|
|
| So I just read an article in which the author claims vertical holds don't hurt muskies. What do you guys think? He has some evidence of large fish being recaptured after a vertical hold. Seriously though, it is an unnatural hold and as soon as that fish flips or flops having a firm hold on its gill isn't a good idea. I don't see the DNR handling fish this way. Finally, if your young son or daughter falls asleep on the couch do you cradle them in your arms and take them to bed or do you lift them up under the jaw? I am not trying to compare fish to children I am just saying it is really unnnatural. If it's unnatural for us why the heck would fish be fine with it? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1769
Location: Algonquin, ILL | Look at it this way, What if someone was to hold you off the ground vetically by your jaw, What kind of damage do you think that would cause. If you have to hold a fish for a pic Horizontal hold is the way to go
Edited by JohnMD 3/30/2006 8:13 AM
|
|
| |
|
| That is the exact point I was trying to make, JohnMD. The article also has the author tagging fish all over the place. If I see anyone tagging a muskie in MN the TIP line is getting a call. Since when can private citizens tag fish? I found the entire article irresonsible and I am not sure what MHM was trying to accomplish. |
|
| |
|
| the scientists that have been asked about vertical holds have said there isn't "proof" it hurts fish, but that their educated opinion is that it's likely to cause harm, potentially leading to delayed mortality. (see articles in Esox Angler)
the article in MHM you're referring to is providing one fisherman's anecdotal evidence. he's recaptured fish that have previously been vertically held. he presents this as "proof" that vertical holds don't hurt fish. imho, he's over-generalizing from a small sample set and i agree that it's somewhat irresponsible to present his opinion as fact.
i'll stick with the scientists' opinions, myself. |
|
| |
|
| DJS
I know youve talked to him before, in the past,,but give Rod Ramsell a call or email at the MN dnr and ask him about vertical holds and what the potential it does to the bones in the fish's neck,, he has a great discription of it |
|
| |
|
| I think there probably is a good chance that often a vertical hold will not hurt a fish..BUT, what's the point of even taking the chance other then to be a show off? Not only is the proper hold better for the fish, it is also safer for the angler in case the fish is not cooperating with you. I don't know why guys are fighting this, it takes so little effort to put your hand up there and certainly doesn't make the fish look any smaller |
|
| |
|
Posts: 734
| Is this the same article where the guy is putting radio transmitters on the bellies of the fish. The pics show wires hanging out of the belly of the fish. I don't like the way that looks. If it gets snagged on anything it is going to be real bad for the fish. Why cant we just catch, photo if it is a nice fish, and release. Especially the small ones. I was fishing with Chad Cain and I caught like a 20" muskie. He cut off every hook to make sure this young fish didn't hurt in any way. It is easier to hold a fish horizontily than vertically in my opinion. I think some people need to take lessons in releasing and handling these fish. I get nervous about the health of the fish after being out of the water for 30 seconds. All I can think is get her back in the water!!!!!!!! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 714
Location: Rhinelander, WI | To be honest I was thinking some of the same stuff you guys mentioned when reading the article. However you have to take it for what it’s worth. It was a very interesting read and there is stuff in there that we can learn from if willing to look past inflammatory buzz. The guy mentioned a couple times this was just his OPINION, it was never stated as fact, he also mentioned it was just anecdotal evidence a number of times. In Ill. it must be legal to personally tag fish in Wisconsin it no longer is. It’s also legal to fish ski during the span in Ill. it isn’t in WI or MN, it’s all relative.
The radio transmitter pic was with the tracking study article. That was a WDNR funded and sponsored, scientific study totally different set of circumstances, and if we want those studies so we can learn more about this elusive fish then that’s the way it has to be done.
Nail A Pig!
Mike
|
|
| |
|
| Hiya -
I did see the article you're referring to after someone pointed it out to me.
Frankly, I was pretty disgusted. To me it was a pretty elaborate justification for being unwilling to change one's ways. It has no more basis in science than the argument that, since fish caught with single hook sucker rigs 'took right off' they were fine.
