Are we killing our lakers?????

[rapalaman]

I was born at Cold lake,Alberta i have fished this lake literally thousands of times and have caught thousands of fish, some days in the summer it is not uncommon to pull 50 or more lakers from the depths and thats only from two or three people in one boat!

Now on a good warm week its no problem for that lake to see a few hundred boats per day all week and even double that on a hot weekend! Now i have come across some information that i believe will change or at least if its true Should change the way we fish for this species.

So as it turns out we all fish for Lakers in deep water in fact it pretty much common knowledge that if you want to catch Lakers you gotta hit em in 80ft of water or more at least for the majority of the year.

I came across this older video publication on very big laker fishing on lake Athabasca and in it it states that being pulled up from depths of over 40 ft you are almost 100% of the time either killing or seriously injuring the fish regardless of how fast you release the fish back into the water.

Now as i saw this i couldn't help but think of how much of a disservice we could all be doing to not just Cold lake trout but but in all bodies of water across the whole country!! i think that if there is any truth to this even a little we owe it to the fish and ourselves to consider finding these fish in shallower water or maybe getting the regs changed somehow so that we can limit the fish that are dieing.

I'm not sure if this will change anything but all i can do is get the info that i have out there hopefully people will see it and make there own judgment calls and if by chance this video and my artical saves even a few big lakers from having there last picture taken!! then its all good.

This is the link to the video i saw please watch it and if not all of it at least look at 4:20 to 5:00.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SJVqBjgh-N0

[aulrich]

I thought lakers were one of the fish that could survive, due to differences in their swim bladder vs other fresh water fish.

I have seen plenty of walleye with bladders distended, but no lakers IIRC

[CNP]

Originally Posted by aulrich

I thought lakers were one of the fish that could survive, due to differences in their swim bladder vs other fresh water fish.

I have seen plenty of walleye with bladders distended, but no lakers IIRC

From Wikipedia - TROUT

The swim bladder is connected to the esophagus, allowing for gulping or rapid expulsion of air

[ak-71]

You can actually see bubbles in the summer

[Pudelpointer]

So, is World Class Laker Bob a fish biologist?

Just because he says it is so, doesn't make it so.

I have not heard of such concerns for salmonids. Maybe your own observations suggest a different reality than what is being presented in the video?

You are apparently catching many trout every day, and are seeing many boats on the water every day. Assuming that everyone is experiencing moderately decent catches, do you think it likely that the Lake Trout population in Cold Lake could sustain even a fraction of that pressure if mortality rates were even a fraction of what Bob is stating in that video?

[rapalaman]

i thought about that as well actually and its hard to argue that fact but at the same time maybe the fish are living only a short while i mean out of sight out of mind right?

i do think you have a valid point as to populations would drop and collapse due to those kind of numbers but even if the rate is say only 20% of all trout pulled out of water over 40 feet die that would not be noticed for a long time or at least not till its too late. All I'm saying is that if you love lake trout fishing and take our resource seriously i don't think its a bad idea for everyone to look into this matter further and gather more info and by all means if you know any biologists ask them i will do the same.

[fish gunner]

The lake would look like sylvan at dusk with all the c&r fish belly up at the leeward end of the lake. Ie hunderds of dead fish like pine or pigeon, or any of our other over developed lakes.

[-JR-]

Had a laker follow my hook from 90 down to just under the ice in seconds , he never bit the hook just watched him up close.
So why would he do that if it would kill him ?

[SNAPFisher]

blah blah blah blah blah....save the fishes!!! blah blah blah blab blah blah

You might think that every fish caught dying might result in a little "visual"...or how about overwhelming evidence floating about. You might even expect 50+ floating dead lakers around your boat everytime you go out...

blah blah blah blah blah blah blah...

[BassDude]

http://www.seagrant.umn.edu/newslett...eep_water.html

Interesting....

