NEWFOUNDLAND
&
LABRADOR WILDLIFE FEDERATION
HOOK & RELEASE
THE SILENT KILLER of SALMON
& TROUT
This paper is a
compilation of DFO science, other
scientific presentations, academia and
field studies by experts in the field and by observation of fishermen.
Rick Bouzan
The word fish is used in this paper and refers to salmon mainly but also trout. Hook & release kills more fish than poaching.
Poachers
keep they fish they kill, but hook &
release continues to kill.
Mergansers, hawks, ospreys, eels etc.
all eat fish
that has been injured by hook & release.
These predators sense injured, or energy
depleted
fish. This occurs in the system before if can be identified, and even
occurs
after hook & released fish appear to recover.
DFO has put a figure of 12% to 25%
mortality on fish
by hook & release. It is possibly higher.
Depleted ATP (energy) levels and
increased lactic acid
levels in the salmon or trout tissues after hook & release combined
with
the stress is killing more fish than is reported,
Hook & release is not a conservation tool nor does
it prevent poaching. Poaching occurs at night, when all anglers are off
the
rivers. Hook & release is a tool for the rich tourists and
outfitters to
remain on our rivers. Unfortunately, the money the outfitters make is
actually
destroying the very resource that they depend on to make a business.
The program "report a poacher" while
good in
principle- is actually the cause of retaliation and social problems in
communities.
Increases in the number of professional
DFO officers
(only) and increased education is the real answer.
Volunteers should and must not be used
to protect our
rivers, and the onus of legal repercussions etc. is the responsibility
of DFO
only and not private citizens.
The ill conceived idea of a combined
super force has
to be removed and replaced with DFO professional wardens - because it
is DFO's
responsibility to protect and enhance the resource.
Allowing DFO to get volunteers or
contract out this
service would be a gross dereliction of their constitutional duty and
responsibility. Only professionally trained DFO wardens should be
allowed to do
this considering that the species is almost extinct.
Since Newfoundland &. Labrador has
over 90% of the
remaining wild Atlantic salmon rivers why is DFO not concentrating its'
enforcement efforts to ensure its survival? And given that over 90% of
wild
Atlantic salmon are in this province why in the name of common sense
would DFO
want volunteers or untrained people doing this important work. If a
species is
close to extinction only the best professional personnel should be
employed in
the recovery effort.
Why is there not a counting fence on
every river to
ensure accurate count numbers of fish corning and going to ensure their
survival? What about late returning fish when counters are closed?
The downloading of DFO responsibility-
in the name of
community watershed management (CWM) is a way for DFO to unload its
responsibility and blame every one else except themselves.
Habitat destruction-especially from
forestry practices
is a problem. Certainly volunteers cannot deal with this major killer
of fish.
Machines running over spawning grounds causing siltation etc. are
killing fish.
Pesticides and uncontrolled development and
Biologists have told us that there are
no trout
biologists in the province and DFO has admitted to the tact that they
are doing
very little in the way of research on hook &
DFO and other surveys done have been
seriously flawed
and biased and do not represent the true picture. DFO in their Science
Stock
Status Report ( salmon) DO-03 1998 state that higher water temperatures
kill
fish that are hooked & released. 32% of 59 grisle died hooked &
released to exhaustion in water of 15 degrees.
The ASF has done studies as a private
group but the
bias is evident and as such not acceptable.
If 92% of all remaining wild Atlantic
salmon rivers
are in Newfoundland & Labrador, then why is ASF head office in New
Brunswick? Is it because this American owned ASF (paid for by American
Outfitters) is close to New Brunswick and are the one who rent and
lease the
best salmon pools to the exclusion of the true owners of the resource-
us.
The University of Waterloo did an
independent study of
Noel Paul Brook in Grand Falls-Windsor on the effects of hook and
release and
found a mortality rate of over 80%.
Members of the ASF and the local salmon
groups- namely
Len Rich- wrote an article in
Several members of the local salmon
groups have
resigned from the group over its continued affiliation with ASF.
The DFO and the ASF data on hook &
release is
seriously flawed and their data is not done for any Newfoundland &
Labrador
rivers-except the Conne. The Conne River showed a hook & release
mortality
of 20%.
The studies paid for by ASF are biased
to say the
least.
The most recent independent, 2-year
study was done in
Norway on the river Alta. The most amazing finding was that all salmon
hooked
& released displayed total disorientation and actually swam back to
the sea
as opposed to going to the spawning grounds. Mortality was also
associated with
the salmon hooked & released. This type of erratic behaviour was
confirmed
by DFO in their experiences.
The Ponoi river (owned by outfitters and
is a private
river) study in Russia on hook & release showed that salmon numbers
increased not due to hook and release but to the closure of the weir
fishery on
that river. Also, this river is different than any river in
Newfoundland &
Labrador and the temperature never goes over 20 degrees, arid has a
faster
water flow. "However, at warm temperatures, in extremely soft water, or
when fish have moved recently from salt water to fresh water the
magnitude of physiological
disturbance may be increased and the fish may suffer higher rates of
mortality." (P123) The Ponoi river has no measuring system for the
fish,
and the length of time the fish is on the hook is reduced making the
their data
suspect.
