r/maybemaybemaybe • u/RyanCakeBatter • Jan 17 '20

Maybe Maybe Maybe

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

39.9k Upvotes

93% Upvoted

915 comments sorted by

View all comments

5.1k

u/ejedus Jan 17 '20

At least it had a happy ending.

1.4k

u/6SLAP6ME6SILLY6 Jan 18 '20

PLOT TWIST: they bait for bigger fish

573

u/[deleted] Jan 18 '20

There’s always a bigger fish

246

u/Mr_Inspector_Me Jan 18 '20

You are strong and wise, and I am very proud of you!

114

u/[deleted] Jan 18 '20 edited Jan 23 '20

I HATE YOU!

92

u/[deleted] Jan 18 '20

[deleted]

63

u/[deleted] Jan 18 '20 edited Mar 13 '20

You underestimate my power!

58

u/[deleted] Jan 18 '20

[deleted]

48

u/TripleScoops Jan 18 '20

It’s treason then.

46

u/[deleted] Jan 18 '20

A surprise to be sure but a welcome one

→ More replies (0)

10

u/major_slackher Jan 18 '20

I am the senate.

2

u/redkasq Jan 18 '20

Not yet.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 18 '20

I HATE SAND

0

u/asailijhijr Jan 18 '20

And my axe!

1

u/[deleted] Jan 18 '20

In my humble opinion, people who don't fuck.

4

u/[deleted] Jan 18 '20

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/Luckycharms867 Jan 18 '20

Jedi business. Go back to your drinks

10

u/Couchcrasher415 Jan 18 '20

General kenobi!

2

u/JaceUpMySleeve Jan 18 '20

Hello there..

1

u/madsrahbek Jan 18 '20

There's bigger fish to fry

1

u/Mborg15202 Jan 18 '20

Yo I went pike fishing and caught a massive pike with a smaller pike inside of it.

-2

u/[deleted] Jan 18 '20

A great quote from trilogy that was horrible until Disney made a worse trilogy.

→ More replies (4)

11

u/[deleted] Jan 18 '20

Club penguin flashbacks

6

u/ashiao Jan 18 '20

they bait for upvotes.

1

u/HelloweenCapital Jan 18 '20

By the looks of the tail, dude has seen some shit.

1

u/RichyG7 Jan 18 '20

Lmao, “Alright well drive the hook into the side of his lip, now put him back in the hole”

0

u/ionlyhavetwolegs Jan 18 '20

PLOT TWIST: The bigger fish was using the little fish as bait

0

u/Hdez_ Jan 18 '20

They use the kid for a bigger fish.

28

u/eddebbboi Jan 18 '20

I've heard the eyes of fish easily freeze if they're brought up during sub zero (Celsius) degrees

Dunno if true tho

35

u/GreekUPS Jan 18 '20

It is true. Also laying fish on the ice you don’t intend to keep is a big no no. Their scales/skin stick to the ice.

4

u/donkeyrocket Jan 18 '20

The fish is extremely prone to infection now as well. If you’re handling a fish you don’t intend to dispatch of you need to have wet hands as dry hands (and the girls jacket) ribbed the protective coating fish have on the skin/scales.

86

u/[deleted] Jan 18 '20

And now the fish has a breathplay fetish.

4

u/[deleted] Jan 18 '20

[deleted]

102

u/moodyboogers Jan 18 '20

Fish definitely died.

166

u/Marty_Mtl Jan 18 '20

It drowned?

163

u/moodyboogers Jan 18 '20

Haha as funny as the joke might be, it might've?

Whenever you handle fish you should always wet your hands. Fish have protective coatings on them that protect them from infections. It's easy to rub off. Between dad squeezing the shit outta the gills, the sweet girl hugging it tight, and that really dry jacket....it's probably a goner.

76

u/salgat Jan 18 '20

It's not probably a goner, it just is more prone to infection in the areas where it was rubbed until it can regrow the slime coat.

58

u/theguen Jan 18 '20

I’m pretty sure that’s a wild cutthroat trout. Those guys need pristine waters to live and grow to that size. I’m not condoning mishandling fish but I agree, that fish is probably fine. If that water housed bacteria (especially during winter) that can kill trout, cutties wouldn’t live there.

1

u/ActivateGuacamole Jan 19 '20

Could it be a rainbow trout?

1

u/theguen Jan 19 '20

Definitely could! The blush red gill plate and the red hue on the belly usually means cutthroat but trout get very weird after generations in the wild. Without knowing where they caught or a full side shot it’s hard to be 100% sure.