[fisherman420]

I agree with JR. I've seen so many lktr chase my lure over 80ft in seconds then go straight back to bottom. They're not perch people, they can endure major depth changes in a hurry with slim to no effect on them....that is unless it bites my lure at 100ft and comes through the ice...and it's legal length....candy lktr...mmmmm

[Levy]

Originally Posted by SNAPFisher

blah blah blah blah blah....save the fishes!!! blah blah blah blab blah blah

You might think that every fish caught dying might result in a little "visual"...or how about overwhelming evidence floating about. You might even expect 50+ floating dead lakers around your boat everytime you go out...

blah blah blah blah blah blah blah...

It's attitudes and comments like this that make people leave this forum. Incidental mortalities are a real thing, that real biologists have researched. The paper I read on incidental mortalities recorded mortality rates between 2 and 30 percent. Two important factors affecting the mortality rate were water temp, and depth. This guy wants great laker fishing to last for generations not five or ten years. It's a crime more people don't stop to think about how they impact a fishery every time they access it.

[TylerThomson]

it's a crime people believe everything they see on YouTube.

[SNAPFisher]

Originally Posted by Levy

It's attitudes and comments like this that make people leave this forum. Incidental mortalities are a real thing, that real biologists have researched. The paper I read on incidental mortalities recorded mortality rates between 2 and 30 percent. Two important factors affecting the mortality rate were water temp, and depth. This guy wants great laker fishing to last for generations not five or ten years. It's a crime more people don't stop to think about how they impact a fishery every time they access it.

blah blah blah blah blah blah Will somebody please think of the minnows!!!! blah blah blah blah blah blah Give me a break! blah blah blah blah blah blah

[wellpastcold]

Yes. Everyone should stop fishing for them except me.

[surhuntsalot]

Truth is Lakers may be able to regulate their swim bladders. What they can't regulate is the other practices inflicted on them. Fingers through the gills to hold them up for a picture before they're dropped bleeding back down the hole.... People stepping on them while they're flopping on the ice to take the hook out.... Even if 1 in 10 doesn't make it, on a "50 fish" day you've killed 5 times your daily limit even if you release them all....

[EZM]

Lakers, as with most Char, will be uneffected by rapid depth change.

They do, however, bleed when poked in the gills by "jimmy fat fingers", and get exhausted when engaged in a long fight by "joe 4lb test with light drag pro star".

It is likely these factor play a much larger role in any mortality.

The article is video is bunk ......... don't believe everything you see or read on the "interweb" ........

[tight line]

Originally Posted by -JR-

Had a laker follow my hook from 90 down to just under the ice in seconds , he never bit the hook just watched him up close.
So why would he do that if it would kill him ?

This!! That is all!

[tight line]

And i know every angler is different, but i have more of my own blood on the ice removing hooks that are properly set in the lip, than Laker blood. Fish smart, if they are hitting light, maybe keep the stingers on, nailing it, go with out. I had one fish out of well over a hundred, that took thehook bad, and thankfully he was a keeper. I grab them out of the hole by the side of their gill, and if you are patient and do it right, your hands are nowhere near their gills, if you keep your finger to the front there is actually a layer of thick skin that separates their gills. I can confidently say my mortality rate on released lakers is very low! That being said i care greatly about the well being of the fish i release and take in all information i read on it

[EZM]

Read this ......... page 136 ........ capture depth ........ Lake Trout

http://www3.carleton.ca/fecpl/pdfs/B...w%20Review.pdf

Conclusion - 6 studies, sound scientific studies, reported ZERO capture depth incidents of mortality in Lake Trout. ZERO, NONE .....

You video is absolute bunk. The amount of misinformation in this video is staggering.

I love the "interweb".

[huntsfurfish]

Originally Posted by Pudelpointer

So, is World Class Laker Bob a fish biologist?

Just because he says it is so, doesn't make it so.

I have not heard of such concerns for salmonids. Maybe your own observations suggest a different reality than what is being presented in the video?

You are apparently catching many trout every day, and are seeing many boats on the water every day. Assuming that everyone is experiencing moderately decent catches, do you think it likely that the Lake Trout population in Cold Lake could sustain even a fraction of that pressure if mortality rates were even a fraction of what Bob is stating in that video?

Good post.
Agree!