Is a verticaly hold immediately fatal, or fatal in all cases? Of course not. Stating that is no revelation. I've talked about this isssue with many, many biologists, including some of the most well-respected Esocid biologists in the world (Mike Butler, Rod Ramsell, Jerry Younk, Bob Strand, John Casselman, Ed Crossman...). None of them has said it's universally and immediately fatal, though all did say immediate mortality was a likely result in some cases.
But: None of them....NONE of them...felt it was an acceptable way to handle fish that are going to be released. The physiological damage that can result from a vertical hold can have a dramatic affect on the fish's long term health in terms of internal injury to skeletal/muscular structures, ligaments and connective tissues that aren't immediately or perhaps even directly fatal, but affects the fish's ability to feed effectively, their mobility, and where their energy goes (repairing injury vs. growth and development). There are simply NO positives that can result from a vertically held fish. What's more - and agreement on this was universal from the biologists I asked about it specifically - all of the negative effects are more pronounced as the fish held that way increases in size. It's just physics and gravity.
So if there are A: no benifits to the fish in being held vertically, and B: potential serious negative effects up to an indluding mortality, what POSSIBLE justification is there for handling a fish that way? Sorry sports fans. "They don't all die" isn't an acceptable argument for vertical holds.
One of the arguments that often gets put forward by those who defend the practice of vertical holds is the lack of specific research on it as a cause of delayed mortality. Why are there no studies documenting specifically the effects of vertical holds and whether or not it's a contributing factor in delayed mortality? I asked a biologist this question once. He looked at me like I'd lost my mind, and said "we don't have the time, the money, or the resources to study the obvious."
I also know what will likely be coming up at some point in this discussion. The "If you're so worried about hurting the fish, you may as well join PETA" argument.
It's a classic case of one of the most popular logical fallacies there is. It's called an 'appeal to ridicule' - an argument which presents the opponent's argument in a way that appears ridiculous, often to the extent of creating a straw man of the actual argument. If Einstein's theory of relativity is correct, then I get shorter and fatter every time I drive my car. Since that is a ridiculous statement, Einstein's theory must be false. Sorry folks, that line of reasoning (if you can call it that) is crap. Period. It is not the case that anyone making a statement against vertical holds is by extension suggesting that we should all quit using hooks, quit fishing, join PETA or anything of the sort. Arguing the question of handling and vertical holds by saying that stating a case for more fish friendly handling is the equivalent of a radical animal rights position is not a valid argument. It's just not.
We've taken some heat for the stance we've taken on vertical holds and handling in general at Esox Angler. The article we're talking about here took some not too thinly veiled shots at the 'experts' who claim vertical holds are unsafe. I can only assume that was directed at some of the writers we've had address the topic (which would include Mike Butler, Rod Ramsell, and, in Mike Butler's article, fisheries biologists and fish physiologists from all over the world). My personal opinion is this: I think there's plenty of room for debate and personal choice when it comes to a lot of aspects of release technique. Photo in the water or a quick horizontal hold? Personal choice to me, because either can be done in a manner that's pretty fish friendly. Measure and girth every fish or just turn them loose? Personal choice again.
But I'm a lot less open minded about vertical holds. When every fisheries biologist I've ever asked about it tells me in no uncertain terms that it's not a responsible way to handle fish, it's pretty clear cut to me. Rod Ramsell called holding fish vertically for a photo an 'ego shot.' I think he's right. When it's detrimental to the fish, even if it's not universally fatal, when it's not a necessity (you have to handle fish some to release them, but holding them vertically isn't a requirement), and when it's done purely for effect (how fish look in a photo), explain how a vertical hold for a photo has any other basis than the angler's willingness to put his own self-gratification above the fish's chances to survive.
If that makes me a radical or an elitist to some who want to continue to justify using a vertical hold, I can live with that.
Rob Kimm
|
|
| |
|
| Excellent post Rob!
Vertical holds can't be good for the muskies, especially bigger, heavier muskies where more potential damage can be done. It probably doesn't hurt the little guys, but why even hold them in the first place? Release little guys in the water |
|
| |
|
| Excellent post Rob. As I stated earlier this article is irresponsible and has no place being published in a magazine that claims to care about muskies.
Finally, the author fishes the PMTT which I know will no longer publish any photos of vertically held fish. Maybe this guy should listen to the pros.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 2427
Location: Ft. Wayne Indiana | We know that vertical holds are not good for the fish, so simply don't do them.