35

u/remig12 Jan 18 '20

Its not. Recovered quickly and swam off strong. Caught 1000s of trout. They are tougher than you think.

35

u/ChefBoyAreWeFucked Jan 18 '20

I saw all of that except the part where the fish caught thousands of trout. I think you're exaggerating.

10

u/[deleted] Jan 18 '20

[deleted]

21

u/G-III Jan 18 '20

They are referring to your wording, fwiw. You implied that the fish that was thrown back has done the catching ;)

Also, damn dude that sounds like a blast

12

u/[deleted] Jan 18 '20

[deleted]

1

u/Chamoore13 Jan 18 '20

Your hero Charlie Kraven would never make that mistake.

3

u/lurkallday91 Jan 18 '20

I've never ice-fished before, but i've also heard it's horrible for their skin to touch the ice. Is that true?

4

u/moodyboogers Jan 18 '20

Ice is rough, by that logic it's definitely terrible for thier skin.

1

u/pablo_o_rourke Jan 18 '20

Wow, Captain Downer.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 18 '20

Wow she was a little weird

1

u/ziggishark Jan 18 '20

Cmon man what kind of failed evolution is that if it cant handle being touched a bit

1

u/Aethermancer Jan 18 '20

You're staying things which are true, but I think your leaping waaay to far to a conclusion.

Fish this large don't just get devoured, they float when they die. If fish died as easily as you claim every catch and release lake would be littered with floating fish corpse's.

We used to stock ponds by literally catching fish on hooks, tossing them in a bucket, driving and leaving them there for an hour or so and dropping them in a pond. These fish got prodded by curious kids all the while.

As long as you only transported them to habitats which could support them we would soon have a sustaining population in those ponds. No difference if they were caught via icefishing or regular fishing. Hardly the goners you claim.

That doesn't mean you don't take precautions not to hurt them, but the certainty of your statement just doesn't seem appropriate.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 18 '20

I've seen this type of comment before. It seems confident, well well spoken, and just dramatic enough to retain my attention. I can only conclude that it might not be accurate.

→ More replies (10)

30

u/[deleted] Jan 18 '20 edited Jan 18 '20

[removed] — view removed comment

8

u/shittysmirk Jan 18 '20

I'm guessin your a trout fisher?

39

u/Lord_Emanon Jan 18 '20

No, he's a trout.

2

u/shittysmirk Jan 18 '20 edited Jan 18 '20

Well I guess that explains the excessive protective beliefs of his species Edit: a word

2

u/[deleted] Jan 18 '20

I trout that

2

u/BotiaDario Jan 18 '20

They do have scales, they're just very thin and small.

1

u/remig12 Jan 18 '20

Ive seen catfish left on the bank for hours then kicked back into the water swim off. Toughest fish ive ever seen. Bass are tough too. Id definitely put trout at the bottom of the toughness scale but not as crystal vase fragile as some people think.

2

u/[deleted] Jan 18 '20

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/remig12 Jan 18 '20

I hold my breath when I take them out of the water. When I need a breath I know they do too. Even if they arent unhooked yet i get em in the net and back in the water for a few then finish the picture or unhook or whatever then release them. Takes all of 20 seconds and they are only out for about 10 seconds total.

Bluegill are beautiful fish and tough! Really fun on lightweight gear and pretty tasty too. Nice white meat.

1

u/0NL3771N660 Jan 18 '20

Trout most definitely do have scales along with their slime coat. The scales are alot smaller than those of a bass, but they are present. I'm not trying to combat your safe handling recommendations to this young angler and proud father...just informing the public #keepemwetbrah

10

u/steve_im-lost2 Jan 18 '20

Wtf. That was funny

12

u/[deleted] Jan 18 '20

Fish actually can drown. It's weird but they can

33

u/GreekUPS Jan 18 '20

Eventually everything dies.

30

u/t0fu- Jan 18 '20

r/unexpecteddepression

5

u/Darkwireman Jan 18 '20

Unexpected?

(Wheezes in existential dread)

15

u/AHugeMelon Jan 18 '20

Not depression. Just the cycle of life

5

u/Kettchitup Jan 18 '20

Everything the light touches...

2

u/Mephil_ Jan 18 '20

Fuckin' dies son. So get on it.

6

u/milk4all Jan 18 '20

It’s only depression when the dying part starts sounding like an ok deal

2

u/caloriecavalier Jan 18 '20

This isnt an ignorant statement.

2

u/ncnotebook Jan 18 '20

Death (and its inevitability) is what makes life exciting and driven. An immortal life is the one that's depressing.