[rapalaman]

Im so glad that was put to bed with scientific proof and data!!!! I must be a retard and completely naive to believe something on the internet!! now i feel bad because i called everyone that fishes for lakers in deep water .....FISH KILLERS!!

.....BUT WAIT i never said i believe what that video said nor did i call anyone a fish killer!! if some of you so called outdoors men lol would read what was said before jumping to conclude that I'm wrong!!, when you have not one shred of real proof yourself you might come to understand that all i did was ask a ? think for yourself is what i said....right????

What i never said was please respond with data sheet and reports that you yourself most likely pulled of the ....inter web!!! lmao first you say bla bla bla bla save the minnows bull S#@t which by the way was really cool and informative if fact with that display of I.Q I'm going to start clapping now and give a ''good for you!!'' shout out im impressed that you got your power on let alone typed some letters!!! bla bla bla.
Forgive me for being concerned.

[skidderman]

If it was true one should see dead lakers floating on top a lot more I would think. I've also heard that bringing them up slow was better but just one person's opinion. Strange because I get mine at 55 feet and shallower. I've had better luck at that depth than deeper but I'm no expert.

[rapalaman]

Originally Posted by skidderman

If it was true one should see dead lakers floating on top a lot more I would think. I've also heard that bringing them up slow was better but just one person's opinion. Strange because I get mine at 55 feet and shallower. I've had better luck at that depth than deeper but I'm no expert.

yes i agree you would think there would be more floating around and the reasoning behind bringing em up slow is to let the fish release the gas and air on its own before it expands to large and cause borotrama.

[fish gunner]

Originally Posted by rapalaman

yes i agree you would think there would be more floating around and the reasoning behind bringing em up slow is to let the fish release the gas and air on its own before it expands to large and cause borotrama.

Leaving the fish immersed helps relieve expansion. Lake char are well adapted to rapid changes indepth as are all trout to various degrees.

[davegrant]

If you want accurate information just talk to the local biologists who constantly monitor the lakes. Talked to Cold Lake biologist and the reason for the larger size limit ( 75 CM ) is that there was poor year classes in 2003 to 2006 and the number of lake trout was low so these year classes needed to be protected so population could catch up. It's amazing the accurate information you get when you go to the right sources.

[58thecat]

Originally Posted by davegrant

If you want accurate information just talk to the local biologists who constantly monitor the lakes. Talked to Cold Lake biologist and the reason for the larger size limit ( 75 CM ) is that there was poor year classes in 2003 to 2006 and the number of lake trout was low so these year classes needed to be protected so population could catch up. It's amazing the accurate information you get when you go to the right sources.

Exactly you get a group of people who fish, throw in a bunch of opinions based on time on water, size of boat, and we get expert opinions...usually induced by a few wobbly pops and then man they are marine biologists! Which reminds me I got to go get another drink.....

[dbllung]

In My humble opinion the BIG threat to the lake trout is the fact that we are allowed to keep the large mature spawners... This conservation model is destined to produce a collapse in heavily fished water bodies... I believe that swim bladder distention is the LEAST of the lakers problems....

Slot limits or max size limits should be a requirement.. Spawning age fish should be protected

IMO

[tight line]

Rapalaman, do you have a flasher/ sonar? That for me put to bed any question of weather swim bladder fatalities occured, i could read every BS paper wrote on this.. But when you watch a Laker at Cold go from 100-5 ft chasing your hook OR Actual Cisco, or Lakers at Abraham chase from 200ft up, and then go right back down! Why would they do this if it killed/hurt them? One of the reasons i love fishing for them!

[TylerThomson]

Thanks ezm for posting a study with verifiable sources and what at a glance looks like sounds scientific method.

Rapala your the one doing harm you you weren't just innocently asking a question as you claim and poor you had everyone jump on your back. You were spreading false information and sitting up fears all based on a you tube video. You realize anyone can pay anything they want in you tube. there is nothing wrong with what ezm did by pulling info from the web. His came with verifiable sources yours was a self purported you tube expert. I hope you can see the difference. it's attitudes like yours that give e thing like homeopathy and all the rest off the junk out there credence. Do some basic research on the subject rather than stirring up fear.