Bleeders...

[wt bash]

I'm sure its been discussed before but I was just thinking about this. You're on C&R water you tongue hook a fish and its a bleeder. What chances do you think that fish has at survival? I hate it when it happens but it is part of fishing.

 

[mrfzx]

Yep, that's a tough ethical question. It has always been my experience that a bleeding fish is a dead fish. Lets face it, a few drops of blood from a smallish fish may represent 10% of its total supply....shock is a real possibility. So what do we do? Keep the fish, not waste it, and hope if you get checked the patrolman is understanding (yeah, right). Or do we put it back, hope for the best, and call it the circle of life? Personally, keeping my experience with waterways patrolmen in mind, I put it back and hope for the best. It doesn't make me happy, but I am not going to pay a hefty fine (in some states the fine is quite hefty) for something that is out of my control.

 

[Rip Tide]

I think that a fish with a serious gill injury is a goner, but you see other fish almost daily with traumas from both man and beast that have survived. It's all about the severity.
I try not to stress about it when it happens to me. Racoons need to eat too.

 

[thorsten]

Hello,

I also hate it, when the caught fish is bleeding and I feel soory for the creature and also a little bit angry with me. But I always release them and I have seen a pike, which was bleeding pretty much and I could observe that he recovered completely after while. This observation has given some hope to me for further, similar situations.

 

[mysticm]

I faced the exact scenario described in the opening post last week-end. I was on a delayed harvest river and hooked a beautiful rainbow (~15in). I could not see the fly until it opened it's mouth since it was hooked quite deep. I tried to remove the fly but could not reach it w/o inflicting further damage. I tie my flies with barbless hooks so not sure why the hook was so deeply engorged. All the while the poor trout was bleeding..
Made me sick to my stomach but there was nothing I could do except revive it the best I could and watch it slowly swim off.

 

[Guest1]

It depends on where and how bad. On Trout it is not a good thing. They are not as tough as some other fish. They did a radio tag study on Musky and hooked one really badly. They had to cut a part of the gill plate, cut hooks and it was a serious bleeder. They tagged it anyway and decided they could just use it to see how long it took to croak from an injury that bad. It didn't croak. It was recaptured two years later and was bigger. The gill plate was healed but scarred. If it has a chance of making it I let them go. Once you kill them they are a goner. If it's a big fish I give them the chance to make it. If it's not a big one I keep bad bleeders. I made it to the top of the food chain and I can eat a fish once in a while.

 

[Poke 'Em]

This fish was a bleeder when I caught him in July 2010.

He was not a bleeder when I caught him in September 2011.

 

[caseywise]

yep, i'll agree.....turn em back. if they survive, awesome!
if they don't.....food chain.
just don't break the law...$$$$$$

casey

 

[thewalker1013]

This fish was a bleeder when I caught him in July 2010.

He was not a bleeder when I caught him in September 2011.

Man, that's a darn shame, that's a beautiful fish... And you know what? We've all been in your shoes at one point in our lives, so don't feel bad. I remember almost every fish I've accidentally killed, and the Fishing Gods know that I pay their memories respect, so maybe that's why they haven't punished me... Bad things happen to good people, it's just life

 

[stl_geoff]

Field and Stream recently had an article published about bleeding fish and releasing them. I forget the exact percentages off hand but the basic idea was if the hook cant be removed easily, cut the line and release the fish. most of the time the hook would be pushed out of the mouth and discarded within 6 days and the fish survived. Playing doctor on the fish and getting the hook out that resulted in more/severe bleeding the fish almost all ended up dying. So basically if they bleed alittle but the hook came out cleanly, let em go, it will heal up and they will be fine.

 

[wt bash]

It's all about the severity

I think alot has to do with water quality too. I read once that 1 in 10 fish caught and released will die so it is an inevitable part of this. Kind of a weird irony, I feel bad about killing a fish but yet I didn't feel too bad about sticking a piece of steel into its jaw.