Who cares what the DNR says...they still don't seem to think catching muskies in 85 degree water is hard on them either.
Just don't do it if you know it will hurt them. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8856
| I gotta agree with Hulbert -- no point in arguing about it, just don't do it. When you see someone doing it kindly mention that connective tissue damage and delayed mortality could result from that sort of hold and hope whoever it is says "wow, really? I'm not doing that anymore!" |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1936
Location: Eau Claire, WI | Great Reply Rob...
Bottom line on verticle holds, good quality release tools, cutting hooks, the need/desire to have a photo of a fish in the first place, is that if you as an individual angler are serious about doing the best you can when it comes to handling/release methods, one will most always air on the side of caution in the interest of the fish. Thuss, verticle holds go out the window...
Education amongst the anling community is the best way to spread the word on all aspects of catch/release 'best practices'. Through conduits like magazine publications, club meetings, the internet, and what I like to call "dock talk" at the boat ramps. It gives us an opportunity to spread the word.
Last weekend I gave a seminar at an area sport show, and for the past several years have devoted a few minutes of all seminars to release tools and methods. To the average angler the subject of delayed mortality is something that most are unfamiliar. Taking the time to explain to someone why you have the tools you do in you boat, or what we know about single hook rigs, etc. can pay dividends long term for all of us. The power of numbers is huge when one person tells one person, and that person tells another one or two and they then tell..... on and on.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 11
| Very good points Mark, you taught me many things about muskie fishing when I fished with you in your boat. Keep up the good work.
Casey Johnson |
|
| |
|
| I've fished with the author for the last five years. He has done a lot for musky fishing including stocking programs, project green gene, organizing spillway rescues, and has been involved in several studies. You can't compare a vertical hold with with the single hook study because vertically held fish are being recaptured. I know someone who caught the same fish 8 times and used a bogga grip to vertically hold the fish. He unhooks them in the net and pulls them out with the bogga grip. This fish was recognized by markings and had tag. Know how can it be as damaging as people say if the fish was caught 8 times in a 2 month span. This individual will not change his ways because of all the fish he recaptures. He never even takes a photograph of his fish. He lifts them out of the net vertically and places them back into the water in less than 6-10 seconds. The fish used the exact same structure for this 2 months. A 40+incher. This brings me to the next point that just about everyone uses a vertical hold when they take a muskie out of a net. Then they use the other hand to support the mid section. The key I believe is to limit your time out of the water. We can all agree on that--Have your camera ready and take the fish out and snap a couple quick photos if it is a trophy in your eyes. We shouldn't take pictures of every single fish. The author recaptured giant fish. The only reason why other top pros won't admitt that vertical holds don't kill fish is because it is pollitical suicide. It would crush there reputation because the majority thinks it's a death sentence. No fact base behind this reasoning. How much force do we apply on a muskies jaw when we do these powerful hooksets and battles. I can gaurrantee that it's more than 40lbs. The average fish that we catch is far below this number. I also don't think that over 900 fish is a small sample group. This group is just him alone. At one point or another, almost all fish are vertically held.
Performers at different shows support themselves by their teeth and spin violently. They don't dislocate thier jaw even with the violent spinning. A muskies jaw structure is larger in comparison with their body compared to humans. Once again just throwing it out there-- We all agree that all of us have been part of a musky that has suffured delayed mortality. I don't think any of us have stopped fishing for musky. We know that there is a percentage of the fish we catch that are hooked wrong or we have stressed a fish to irreversible levels. That is the bottom line. All of us have are different opinions on this matter. I understand that these opinions are for the benifit of this resource. So I do respect them--The evidence is in the recaptures of fish that have been vertically held for a short period of time. A fish held horizontally for an extended period of time is worse in my OPINION. The bottom line is we all kill fish by simply setting our 6 odd trebles in their mouth. Sometimes setting the hook twice--We have solid evidence that that vertical holds do not hurt fish. Please respect our opinions as we respect yours. I know that each of us care about the fishery. The only way to garauntee not to kill a musky is to not fish for it-- Todd Kotarski |
|
| |
|
| thanks for speaking up Todd.
lots of good information here, different opinions all around.
