Should we ALL be tagging??

[tully]

Just to throw another light on the subject, I was fishing on the shore of lake Macquarie here in NSW a few years ago and got taliking to a guy fishing nearby about tagging. Turns out he was a fisheries dept. employee and had reservations about tagging because some of the information gained from it had been used by the commercial sector to their advantage.
I don't know what info or how it could be used, but he said the pros had been able to take advantage of it in a direct way to aid their fishing, rather than in a political way.
No need for anyone to jump on me here, just sharing something. I have never been involved in tagging and don't know much about it at all.

[choppa]

I honestly think that tagging is a great idea. Just how many people would fall into the "I can't be bothered doing it" category would probably blow you away though. I think I would happily tag and release personally. Good thread Scalem.

Poodroo

i've been involved in tagging for a number of years,,,, off late though i've been a bit lax,,,,

its something that you don't have to do every trip,,,, and more importantly you don't have to tag every fish caught

C&R,,,,Tagging,,, its all part of the same picture for me personally,,,, but then you get low in fresh fish in the freezer and it changes to catch n kill,,,,,,

some of the info that is posted on the free newsletter that is emailed out each month is eye opening,,, especially on the distance/time periods/growth rate of species,,,,

i'm happy to report that i've had a couple of fish recaptured after being tagged,,, both of which were still in the same waters,,,, 1 was 14 weeks after,,, and the other was 41

choppa

[Maxg]

The problem with tagging is that its putting a non-sterile plastic object into a fish. And that in itself has some serious down sides. Different bad sterile conditions, storage for tags, Infection, bad handling, wrong place etcetcetc.
And the number of tags returned, on average, from ANSA data, rarely exceeds 10% from shallow water and next to none in deep water. And doesn't give any information where the other 90% are or whether they are healthy or not. A return figure of 10% is pretty bad in real terms. In fact its awful.
Results of tagging 20,000 marlin on the GBR over 10 years came out at 189 tags returned, most from longliners. Thats totally disasterous really. But it still goes on.
Fish are stressed by removal from water, 1 minute out of water can be fatal and 3 minutes definitely is. Removing a fish from water after stress is much the same as you stuffing your head in a bucket of water for a couple of minutes after a 100 metre sprint. Not funny Fred. And it takes time to record/weigh/measure/photo and tag a fish.
Flash photography can light stress a fishes visual system and more so if the fish comes from dark water and has a tapetum lucidem.
You do need to have some idea of each species visual system, whether its OK to photograph it or not.
On removal a hook/line caught fish is already stressed and may be energy expended. Which is not ideal for tagging. Like adding one more stressful situation on top of another.
You either fish to tag or for fun. In other words you need to have some idea of the species ability to handle barotrauma. It varies with species, like dhu fish are bad, snapper not so bad. Mulloway are very susceptable so are black jew.
And you need to fit your tackle to the object in hand, and be prepared to do a lot of decompression fishing. You just do not drag them up rapidly.
The question is very basic. Do you think the average rec angler is competant to carry out a tagging regime?
Or do they need a course on proper handling of fishes being tagged?
Can you recognise the condition of a fish, remember its not much point in tagging a fish that is obviously badly stressed?
Some demersal species are so susceptable to the effects of barotrauma, like bladder expansion, circulation cessation and bends, that they are dead, but for all intent and purpose still alive, when they hit the surface. Survival time is about 3 days. Dhu fish for example.
The problem with the idea that anyone and everyone can be a tagger, simply increases the jumber of fish tagged simply because they can be. And thats dangerous.
If tagging is for science, then scientists should do it, because thats their business.
Science has nothing to do with rec anglers basically because they are not scientists.
Fish are live animals, not just objects to be treated as things to be tagged etc.
We have seriously declining fisheries and since bag limits have been introduced and research done on the why's and wherefores of fisheries decline, regardless of the result we have had reducing bag limits on a few yearly intervals. Basically because the fishery continues to decline regardless of the measures taken to reduce that decline.
Commercials have. and still are being hit hard and there are no fish zones.
What fishing practise exists and has existed since the 1980's that has no regulation, no accountability or any control whatsoever and is outside the rules and regulations? And if there is one, could it be the real reason for the fishery decline?
You figure it out but you will find that catch and tag/release fits all the negatives as far as fishery conservation is concerned.
I'm just pointing out the the things that people don't consider when they get "tag" virus.
For my money all open ended release practises are bad for the fishery, basically because its widespread, uncontrollable and the reason for the major part of the decline of fisheries. You can offer arguments, but I'll bet you London to a brick that this will bring a hell of a lot of abuse and maybe even my being banned, because there is no logical answer that can be used to refute it. It's too obvious.
Now to most rec anglers that sort of thing isn't funny, but neither is the cessation of fishing alltogether because the fishes disappear.
And they are steadily doing that regardless of permenently reducing bag limits and controlled fisheries.
MaxG.
PS I just sat down and looked very seriously at the why's and woffors of fishery decline. You can too.