 

[poke em]

Man, that's a darn shame, that's a beautiful fish... And you know what? We've all been in your shoes at one point in our lives, so don't feel bad. I remember almost every fish I've accidentally killed, and the Fishing Gods know that I pay their memories respect, so maybe that's why they haven't punished me... Bad things happen to good people, it's just life

I don't feel bad at all. The fish was fine. I caught him and he was a bleeder, I put him back and caught him a year later (and an inch or two longer). So clearly he was no worse for the wear.

 

[bigtone1411]

I don't feel bad at all. The fish was fine. I caught him and he was a bleeder, I put him back and caught him a year later (and an inch or two longer). So clearly he was no worse for the wear.

I'm just curious, how are you sure it was the same fish?

 

[silver creek]

I release the fish anyway. If it dies, it provides food for the other fish, eagles/osprey, as well as the aquatic insects.

Circle of life.

 

[Guest1]

This fish was a bleeder when I caught him in July 2010.

He was not a bleeder when I caught him in September 2011.

That's really cool that you have proof a bleeder trout does not necessarily end up dead. There was a kid doing a school paper on catch and release that should be shown these photos. I'll find the post and move a copy of them there.

 

[Ard]

Hi Bill,

I thought I posted here yesterday but it looks as if that one got lost in space. That was way early in the discussion and I see that what I said has been covered now at great length. I'm pretty sure you'll agree with me that whether or not a fish is bleeding at the time of release there is another very important factor when considering post catch mortality. To encapsulate the thought I'll simply say this, use a heavy enough leader so that fish can be brought to net - hand - shore, whatever quickly. I have been practicing what I preach for many years, from the lower 48 to here. I've seen people fishing for huge steelhead with a 4 pound leader and nymphing trout in swift waters with 6 & 7 X tippets. I have reached the point where I feel that If I need to go to some extreme in light leaders or fly sizes just to catch a fish, then that fish was not meant to be caught and released.

Some may scoff at what I put forth but I can assure you that once you get past the 'I have to catch that fish no matter what' point, you may see the sense in what I suggest. While it is true that some fish may shy away from an 8 pound strand of fluorocarbon, when you do hook up you just reel the fish in. Of course the hook may pull out if you rush too much but what you don't worry over is the leader breaking because it's a 3 pound test or less, with a 5 pound fish attached. Some fish that are hooked badly will need to be killed or if released they may die due to the injury or an infection due to same. What I don't struggle with is the thought that I am somehow torturing the fish because of some long protracted 'fight' that we were raised to believe is the coolest part of catching fish. To me the cool part is catching them and being able to do so with very little in the way of theatrics.

 

[lazaruslong]

yep, i'll agree.....turn em back. if they survive, awesome!
if they don't.....food chain.
just don't break the law...$$$$$$

casey

Yep.

Don't know why people get bent out of shape about it, if the fish dies it becomes food for the crawfish, smaller fish, etc which then in turn nourish the larger fish and so on. It all works out.

I'm just curious, how are you sure it was the same fish?

Well, I hear that it's sorta uncommon for two fish that typically have lots of spots, in the same stream, to have identical numbers and locations of spots.... :teef:

 

[spiderninja]

I'm always impressed by how hardy fish can be. I hooked into a nice little 14"er a couple of months ago in a C&R area. Landed it quickly, but it took me a little while to figure out what was going on with that fish.

There was an extra fly attached to it that wasn't mine. The extra fly was attached to a line which was dangling from its poop shoot. When I pulled on the line that the fly was attached to, it pulled on its intestine. So, it seemed as though the fish ate a double fly rig and passed one of the flies and had another lodged in its belly or something.

I don't know, I trimmed the line off an let it go. It was healthy enough to be feeding, so not quite sure what the deal was. I'm just surprised how hardy they can really be.

 

[Guest1]

I'm just curious, how are you sure it was the same fish?

I looked close at the markings on the fish. It was definately the same fish. Spots are like fingerprints. No two are alike.

 

[Poke 'Em]

I looked close at the markings on the fish. It was definately the same fish. Spots are like fingerprints. No two are alike.

Exactly. The second time I caught him, he was about 25 yards downstream of the first place I caught him.