, dry surfaces such as aluminium or steel boat decks. Also, avoid hanging or suspending fish by their jaws, gills or tails. Support their weight at all times with a hand under the belly and another at the head.
If the hook has been swallowed deeply, don’t attempt surgery to recover it, and don’t simply yank on the line in an effort to tear the hook free! Use a knife, clippers or scissors to cut the line as close as possible to the fish’s mouth and return the catch immediately to the water, with the hook left in place.
Often, these fish will regurgitate the hook, or it will pass right through the fish’s intestines and out its vent. On other occasions, the catch’s stomach acids may eventually break the hook down. Either way, any deeply hooked fish stands a better chance of survival if it’s quickly returned to the water with the hook left in place. REVIVING TIRED FISH From time to time, a fish may need to be revived after capture. This is more common with large, fast swimming species like tuna, trevally, queenfish, sharks, sailfish and marlin, although big bass, barramundi, snapper and trout taken on relatively light tackle and battled for some time before being landed may also require revival.
To revive a tired fish, support it’s body upright in the water, facing into any current or flow. A gloved hand or wet towel wrapped around the tail wrist and another placed under the forward part of the fish’s belly are ideal for this purpose. If there’s no significant current, walk or wade forward or have the boat move slowly ahead to create water flow in through the fish’s mouth and out over its gills. Avoid pulling any fish backwards or facing it down-current.
Most fish will revive quickly if treated in this way, and begin to kick strongly in your grasp. Often, their fins and eyes will move and swivel, too, indicating a rapid return of strength. When the fish feels as if it is ready to swim, release your grasp and allow it to move ahead under its own steam into the current. If the fish rolls on its side or turns belly-up, grab it again and continue the revival process. Be prepared to spend 10 or 15 minutes reviving a really tired fish before setting it free. WHEN IT ALL GOES WRONG Often, things don’t go perfectly in this catch-and-release process. Fish get hooked deeply or in sensitive areas such as the eyes or gills. They bleed. They thrash. They lose scales and split their fins. It’s incumbent on us to do our best to minimise these traumas, but we need to accept that they will happen from time to time, no matter how careful we are.
Don’t automatically assume that a bleeding or injured fish is doomed. Anyone who’s done a reasonable amount of angling will have seen otherwise healthy fish with horrendous scars and old injuries that have healed. Many species are reasonably tough creatures. There have also been numerous long term tag recoveries from fish that were not expected to live for long when released. They’re surprisingly resilient critters.
Catching fish from very deep water is another problem area, due to the stresses and physical injuries resulting from pressure-related barotrauma. Fisheries WA, in particular, has spent a considerable amount of time studying this subject, primarily because of the importance of its offshore snapper and dhufish resources.
The jury is still out on mortality rates amongst line-caught deep water demersal species and on the best strategies for releasing them, and until all the findings are in, my advice is to bring smaller fish (that are likely to be undersized) up slowly, to consider the use of a weighted deep release device such as the Survivor Reviver (perfected by ANSA members in WA) and to simply stop fishing or move to shallower grounds when you have achieved your bag limit or caught enough for your immediate needs.
Practices such as ‘venting’ deep water fish with hypodermic syringes may eventually prove to be very worthwhile, but until all the data is in and there has been an official angler education program based on its results, many of us are likely to do more harm than good by playing doctor and wielding sharp needles. AVOID PREACHING! Much as some people might like to regard themselves as ‘purist’ catch-and-release advocates, and loudly voice disdain at the killing of any fish by recreational anglers, fishing remains first and foremost a form of hunting. Therefore, in purely simplistic terms, it’s a ‘blood sport’. In my opinion, those people who object to such activities on religious, cultural, moral or ethical grounds (and who have every right to do so) really shouldn’t go fishing — at all.
As careful as we might be about minimising trauma to our catch and quickly unhooking and returning to the water any fish destined for live release, the very act of introducing a baited hook, lure of fly into the aquatic environment makes us personally responsible for the potential injury and death of fish. That’s because even the best catch-and-release practices simply cannot guarantee a 100 per cent survival rate amongst fish returned to the water. Because we go fishing, some fish will die. For this reason alone, it doesn’t make sense to get too high and mighty when preaching the catch-and-release gospel to others. Remember, it’s an option, not a religion. TAKING RESPONSIBILITY In my opinion, we all need to start taking a lot more personal responsibility for our actions in every field of human activity — including our hobbies and sports — and to make conscious, informed decisions about how we behave and what we do. The buck stops with each of us.