[Scalem]

Not sure I follow you MaxG,
One of the points you make about knowing how to handle fish is part of what I said from the outset- to be trained properly. I agree we can't all be scientists, but evidence suggests that there are guys out there tagging who really know what they are doing, otherwise their fish would not be caught again would they?

I don't agree with your statement "You figure it out but you will find that catch and tag/release fits all the negatives as far as fishery conservation is concerned" If you are trained to tag properly, minimising injury to the fish, tagging has to be a good thing. I think you are missing the fact that if there was absolutely no human intervention in the life of anything piscatorial, it's a dangerous world down there in the life of a fish. If you could invisibly identify a fish and allow it to go about its business, what are his odds of survival? I think his chances of survival are very slim, nothing to do with tagging. Now add polution and all other negative influences, and you are correct in saying there is no logical answer.

But to label some do gooder fishermen with the "tag virus" is a little unfair, we only want what is best for our fishery, if that means getting involved in some way such as tagging. If you are saying "all open ended release practises are bad for the fishery" then the solution is simple, we can't give up our fishing, so we may as well fish without hooks.

Scalem

[Maxg]

I don't think you get the whole picture. The point is that in Australia there are millions of fish caught and released each year by people who are fishing just to catch and release. Most are not tagged.
Lets say that figure is 4 million and mortality rates are 50%. Isn't that 2 million dead fish. If there is no catch and release the dead figure is zero and thats 4 million fish swimming around out there.
There are no rules or regulations that apply to C/R it's outside the law, you know that Fishery LAW.
You need to recognise that the bag limits are continually being reduced, and there are increasing no fish areas, but regardless of this the fishery is declining. Added to this is population increases, more boats more fishos.
In fact it doesn't matter what rules are applied the fishery declines.
Something is responsible for the declining fishery. There has to be a reason.
MaxG.

[Maxg]

I agree that life is tough for the fishes, and any of the species inhabiting the water, rivers or oceans, but thats natural because the whole deal is a food chain. It has to be, as it is on the land masses. Native animals/ birds etc live off the land. But we restrict the killing of land animals by restricting firearms etc.
The equivalent of catch and release, land version, is chasing a animal around a paddock for hours, until is energy depleted and sticking a non sterile tag in its rear and letting it go.
Hunting is just one killing shot to the head. The animal doesn't know its dead.
Just because its a fish, we can justify doing what we do because its unseen until its in the boat. And it doesn't yell and scream.
This is of course the view of the animal libbers, and they have a point, if you didn't catch them you wouldn't kill any. I am not a libber, absolutely not.
Whats wrong with fishing to eat, Forget fun, just kill to eat. Thats what hunters do.
And stick to the rules.
MaxG.

[Poodroo]

I don't think you get the whole picture. The point is that in Australia there are millions of fish caught and released each year by people who are fishing just to catch and release. Most are not tagged.
Lets say that figure is 4 million and mortality rates are 50%. Isn't that 2 million dead fish. If there is no catch and release the dead figure is zero and thats 4 million fish swimming around out there.
There are no rules or regulations that apply to C/R it's outside the law, you know that Fishery LAW.
You need to recognise that the bag limits are continually being reduced, and there are increasing no fish areas, but regardless of this the fishery is declining. Added to this is population increases, more boats more fishos.
In fact it doesn't matter what rules are applied the fishery declines.
Something is responsible for the declining fishery. There has to be a reason.
MaxG.