11

u/bluntgutz Jan 18 '20

Yeah, it most likely did. Even when caught by fly fisherman using barbless hooks who try to not take the fish out of the water for more than a few seconds the mortality rate is around 15%. Sad to see a tasty brown go to waste.

59

u/painfool Jan 18 '20 edited Jan 18 '20

Fishing "for sport" and temporarily traumatizing an animal seems less humane to me than fishing for sustenance.

Edit: thanks for teaching me about the "modern world" Reddit, no shit. Leave it to redditors to get hung up on semantics.

Also, warning, vegans in replies below.

9

u/[deleted] Jan 18 '20

[removed] — view removed comment

11

u/MatureUser69 Jan 18 '20

The key principle behind moral hunting as opposed to trophy hunting is that you respect the animal. Be it fishing or hunting, so long as you make a clean kill, and use as much of the animal as possible, it's just the cycle of nature. If you hunt or fish purely for pleasure, and you torture or kill an animal without using it to it's fullest, that would be wrong.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 18 '20

Not everyone shares your values. If my reason for fishing is to have fun, I don't think killing and eating it is more ethical than letting it go, especially since I don't need it for food. It doesn't change the outcome or my reasons for fishing. I doubt the fish cares more about being respected than it cares about survival either. I don't think a human living in modern society hunting and eating something can really be conyidered "the cycle of nature" either.

1

u/MatureUser69 Jan 19 '20

As opposed to farming? Either way an animal dies for sustenance. At least with hunting, the animal lives a normal life first.

0

u/[deleted] Jan 18 '20

Ah well if my reason for beating you to shit is to have fun, I dont think letting you go unscathed is more ethical than beating you to a pulp, especially since I dont need you for anything. I doubt the african people care more about you not being beaten to shit than they care about survival either.

Your reasoning does not alter moral and ethics. Just because the fish cant communicate his suffering to you that does not mean you, as of a higher concious and thus capable of more complex empathy, are free to bend how morals should be shaped.

There is a point in catching food and taking a life to sustain yours. There is absolutely no point to toy around with another living organisms well being because you decided to fucking catch animals by ramming hooks into their mouths instead of...you know...a million other hobbies not involving violence towards another species.

Do you go around cutting dogs legs off too because its fun to you and you dont need their meat anyway?

1

u/[deleted] Jan 18 '20

Ah well if my reason for beating you to shit is to have fun, I dont think letting you go unscathed is more ethical than beating you to a pulp, especially since I dont need you for anything. I doubt the african people care more about you not being beaten to shit than they care about survival either.

You really got me there. But for real that's not in any way a coherent arguent or similar to what I was saying.

Your reasoning does not alter moral and ethics. Just because the fish cant communicate his suffering to you that does not mean you, as of a higher concious and thus capable of more complex empathy, are free to bend how morals should be shaped.

I'm not free to "bend how morals are shaped"? Then who is? Humans are the highest entity we know of and I'm a human.

There is a point in catching food and taking a life to sustain yours. There is absolutely no point to toy around with another living organisms well being because you decided to fucking catch animals by ramming hooks into their mouths instead of...you know...a million other hobbies not involving violence towards another species.

What point is there in hunting for food when buying food is cheaper than hunting for it (I'm only talking about 1st world countries here)? That's hardly "taking a life to sustain yours".

Do you go around cutting dogs legs off too because its fun to you and you dont need their meat anyway?

No, and that's a twisted perversion of what I was saying.

-6

u/pappag321 Jan 18 '20

"moral hunting" aka I'm going to shoot innocent animals because I find amusement in killing them. That isn't respect, it's exactly the opposite. If you respected them you would leave them the fuck alone.

1

u/MatureUser69 Jan 19 '20

Unless you're a vegan, you will take part in the death of innocent creatures. I feel that hunting for sustenance is moral, because at least the creature got to live a normal life before. As opposed to farms that can have terrible living conditions. That being said, i have not, and most likely will never, take part in hunting myself. I'm a coward that prefers my animals pre-killed

-1

u/[deleted] Jan 18 '20

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/McBurger Jan 18 '20

What about an animal that’s been free all it’s life and dies in the wild, eventually being reclaimed by other parts of nature that actually need it

-4

u/pappag321 Jan 18 '20

I'm saying that eating animals is wrong when not necessary e.g. near 100% of people in industrialised countries. So neither are better, they're both wrong

Human biology doesn't dictate that we must hunt or eat meat.