Mr. Rusteberg clearly cares passionately about muskies and muskie fishing, he's an amazing fisherman, and his recapture data does suggest that muskies are being frequently caught and released successfully.
in discussing vertical holds with trophy fish, he notes having 42 fish over 50" in his boat. "many" have been vertically held, with 16 being recaptured later.
that is a lot of trophy fish, but it's actually not a big sample size in a scientific sense. especially when one considers his conclusions are based on a recapture rate of 38%. (which means 62% are unknown!)
he suggests "one become more educated before you chastise another musky angler on a hold or release technique." then he goes on to note that scientists have written about the subject (and they suggest v-holds are likely harmful) but he says that no conclusion is "irrepressible". "my tag data suggests that vertical holds are not damaging fish."
that last bit is where i believe he goes astray. his tag data suggests that some fish (38% of those over 50") are surviving the process. that's it. that's all. it doesn't suggest anything at all about whether or not vertical holds are damaging some of the fish, or potentially contributing to delayed mortality in some of the 62% that have not been recontacted.
yes, get more educated...by listening to the people who study and know about the physiology of muskies. in no way am i suggesting Mr. Rusteberg is a bad person. he's likely done more for the sport by educating people in his boat than i will ever do! i just think his opinion on this issue is wrong. i also think that the influence of articles and photographs is very large, and therefore carries a large responsibility to be more conscious of what good science says. although his recaptures of trophy fish are impressive in the muskie fishing scheme of things, it's not strong scientifically, and shouldn't be presented as such.
encouraging the use of horizontal holds based on scientific opinion isn't putting muskies on a "pedestal", it's just doing one more thing to preserve the resource for "next time".
get them back in the water quickly. we can all agree on that. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2091
Location: Stevens Point, WI | I think anglers should continue with horizontal holds, there is much more data to suggest that this is safer for the fish. Just because one person claims it doesn't hurt them, doesn't mean it's good for them. |
|
| |
|
| Lambeau,
Thanks for your opinions concerning this issue. I learn a lot from this board and other peoples opinions. Someone stated at one time that vertical holds kill fish and it spread like a wild-fire. He stated the 50 inchers he caught in a non-scientific study for this article. I don't have his article in front of me so I apologize about some of his qoutes. I do believe he stated it's non-scientific study. Other musky fisherman/woman have caught hundreds of these tagged musky. The one fish was caught eight times in 2 months. I believe almost all musky fisherman use a vertical hold when taking a musky out of a net. We both have to agree on that fact. I have proof in these recaptures that this is not a death sentence. We can never recapture all the fish we have previously caught. I would Love for someone to do a scientific study of 12 vertically held, 12 horizontally held, and 12 control. This would solve this issue once and for all. I respect everyones opinion on this board and understand that this issue is to protect resources. How much force do we put on their jaw with a violent hookset. It has to be an incredible amount of force isolated in such a small area.(hook) If anything would break a jaw or impact mortality, it would be our violent hooksets and battles. Thanks for your opinion. |
|
| |
|
| On the point of comparing vertical holds to the single hook sucker rig, I do believe some of the fish in the CHIP study were recaptured that had swallowed a single hook sucker rig. They obviously lived but were in poor shape from what I remember. So to use the same logic as the author one can keep using single hook sucker rigs as long as they recapture a fish that has swallowed one in the past.
The action of sticking these fish with tags is also out of line and I can't believe the Illinois DNR even allows it. Every angle in Illinois is going to run out and by a tagger and start punching holes in every fish they catch. I am sure that won't harm the resource.
My frustration not only lies with the author but with the magazine publishing the article. IRRESPONSIBLE!!!!!!!! |
|
| |
|
| Todd (ski86) - i do appreciate your taking a reasonable "tone" in what can obviously be an issue that gets people heated, and your willingness to voice your thoughts in spite of a lot of social pressure not to do so. that's what makes for good discussion.
to flip the discussion on it's head a bit: what is good about vertical holds? why use them?
imho, they don't look as good in pictures and might induce some risk to the fish.
what's are the advantages in your mind?