We do not have any scientific evidence to support any percentages of mortality. What if it is only 2%? What if the mortality rate is less than one percent? Until I can see some hard proof written that there is any kind of mortality during catch and release then I would have to say that catch and release is far better than no release at all. How do we know that fish stocks are on the decline? Where is the hard proof other than what the greenies are telling us? Whenever I see current documentaries showing our reefs filmed by divers I have to say there is no shortage of fish when they do these films. It all looks pretty well stocked and healthy to me. To me it seems we are being targeted by the greens purely based on non-factual hypothetical garbage.

Poodroo

[Jeremy]

Lets say that figure is 4 million and mortality rates are 50%.

Where did you get THAT from? Is that just a wild guess. I believe from various sources I have read that survival rates of released fish are MUCH higher than that, somewhere around 90%. In fact, I participated in a flathead survival study, in which a couple of hundred flathead were caught by various means (bait and lure) with both lip, mouth and gut hooked fish. They were tagged, kept in a large holding tank for 5 days and then released. The overall survival was 97%, and did not relate to hook location from memory.

I know survival rate will vary with species and depth etc, but let's not just pull a random figure out of the air. OK?

Jeremy

[Jeremy]

Infofish Services (Bill Sawynok) administers the Qld tagging program (SUNTAG) on behalf of ANSA Qld. This link http://www.info-fish.net/ will give you all the information you need about the tagging program both Qld and other states.

Each year, Ansa Qld gets funding from the Qld govt via DPI&F. This covers administration costs and purchase of tags. As has been previously stated, there are only a limited number of tags available hence the restriction of tagging to those species listed on the tagging list.
Bill is more than happy to received donations towards the purchase of more tags.

To participate in SUNTAG, you have to be a member of ANSA Qld either through an affilliated club or as a direct member (Qld sportfisher).

The detailed info required from taggers allows Bill to accumulate very comprehensive information about fishing. (read some of the report available online from INFOFISH).

If you're not prepared to complete the tagging sheets properly, don't tag.

The only way we can argue our position is with hard and accurate information. Have a look at the CapReef link on the Infofish website.

This sort of monitoring program should be used across the whole of Qld to provide info (read ammo) for when dealing with government department and others who want to stick their noses into rec fishing.

Luc
ANSA Qld Exec
http://ansaqld.com.au/

Problem is Luc, the data has also been used against us by the EPA for the Moreton Bay Marine Park and I believe in other cases also. I know some of the most prolific taggers who feel very disappointed about this.

Jeremy

[Scalem]

MaxG,

You seem to draw parallels between declining fish stocks and catch & release. Thanks Jeremy for your input, I think that your test results pretty much dispell that notion C&R is unhealthy practice- in the case of the flathead. I think results vary from species to species, but again, release is better than nothing. Also, your comparisons between chasing a warm blooded animal around a paddock to stick a tag in its ear and hooking a fish in the mouth are not apples for apples IMO. I can't imagine how much a fish hurts when hooked, as a cold blooded creature. Fish are part of our ecosystem with man at the top of the food chain, as a food source to harvest, and that's that. Next time I spot a Lion preying upon an innocent gazelle in a National Geographic show, I might ring the TV channel and protest that they should have stopped it!!

If you want to start thinking about other reasons for declining fish populations, ask Gary Fooks about his Environmental studies on outboard emissions. It must be time for me to buy a 4stroke engine after I saw the sludge my 2S leaves in a flush bag after running it for 15 minutes. Theres a million ingredients to this cake, C&R is unlikely to be a major one.