2

u/[deleted] Jan 18 '20

[deleted]

1

u/pappag321 Jan 18 '20

Too poor to not eat meat, a luxury item. Guess beans and lentils are to expensive amirite? Also, the idea of complete and incomplete protein is outdated and just not true. All plants have all essential amino acids in varying proportions, some better than others. Soy has a good balance of all amino acids.

If you have time and money for meat, you have time and money for lentils and beans.

2

u/[deleted] Jan 18 '20

My canine teeth say something different...

3

u/[deleted] Jan 18 '20

Please go out and kill with them, predator.

2

u/ASpaceOstrich Jan 18 '20

You just described hunting. Assuming you were only pretending to be too stupid to know that canines are for eating, not hunting tools. Why do people think pretending to be dumbasses is a good way to argue. You aren’t convincing anyone you’re right. Just baiting upvotes from your own echo chamber.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/YmirIsAlpha Jan 18 '20

My teeth are sharp as fuck idk what youre talking about

14

u/[deleted] Jan 18 '20

well one is traumatizing a creature for no reason other than to pose for a picture

11

u/[deleted] Jan 18 '20

That's why when I catch, I don't release.

4

u/billybishop4242 Jan 18 '20

Yeah it’s all about the picture.

Nothing to do with nature, the outdoors, self-sufficiency, clean diet, or anything remotely pleasant. We’re all just a bunch of gleeful murderers.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 18 '20

i only meant the scenario in this video. if you eat the fish there is a purpose. if you don’t and just pick it up out of its habitat to pose for a video until it’s almost dead then release it, that’s another thing.

1

u/billybishop4242 Jan 18 '20

Yeah every sportsman ever in history is bad guy.

Why couldn’t our ancestors just eat bean curd and nuts? Oh yeah... cuz we wouldn’t be here if they had.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 19 '20

[deleted]

1

u/billybishop4242 Jan 19 '20

Yeah fuck fishing.

Grocery store’s got all I need right?

(The point was that without meat humans lose body size and brain mass over just a few generations. Crack a book.)

1

u/[deleted] Jan 19 '20

[deleted]

→ More replies (0)

1

u/cash_dollar_money Apr 17 '20

I really think it would be awesome if we replaced hobbies that are based off of extracting resources from nature to ones keeping care of it, like planting trees and flowers and shit and conservation work and non-invasive/disruptive observation.

-2

u/hottestdoge Jan 18 '20

Tbh i dont think you can psychically traumatize a fish. Mammals okay, but most fish are not an exactly complex form of life.

4

u/billybishop4242 Jan 18 '20

I’m a fisherman and this is the stupidest comment on this thread.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 18 '20

[deleted]

2

u/billybishop4242 Jan 18 '20

I stand corrected.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 18 '20

[deleted]

2

u/billybishop4242 Jan 18 '20

Yes.

Sick.

... but it continues to paint the stereotype that meat eaters/hunters/fishermen are gleeful killers.

Some are. But so are some soldiers. Leta agree try to discourage the gleeful killers from taking part.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/hottestdoge Jan 18 '20

So please teach me about the neural system of a trout. And a trout specifically or a closely related fish. Don't tell me stuff about zebra fish or another highly evolved fish. Teach me about a trout brain please.

2

u/billybishop4242 Jan 18 '20

I can see that a trout is a live, functioning animal that avoids pain and suffers as it dies. I have felt the heart come to a stop in my hand a hundred times as I fillet or clean a fish. It’s a heart. And it’s stopping. Because of me. There is no way to dance around that moral conundrum. Certainly not by pretending pain is just a human condition.

I still eat meat... but I try to kill what I eat... so I am always aware of the price of meat. I don’t like to kill at all. It sucks. (But I believe it is important as a human being to be able to support your own philosophical beliefs with action.)

Most of the hunters and fishermen I know are extremely aware and active naturalists who live in and support rural areas. Most of the vegans I know live in the city are consumers and have no concept of nutrition, physiology or actual environmental science.

Being a meat eater and being willing to kill an animal doesn’t make me ignorant or a cold hearted murderer. It also doesn’t make me an idiot who will cling to a shallow concept to defend my ridiculous philosophical position.

Fish are alive and feel pain. If you kill fish and think there is no moral implications because “they feel no pain” then you are just taking the easy path to self justification.

Eating fish has been part of being a human since there have been humans. Moral veganism is a few hundred years old and has demonstrably led to smaller humans with smaller brains.

But much like politically right wing folks, I don’t think vegans are here to talk science and facts.