Hook & release is a most
controversial issue and
needs to receive a significant amount of study before it is allowed.
All
studies done on hook & release appear to he done with a great deal
of bias
to attempt to show that hook & release works. BUT IT DOESN'T.
Experiments by teams in the 1980's have
shown that
hook and release causes a delayed mortality when fish are angled to
exhaustion.
Breathing in the fish has shown to be very
Other factors leading to fish mortality
are the length
of time the fish is out of the water, the water temperature- this is a
critical
factor- the oxygen content of the water, the current flow, the length
of time
the fish is angled to exhaustion and predators in the system.
The most telling study done by M.A.
Bobbel et al 1966
was an extensive study done on bright salmon and Kelts in the Miramichi
river
in New Brunswick. It was revealed that tissue samples from the fish
showed the
ATP was depleted- ATP and Giycogen (a fish's stored energy) was
depleted and it
took a long time to recover-if it did recover. Over 12% died.
As predators sense injured fish they
take advantage of
this and the fish mortality goes up - and these are fish that we never
see
again and thus false assumptions are then made about the benefit of
hook &
release.
Hook & release studies generally
only last 12
hours and this too appears to done purposely as the mortality of fish may and
usually
occurs much later than 12 hours. There are projections that have been done that show
the
mortality is almost 50% after 48 hours after a fish is hooked & released. Other
studies
show a significant drop in egg deposition after a fish is hooked and
released.
The study " Effects of Late Season Catch
&
Release Angling on Anaerobic Metabolism, Acid-Base Status Survival, and Gamete Viability
in
Wild Atlantic Salmon" June20/l 994 by Richard Booth, James D. Kiefter, Kevin
Davidson,
Alex Bleiak and Bruce Tufts showed that all fish hooked & released have
elevate levels of lactic acid, a drop in
muscle pH, a drop in the concentrations
of PCr, ATP and glycogen and in egg
production.
This was more dramatic as water temperature rose and an increase in
plasma Potassium, and chloride
(electrolytes-used to keep the
fish heart healthy).
The study by F. Mowbray and A. locke "
The Effect
of Water Temperature on Angling Catch
of Atlantic Salmon in the Upsalquitch
River" showed a huge increase in mortality
This study also confirms high mortality
in both
laboratory and field studies if salmon are
Remember, most hook & release takes
place mainly
in the summer when water temperatures are high. Why then does DFO allow
hook
& release when their own mandate is zero habitat destruction and
zero human
induced mortality on this almost endangered species.
According to Black 1958, Beggs et al
1980, Graham et
al 1982, and Wood et al 1983 all indicate that exhaustive exercise can
result
in delayed mortality of a large fraction of hooked & released
salmon.
The hook & release rule of 4 fish
per day is not
being followed and cannot be policed, It has been recorded that some
'outfitting camps talk about 12 fish per day being hooked &.
released. This
is poaching, not a conservation tool. Given a 25% mortality on 4 fish-
you can
easily see this doubling as more fish are hooked & released. Given
that the
species K almost extinct how in the name of conservation can ASF or the
salmon
groups claim that hook & release be allowed to continue. Is it the
big
money?? One has to seriously question if their mandate is really
conservation,
because to insist that hook and release is good is really a
contradiction of
their "proposed" mandate.
If ASF is so concerned for the welfare
of the salmon
why are they not calling for the closure of the caplin fishery? Or
protesting
the dumping of small shrimp- salmon food?
How can any conservation group permit
any mortality at
all to be allowed given the plight of the species. The answer must be
that they
are not really concerned for the salmon as much as they are for the
commercial
exploitation of the resource by industry -who comprise their board of
directors.
The documents “The Challenge Of CWM for
recreational
fisheries" developed in April 1995 in Comer Brook and the ERC 'Casting
forward a Framework for CWM" summary of these papers by ASF member
Larry
Felt in which he states " negative economic rent is being generated by
both resources'' he implies that by decentralizing the resource and
using CWM
in which the outfitters will control the resource is the way to go.
This means
of course that the people who own the resource -the people – will be
barred
from the resource. This is easily done by using part IV of the land’s
act. They
appear to want to privatize the resource for economic reasons. New
Brunswick
its prime salmon pools to the rich and the locals cannot afford to fish
their
rivers.
Joe Doggett- saltwater action paper-
states that Bob
Colura -Texas parks and wildlife and Jim Dailey-a marine biologist-
both have
suggested that fish that have been hooked and released do not survive.
Only 50%
survive. Small fish survive better as they are caught quicker and do
not fight
as long and exhaustion is not as big a factor. How deeply a fish is
hooked is
also a factor and deep hooked fish do not survive.
Hook & release during the fall
season-the main
spawning time- should be terminated, at once. Yet, ASF and the salmon
groups
promote it. Why???
Until extensive and conclusive studies
are done to
show the real damage being done by hook &. release- the practice
should be
banned.
DFO should immediately ban hook &
release, based on
the sheer volume of evidence that clearly does not support this
barbaric
practice.
The public would not allow a hunter to
lasso a moose
and drag it up and down a woods road to the point of exhaustion and
extreme
stress and claim that is good conservation, The Minister needs to
immediately
do his duty and ban all hook & release fishing.