Scalem

[BigE]

MaxG i with you on this one but your whole lot braver than me .... some of the bark lovers are gonna stake you out.
as for tagging in general ??? well if some one can spell out just how they think tagging data will #1 in crease bag limits or #2 provide more fishing area for rec fisho's. then i give it some serious thought until then like all other "research" you can stick your tags ....... well i'm sure you can work out where to put em.

hang on maxg this will probably be a bumpy ride

BigE

[Scalem]

MaxG i with you on this one but your whole lot braver than me .... some of the bark lovers are gonna stake you out.
as for tagging in general ??? well if some one can spell out just how they think tagging data will #1 in crease bag limits or #2 provide more fishing area for rec fisho's. then i give it some serious thought until then like all other "research" you can stick your tags ....... well i'm sure you can work out where to put em.

hang on maxg this will probably be a bumpy ride

BigE

Increase?? My mail tells me that we will be flat out keeping things exactly where they are Good luck hoping for reversals of bag limits and green zones, you may as well sell the boat and rods now.... To coin a phrase, the only way to fight fire is with fire. Unfortunately the "research" as you refer to it is one of the only lingos they understand in political circles - the hard facts..... Surely fishermen would jump at the chance to take ownership of their own hard research instead of being force fed some of the garbage we have had to swallow thusfar. So when a new legislation is passed in the senate that will dramatically affect your freedom to fish how and where you want, is that when you reach for your carefully concealed research to try argue your point of view??? Without that, what else have you got? Friends in high places??


Scalem

[grahams]

Just a couple of updates,

• Local taggers have just completed tagging over 3000 fish INSIDE the Keppels green zones working under the guidance (and permit) of JCU scientists, who couldn't possibly tag that many fish without our help. I think within the week the recaptures of tagged fish was a couple of 100. This will be a great data base in coming years.
• Fisheries are in far more danger of being depleted due to ignorance and mismanagement than they are by excessive tag and release.
• There is a heap of research going into mortality rates on C&R and this will help in deciding when and what is tagged. Bag and size limits do not protect fish from Barotrauma either as its not really possible to release undersized fish from your hook without bringing them to the surface. (no fish zones do work??). Good management decisions and handling practices might be able to limit some of these effects in the future.
• If a tagging data has been "used against you" is that the data or the interpretation and management decisions that are a worry.... would you prefer no hard data?
• CapReef particularly, has worked closely with Scientists and Yes there were some long discussions about scientific method and validation, but with their help our data is very useful and doesn't claim to be anything more than a big buch of information that people can choose to use.... or ignore.
• I believe if fishers from all camps are better informed then the chances of decent management are better.

[One Day]

I guess the answer to the main question is no we shouldn't all be tagging.

I have to admit that I'm surprised as to the division from a rec fishing web site. If you don't believe it is a worth while practice then don't do it. It does actually take a reasonable amount of effort to care for the fish, accurately record all details of the trip, type it out when you get home and e-mail it off. And you also need to get off your bum contact sun-tag, do a bit of research about the whole thing and pay a small annual fee before you even start.

I am a tagger and personally see it as a small way of assisting with the conservation of future fish stocks. One small way where I can help out.

One way we can help to ensure there are fish for the future is to try to understand their habits. To find out more about them and their movements (i.e research). Since I release almost all of the fish I catch I might as well help researchers by popping a tag in.

Or we can all do nothing, kill all the fish we catch (because if we were to release them they would die anyway wouldn't they) and piss and moan about the decline of fish stocks. I'd rather help out and be part of the solution.

I'd encourage all those who feel as strong about it as I do, and who are willing to put in the time and effort to participate to do so. It is a worth while cause.

[Luc]

Hi Jeremy,

Before releasing the data to the EPA, Bill canvassed the high volume taggers in the Moreton Bay area and the consensus was that the data should be given.

In any case, the EPA could have obtained the info via DPI&F.

IMO, the whole unfortunate aspect of the Moreton Bay review is that it seems to be more politically motivated (green preferences payback) rather than based on sound science. If the aim is to protect the bay environment, the green zones won't do this as pollution and habitat destruction are not being addressed.

It seems to me that in the whole debate, DPI&F has been strangely silent. I'd hate to think that the gag has been applied.

Luc