As I’ve spelt out, fishing is a type of hunting, and that’s clearly part of its attraction for many fans. In an age when we’re increasingly insulated from nature and from the processes involved in providing food for our tables, fishing provides a refreshingly hands-on link to the past — to an age when we hunted and gathered successfully, or we went hungry.
The fact that we have a clear cut choice today, and that very few people in Australia will go hungry if they can’t catch and kill a fish, only serves to deepen the responsibility we all share for husbanding the resource and sharing it around more fairly than in the past.
Before you fish, think in advance about what you’ll catch, what you’ll kill and what you’ll release. Make informed decisions about your actions and then do your best to carry those decisions out in an efficient, professional and ethical manner. It’s not rocket science, but getting it right today may well be critical to the long-term survival of recreational angling as we know it… Our future is in your hands. BARBLESS HOOKS Barbless hooks definitely enhance the catch-and-release process and improve fish survival rates.
Few hooks are sold without barbs, although there’s a modern trend amongst leading manufacturers to reduce the size of the barbs on many of their models. You can easily render any hook barbless by using a pair of long-nosed pliers to crush the barb flat. As a bonus, barbless hooks are much safer to use, and if you happen to get one stuck in your own skin or someone else’s, it’ll come out far more easily than a barbed hook!
Debate rages about whether more fish will be lost on barbless hooks. Personally, I still believe that certain species — especially aerialists like barra and trout — are more likely to throw a barbless hook, especially when fishing with low stretch lines such as gel-spun polyethylene (GSP). For this reason, I often partially flatten my barbs, leaving a small bump that help keeps the hook in place. TOOLS OF THE TRADE In my book, the most valuable catch-and-release tools are your own wet hands and a pair of long-nosed pliers or forceps. Every item you add to the equation beyond that has the potential to decrease the survival chances of the catch rather than enhance them.
Personally, I’ve never been a big fan of landing nets, although they’re a necessary evil in many instances. If you do use a net for catch-and-release, avoid models with thickly knotted mesh that can easily damage a fish’s protective slime coating, knock off scales or break and split fins. Dave Irvine’s purpose-built Environets are far and away the best tools for this job and it’s no accident that they’re widely used nowadays by fisheries agencies, hatchery staff and professional guides, not to mention a legion of smart tournament anglers.
Ditto the popular Boga Grip and its growing tribe of cheap clones. These devices have their place (especially on toothy critters), but are badly used by many anglers, who treat them as a convenient handle for swinging, hanging, dangling, carrying and suspending fish. Personally, I hate the fact that the original Boga (which is a brilliant tool if wisely used) features a built-in weighing scale. Suspending a large fish by the bottom jaw while checking its weight is simply not a good idea and should be avoided at all costs.
As for so-called ‘release gaffs’, I regard that term as an oxymoron. Gaffs are for killing fish. If you absolutely must use a gaff on a fish intended for live release (and it’s a bit hard to imagine such a scenario), use one with a fine, sharp hook that’s clean and free of rust and make sure it penetrates the membrane behind the fish’s jaw bone just once. FISH SURVIVAL RATES You’ll hear a lot of rubbish spouted at boat ramps and in pub bars about the supposed survival rates of released fish. Most critics of catch-and-release base their doubts on speculation and unsupported anecdotes, or on the generally low recovery rate of tagged fish, which are a clearer reflection of stock size and fishing pressure than hooking mortality. The claims of these bar stool ‘experts’ are generally wildly inaccurate.
On the other hand, there have been many scientific studies done on this important subject over the years, and more are underway right now. Modern Fishing’s own Dr Julian Pepperell has been collecting and collating the results of these studies for some time and I’ll leave it to him to present his findings through his “Tag Lines” column in a future issue, but suffice to say that the news is generally very good.
In most fisheries — especially relatively shallow water fisheries — mortality percentages for carefully released angler-caught fish are in the single digits or low teens. These rates improve even more if the fish are taken on lures and flies rather than bait. In other words, it’s highly likely that nine out of every 10 fish you put back in reasonably good condition will survive.
The absolute bottom line is this: Any fish returned to the water has an infinitely higher chance of surviving than one killed and stuffed in the fish box!