(i'm sure you can see where i'm going: if there's no big advantages, why risk the possibility it's harmful?) |
|
| |
|
| Is it responsible to be open minded about a subject or closed minded, especially when there is no proof either way? I found the article extrmely interesting especially since he recaught 16 of 42 50 inchers and held them vertically. Of course he isnt going to recatch every one but that shows a trend. I would much rather read a publication that is open minded rather than one that tries to force an agenda on the public |
|
| |
|
| Look at much of what he has written in the past and you could compile articles going against the common belief. Each article alone is fine, but when you put them all together it forms a large picture. They are just fish so people can hold them how they like, but using this article as "support" is just silly..Ben Remer |
|
| |
|
Posts: 8856
| I don't think we generate as much force on the hookset as we think we do. Between the resistance of the water, the length of line out, the flex of the rod, and the drag on the reel, I doubt there is much risk of injury there (other than hook wounds of course) I also doubt that a vertical hold is detrimental to a smaller fish as much as it is a large heavy fish.
The only advantage I see to a vertical hold is to avoid removing the slime coating. So what is worse?? Risking internal injury and delayed mortality due to a vertical hold, or riskng infecton and delated mortality due to placing your hands on the fish?
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 341
| My buddy is a guide up in Vilas and has over 3500 muskies in his life time. His hold is unique and consistent with one hand on the jaw and the other on it's tail positioned vertical for pics. I'm sure if he ever experienced damage to the fish he would stop since his lively hood depends on it and his duty cycle. Who the hell knows what the fish feels for sure, If I was ski I would prefer being held vert rather then 5/0 hamsandy set with the super lines of today. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1767
Location: Lake Country, Wisconsin | I just don't understand the reasoning for debating this issue...Taking the fish out of the net requires an extremely quick vertical hold, but we are talking like 1-2 seconds before your other hand gets there. I don't think that is what is being debated. I am hardly a fanatic like some guys in our industry are about handling fish but this is one issue that I feel is pointless to debate...While It may not be an automatic death sentence by any means it does seem to add another negative chance of harming the fish... so again, why argue it simply don't do it |
|
| |
|
Posts: 384
Location: Eagle River, Alaska | Let me play devil's advocate just because it is so much fun. The first large musky I caught was on the Ottawa River with Richard Collin as he got the camera ready for my obligatory "ego shot" I moved the fish up in a vertical hold and I thought Richard was going into an apoplectic fit....he quickly had me reset the fish in horizontal mode for a few more quick shots.....then she was off back into the Ottawa. It didn't take me long on the boards afterwards to release I may have committed one of the "unforgiveable" sins of muskydom by holding the fish vertical...what was my tiny brain thinking? Which brings us to Rob Kimm's response:
"One of the arguments that often gets put forward by those who defend the practice of vertical holds is the lack of specific research on it as a cause of delayed mortality. Why are there no studies documenting specifically the effects of vertical holds and whether or not it's a contributing factor in delayed mortality? I asked a biologist this question once. He looked at me like I'd lost my mind, and said "we don't have the time, the money, or the resources to study the obvious."
What a ludicrous statement for a biologist (a scientist by training) to make. My college degree was in zoology (animal study) and unless it has changed signifcantly nothing in that training would tell you as a scientific fact that the above statement was true or false. When you have a "lack of specific research" everyone's opinion is speculation....there may be a better background knowledge for biologist, or ichthyologists to reply, but without any really science behind it, it is still just a matter of OPINION. And it will remain so until someone specifically studies it....the science world has learned through many hard lessons that few things are really obvious....
"It's a classic case of one of the most popular logical fallacies there is. It's called an 'appeal to ridicule' - an argument which presents the opponent's argument in a way that appears ridiculous...
My personal opinion is this: I think there's plenty of room for debate and personal choice when it comes to a lot of aspects of release technique. Photo in the water or a quick horizontal hold? Personal choice to me, because either can be done in a manner that's pretty fish friendly. Measure and girth every fish or just turn them loose? Personal choice again.
