"Fishermen are born honest, but they get over it"
Ok, we've all seen the photos of the vanquished trout - laying on the wet shoreline and totally motionless. Photos are snapped, high fives are tossed around and then the sacred C&R ritual is performed and fishing is resumed. But we may have sentenced a trout to death by photography!!! Many anglers take WAY to much time shooting pictures instead of releasing. I've seen trout go this route on the Swift and drift downstream to die. (The worst are the people taking selfies of themselves and the fish.) I will call them out on it and sometimes it works but...
How to take a Trout Photo
First, time is critical. The whole event, from netting to net release should take much less than a minute
Second - the net and the fish should never leave the water. Appealing photos often come through keeping the fish partially submerged and perhaps slightly downward. Consider leaving the fish underwater the entire time.
Third - worried about dunking your camera? Get a waterproof case or a waterproof camera.
Fourth - go barbless all of the time because it saves time and wet your hands before removing the hook. (I'm constantly amazed at the number of fly shop catalogs and magazines that STILL publish photos of barbed flies for sale.)
Fifth - And don't lay the trout on the ground. If you insist then hand over your license!!
Where to go
Try the EB. It's perfect!!!!!
Ken
11 comments:
Also no need to measure fish with a tape or markings on rod or net. Just use your hand and fingers. Take the time to take measurements of your thumb to pinky outstretched and also your fist. Works pretty good for a ballpark number!
I thank you for pointing this out to your readers...its really important. I see the same thing onstream and don't get me started on YouTube or social media. I take almost zero pictures whatsoever...even with my brother we both typically decline...If we do we are ready well beforehand and the fish stays in the water. We have both caught a lot of fish and have nothing to prove except to ourselves.
Anonymous,
Good idea!
BobT,
I take photos for the clients use. One of the best trout photos that I took was of a brown rising to the surface to take a natural. A minute later I cast and then landed it.
Ken
Great post, Ken. I don't take many photos anymore, if I do the fish stay in the net in the water. Brookies, most times I give them slack to give the barbless hook a chance to get shaken off. Most times that does the job so I don't have to handle them at all. I don't mind long distance releases these days. If I ever catch a big brown though, that is something I want a picture of! Maybe someday.
Sam
I take very few pictures, but when I do I usually dehook the fish, resuscitate, and then snap the picture just as I am about to release it.
Some of you many have seen me braining a 14-15 inch Rainbow with a rock and dumping it back in the water up in the bubbler arm this week. It’s something that I don’t like to do, but have changed my practices recently after discussing with a lot of people. It’s an ethical question. There is no doubt my fish inhaled the Hopper and it was easy to reach with the pliers, but when I took it out I had an arterial gusher of blood. In the past, I’d release the fish to either a) die in it’s natural environment or b) miraculously recover on it’s own. I now kill it and dump it back in the water. The reality is that it will die no matter what, and, in my older mind now, suffer. I feel offensive doing it, but I think it is the best option. I’d be interested in hearing your view or other readers. This only holds for fish that are gushing bright red blood from the gills.
Falsecast,
A tough call!
One might say that it would be ethical to keep a mortally wounded trout but that could open the floodgates for the "catch & keep crowd".
Ken
Ken,
I agree with your comments that fish to be photographed should always be left in the net, and the net (and fish) should remain in the water.
Now look at the home page of your own web site. You might be confusing some of your readers. While I agree with your advice, In nearly 100% of your photos, the fish is in the net and the net is way out of the water. In this photo of you (Oak Orchard Creek or other Lake Ontario trib if memory serves correct) the big brown trout is not in a net, or in the water. Encourage to remove the photographs you used to take, and update you site with photos of trout in the water. A picture is worth a thousand words.
Hope you continue to heal. BTW, had lots of success in Bondsville this morning from 6-11am. Lots of brookies and one big brown, the latter was a long release.
Anonymous 11:48,
Nice try but:
Almost all of the trout that I or my clients catch are released ASAP and from the net. We seldom take photos and that's only when the client requests one. (I have lots of photos because I've been guiding for years.) That big Sandy Creek brown was in the skillfully control of our guide who put that fish back in the river quickly. It spent most of its time in the "wet" and not "on the rocks" like what I was talking about.
Ken
When I photograph, especially when I'm fishing solo, I never take the fish out of the net, just briefly lifting it part way out of the water to snap the shot. I've gotten some fun and unusual effects this way, with the pattern of the netting as a background. I'm hoping this will be made even easier and safer by the innovation of the floating net designed specifically for this purpose. Frabill now makes one, in a range of sizes (available on Amazon and elsewhere). I recently bought one but haven't had a chance to try it out. It lets you unhook the fish and let it hang out in the net in the water, leaving your (or more accurately MY) clumsy hands to fumble around with my phone for the photo.
Dave P.,
Frabill makes a floating net?? Definitely worth checking out.
Thank you!
Ken
Ken,
Yes! And in multiple sizes. I've always thought their nets were a terrific value.
Cheers,
Dave P.
Post a Comment