|
Boundary Waters Quetico Forum :: Fishing Forum :: Lake Trout mortality
|
| Author | Message Text | ||
| jhb8426 |
I can sort of understand that argument, but it seems that decompression also involves release of excess inert gases dissolved in the body tissues (at least for humans). Guessing the same applies to fish. |
||
| thegildedgopher |
|
||
| egknuti |
Lake Trout mortality |
||
| mgraber |
The Laker population is very vulnerable and we should do all we can to protect it. Large pike are also extremely fragile and often do not survive release, except in most cases it is not water temps, but poor handling. There is much evidence to support this, as well as how quickly a lake becomes completely out of balance when the very top predators are removed. Pike and Lakers are both very cannibalistic and do much to control their own population. It takes a long time to grow large lakers and pike and their genetics are probably also very unique. Why such a profound difference between BWCA and Quetico? My uncle had photos of huge pike they caught in large numbers around the Park Rapids area. They are almost unheard of today, but you can catch all the hammer handles you want. Just because a fish swims away, does NOT mean it survives, it might make you feel better to believe that, but it has no actual bearing on survival, stress, eye injury, slime coat damage, cuts and scrapes, gill damage, broken cartilage in the jaw do not prevent a fish from swimming away, but can eventually kill it or reduce feeding and growth for a long time. Take care of those lakers and large pike, or canoe country will start to look like the lakes further south. Do not put them in the bottom of the canoe, do not drag them to shore for a photo session, they are worth more than that. Use techniques to land and photo or measure quickly and release immediately, seconds count. And be prepared for that extra large fish, you never know when it is coming. End of rant. :) |
||
| KarlK |
|
||
| thegildedgopher |
Anecdotally, has anyone ever come across a dead laker floating in the bwca? |
||
| thegildedgopher |
“A key take home message from this study is that lake trout are not a suitable fish for catch and release fishing,” Shawn Sitar, Michigan DNR fisheries biologist who headed the study, concluded in assessing the study results. I just think that’s far too broad and there are many instances where this is not true. |
||
| Pinetree |
Many can swim away and dive and die, also most dead fish are grabbed very fast by eagles or gulls. The surface water in inland lakes usually will be warmer than Lake Superior so temperature difference could be greater when brought up from cold water at times. Yes, each scenario is different. Even on Mille lacs and its shallow water, the DNR puts additional restrictions on when water warms. Lactic acid builds up so much faster when water is warm. |
||
| timatkn |
I would add though this information is based on Lake Superior Charter fishing the trout are being hauled up from depths of 100’ or more. Most people fishing in a canoe are catching fish between 20-30 feet. It’s an apples to oranges comparison. I still think you should be careful in warm weather for the most part I just catch and harvest vs. catch trout after trout in warm water…but I’ve fished for walleyes on a 20’ reef in August and caught lots of trout from shallow water. The fish in Quetico/BWVAW are not the same as Lake Superior fish. They relate and acclimate to warmer water and stay shallower. You can find deeper fish in those areas too but I don’t think you should target them in warm weather it’s too big of a shock to their system. Finally don’t rely on barbless hooks to cause less damage. Barbless hooks won’t do anything for a deep water fish. Barbless hooks cause deeper hooksets, tear more tissue, more gill damage and arterial damage than barbed. You still need to practice good ethics when targeting deeper fish. The Mille Lacs study showed a higher delayed hooking mortality on walleyes using barbless because of these issues. I still use barbless—I like them better and in lip hooked fish they do have a better mortality and are easier to release…they just aren’t the panacea we originally thought and won’t counter act bad ethics. As Pintree stated barbless hooks on shallow fish (more likely a mouth hooking) in cold water have the best chance for survival after release. I’ll double down on don’t drag fish to shore to land them. You will kill big walleyes, Northerns, Lakers doing that. The fish are coming from colder water…you are dragging them into warmer water, tiring them out and building up lactic acid, then releasing them in shallow warmer water. Pretty much a guarantee for delayed hooking mortality for a big northern, walleye, or Laker. T |
||
| Pinetree |
|
||
| timatkn |
jhb8426: "I recently read an article that said decompression was also an issue for fish caught in deeper waters, but one of the later paragraphs in this article seems to refute that saying that venting or deflation of the lake trout’s gas bladder was of no benefit. Yea there used to be a practice of inserting a needle into the air bladder and releasing the pressure. I believe this is illegal in most states now. I don’t believe there is any benefit to the fish except it may not float right away. But as far as delayed mortality I don’t believe it has ever been proven to help. I am going off memory so correct me if i am wrong. Lake trout can handle depth changes other fish can’t though. I don’t know their depth limit, but it’s better than crappies or walleyes for example. I fished on Lake Oahe in SD one year where the limit was 42 walleyes in possession and 14/day. We targeted walleye in deeper water 40-60 feet and it was catch/kill. Not one of those fish would have survived. All eater sized thank goodness. BTW didn’t get my 42 walleye limit LOL. I don’t think trout would have had the same issues, but I have never fished for trout deeper than 30 feet. Never have had too. T |