But I'm a lot less open minded about vertical holds. When every fisheries biologist I've ever asked about it tells me in no uncertain terms that it's not a responsible way to handle fish, it's pretty clear cut to me. Rod Ramsell called holding fish vertically for a photo an 'ego shot.' I think he's right. When it's detrimental to the fish, even if it's not universally fatal, when it's not a necessity (you have to handle fish some to release them, but holding them vertically isn't a requirement), and when it's done purely for effect (how fish look in a photo), explain how a vertical hold for a photo has any other basis than the angler's willingness to put his own self-gratification above the fish's chances to survive. Rob Kimm
Now Rob in the last paragraph aren't you doing exactly what you rail against earlier in your reply? You certainly are trying to make the other sides position to look "ridiculous" by ridiculing any holding a fish vertically for a photo as an "ego shot" and "explain how a vertical hold for a photo haas any other basis than the angler's willingness to put his own self-gratification above the fish's chances to survive." Somehow you don't feel those comments are ridiculing the other position? PLEASE. The natural continuation of your thought should be that ANY hold to take a picture is for self-gratification and ego and pictures should NEVER be taken for the health of the musky. True or false? Wouldn't not handling of the musky out of the water be the best thing for them? So why take them out of the water at all? In Alaska it is illegal to remove any salmon or trout from the water that you intend to release....I will have to say this is not a rule that is adhered to regularly. I think many of us take pictures to remember the trip and the fish and how much fun it was.....maybe that is self-gratification. But any picture taken, regardless of hold, would be for the same reason.
"...to flip the discussion on it's head a bit: what is good about vertical holds? why use them?
imho, they don't look as good in pictures and might induce some risk to the fish.
what's are the advantages in your mind?
(i'm sure you can see where i'm going: if there's no big advantages, why risk the possibility it's harmful?) Michael Winther
Interesting point MW....but I personally think most fish look better in a vertical hold....geez I must have some kind of twisted brain. We have sat and discussed the photos of the Spray fish, Lawton, et al....they all should have used a horizontal hold because it is MUCH more difficult to tell the actual size of the fish from many of the horizontal holds. Frequently you see the fishes tail section angled toward the camera, etc, to give it the appearance of a larger fish....isn't this ego? Can't do that with a vertical hold. Again.....why risk any hold for a picture out of the water?
The only advantage I see to a vertical hold is to avoid removing the slime coating. So what is worse?? Risking internal injury and delayed mortality due to a vertical hold, or riskng infecton and delated mortality due to placing your hands on the fish? Esox Addict
Good question by EA. How many horizontal holds have we seen of big fish where the anglers have their arms cupped around the fish and sometimes are holding them tight against their bodies? You don't think this doesn't remove a substantial section of the slime layer exposing the fish to infection and delayed mortality? Since no one has studied either issue scientifically all each of us has is our own opinion. Would be nice to have some real science on the subject. But let's not harangue everyone who has a different opinion, or attempt to make them look "ridiculous."
Personally, since my trip with Richard Collin, who was very diplomatic in talking to me about how he disliked vertical holds, I have never held a large fish to be released in this fashion. All are with horizontal holds. And my education of animal biology would tell me that, indeed, holding large fish in a vertical hold could easily cause damage, especially if the fish starts to thrash around. I don't do it anymore and do not feel it is good for big fish since they can injure themselves far easier when held like this. But reasoned education like what Richard did with me is the way to do it....if he had reacted violently and told me how stupid I was, my reaction would have been much different....but that is not what he did....and I believe it is risking less chance of injury to hold big fish horizontally rather than vertically....IMHO.
Brian
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1938
Location: Black Creek, WI | lambeau - 3/30/2006 8:32 AM
the article in MHM you're referring to is providing one fisherman's anecdotal evidence. he's recaptured fish that have previously been vertically held. he presents this as "proof" that vertical holds don't hurt fish. imho, he's over-generalizing from a small sample set and i agree that it's somewhat irresponsible to present his opinion as fact.
i'll stick with the scientists' opinions, myself.
I'll disagree. I don't feel the author portrayed his OPINION as fact at all. He seem very objective in his presentation... simply saying he held big fish vertically and a high percentage of those those fish were caught AGAIN.
I'm no rocket scientist, but the data presented does seem to prove to me that the recaptured fish survived the intial "the death hang". That seems like fact to me. However, those FACTS don't necessarily prove that verical holds are OK... but it does prove that vertical holds do not kill ALL the fish unfortunate enough to experience one.
And... I feel the author of that article left it up to the reader to decide whether the data will change their mind on how to view vertical holds. I also found it refreshing to see Musky Hunter publish the article on an apparently controversial subject. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 172
|
this shouldn't be looked at as a "scientific" issue at all. it should be looked at from a bio-mechanical standpoint.
a study can tell you statistics and a reasonable assumption made from the data set, a calculation can show you literally which is worse and if either is bad enough to cause damage. do i do a study to see which beams break when loaded differently? no. of course not, i have many calculations i can do to tell me without having to break 1000's of beams for comparison. these calculations are derived from the real world numbers. why would we want to go backward?
so do we know how much pressure it takes on a section of a muskie to cause damage? how much is too much? it will vary depending on how close you are to the head vs tail. bending stress and axial stress will vary depending on the dimensions and weight of each fish.
do we have dimensions and weight for the animals we fear we are injuring? yes. how about on just the critical parts? do we have an idea of how much is too much pressure? how much pressure does it take to tear the tissue, break connections, break the spine, etc.
if we just had these numbers we could end all the speculation and bickering. its pretty easy really, if we even have a ballpark of the numbers.
I commend those on both fronts for standing up for their view, but this vertical hold hot-button-issue has been spiralling out of control for a long time and ppl get fanatical about it in a hurry.
sorry for being so blunt about it, but opinions are opinions and thats about it. is it gonna kill every fish? no. is it bad? probably. is it better or worse than any other hold? we dont know for sure yet but we have recommendations. if you're worried about it dont do it. some ppl are going to do it no matter what. we don't have any concrete NUMBERS that tell us one way or another about it that i am aware of.
its an easy comparison if someone has the dimensions and numbers i would need to just compare a few different holds once and for all....
RK consider it a formal offer to look into it if you can get data for me.
from my standpoint itd be well worth-while just so i dont have to listen to people argue about it anymore.
-matt holbrook |
|
| |
|
Posts: 384
Location: Eagle River, Alaska | "a study can tell you statistics and a reasonable assumption made from the data set, a calculation can show you literally which is worse and if either is bad enough to cause damage. do i do a study to see which beams break when loaded differently? no. of course not, i have many calculations i can do to tell me without having to break 1000's of beams for comparison. these calculations are derived from the real world numbers. why would we want to go backward? "
I agree with your personal position on this hold thing but disagree with your above statement. You don't have to break the beams because your calculations are based on "real world numbers". Where did these come from? By somebody actucally measuring the beam, or it's constiuents and breaking the darn thing....there is no other way to get "real world" numbers but by actually breaking the things and measuring it at some point. In my field of dentistry this is done on a continuous basis are new products are released for use they have a littany of studies which have been done stressing and breaking materials we use in everyone's mouth. Compressive strength, tensile strength, moisture leakage, they all are subjected to tests before they can be used. What kicks my butt though, sometimes, is that all these in vitro studies sometimes don't actually pan out in vivo. You can take a 0.5mm porcelain veneer and break it between two fingers with ease.....but once you "bond" the darn thing to a tooth it becomes nearly unbreakable....(although they do sometimes break).
Has anyone actually taken apart muskies doing a physiological exam comparing the strength of it cartilage and attachments and how much force it takes to damage them? I doubt it. The biomechanics then of musky physiology would then be merely a guesstimate from assumed "facts". So much of what we assume is anecdotal....which does have its own validity. But as this article states people arrive at different conclusions based on their real world experience. How many of us can quote any study we have done, or that has been done, which actually shows immediate or delayed mortality to vertically held large muskies? At least this author has evidence of some of these fish being recaptured....even several times.
Does this mean it's a good practice? No....but his opinion is at least based on some real facts. Common sense tells us that hanging all that weight vertically isn't good for the fish....personally I agree with this position. It's interesting you don't here about much with other fish which are mostly released...say tarpon. How many pictures do you see with a tarpon between 100 and 200 pounds almost completely out of the water suspended from a lip gaff? Fortunately most salmon and large trout can be lifted with a tail hold and then lifting under the belly....I have lots of old pictures with fish hanging vertically.....most before my little trip with Trophymusky....since then you will only find horizontal holds....don't like to get near those gills. But quiet discussion about the issue usually works better then lambasting as there really is not any science, just good sense, to back up the position for horizontal holds.
Enough rambling.....
Brian |
|
| |