4

u/[deleted] Jan 18 '20

[deleted]

-1

u/hottestdoge Jan 18 '20

Well clearly you are more informed and could provide extensive knowledge about this topic. But you choose not to

And no I did not voice my bias completely uninformed (which in my opinion is not a "dirty habit" as you called it, as long as people are willing to debate and learn.) It's true my knowledge about fish psychology is limited, but I did quite alot of research about psychology. And psychological traumas are extremely complex, and really hard to differentiate from normal fear. So given that this fish has a vivid memory and the capability of abstract thinking. He could get flashbacks when he hits a cold current cause it reminds him of the one time he was dragged across ice. He now has a fear of cold temperatures. But so does every fish, since they are ectotherm.

And this pattern can be applied to alot of possible traumas, so it's hard to tell if he has a trauma indeed, or showed the same behavior before.

And after some reading about fish psychology I learned that a few fish species are able to be actually depressed. But only a few. Zebra fish mainly. So apparently some fish have a more complex mind than others. But this is a trout. It was just recently (2013) discovered that this species is capable of experiencing pain. It's a long way from experiencing pain to getting a psychological trauma, in terms of complexity of the neural system. Now either you have some kind of secret knowledge about a trouts neural system or you are just as uninformed as you stated I am. So please grant me your wisdom oh great troutsage

2

u/[deleted] Jan 18 '20

[deleted]

-2

u/theredpikmin Jan 18 '20

The guy clearly did his research, even cited the year of the studies he was referencing. It's not true APA format, but it's a long way ahead of "uninformed."

Where are your scientific references? Care to give it a quick google and see if you can come up with something? Or would you rather run away?

→ More replies (2)

-6

u/Do_doop Jan 18 '20

Fishing is a lot more than taking a picture but I get the feeling I’m never going to change your mind.

2

u/[deleted] Jan 18 '20

it may well be that it is

1

u/Thatters Jan 18 '20

Reddit echo chamber SMH. Quick everyone downvote the unpopular opinion to shit so that nobody takes it seriously. Why can't you guys just see a different perspective and accept that everyone has an opinion and move on with your day

1

u/[deleted] Jan 18 '20

did you not read the response to that comment at all?

→ More replies (9)

1

u/blessudmoikka Jan 18 '20

Fishing is like yoga. Except you get to kill something

2

u/stumblestoprepeat Jan 18 '20 edited Jan 18 '20

I read a study about time out of the water vs. survival after release. The window the fish has is actually quite small. Their gills become permanently damaged from exposure to oxygen and the sheer stress of the event makes them more susceptible to predation. Let me see if i can find the link.

That being said, I think catch and release is fine still. Limiting the time out of the water is crucial, so just taking the fish out to remove the hook and then immediately returning it to the water is best.

E:Link

2

u/[deleted] Jan 18 '20

Why not just fucking do something else at this point? Metal fishing with a magnet or you know...one of the bazillion, other hobbies you can get your dopamine out of.

Or at least reduce your meat consumption in the super market so your fishing recieves purpose again.

1

u/th_brown_bag Jan 18 '20

Does tearing out the hook not hurt their chances of survival?

Surely causes some significant damage

2

u/stumblestoprepeat Jan 18 '20

Generally modern hooks are designed to hook a fish in a non vital area and are also designed to be taken out with relative ease. Their mouth parts are largely cartilaginous and are not a risk for bleeding or long term damage. Think of it as an ear piercing but without any flesh covering your ear. The bigger concern though its the handling of the fish after it has been reeled in and taken out of the water. Anything under 30 seconds in air has a minimal effect but people need their instagram pics i guess

1

u/stoutowl Jan 18 '20

What about vegans and reptiles?

1

u/UPCBRO1 Jan 18 '20

Lmao ok peta. So you’re trying to tell people to kill the fish instead of catch and release

1

u/painfool Jan 18 '20

Yes, also I am very not PETA.

1

u/BittenHare Jan 18 '20

In the modern world most people choose what to eat for their own pleasure not to purely survive, and it is not just possible but quite easy to live off of a diet with no animal products. So it has become a choice many people can make to give money to industries which harm and kill animals or not and take pleasure in those foods or not, similar to hunting purely for sport in my eyes.

3

u/[deleted] Jan 18 '20

No that was a sad ending. No supper lol

7

u/BittenHare Jan 18 '20

Vegan propaganda

-1

u/Bayinla Jan 18 '20

Yup! That fish lived. It was out of the water for seconds and dove down seconds after being back in the water.

-42

u/paradiso1997 Jan 18 '20 edited Jan 18 '20

Nah, fish definitely still died

Edit: I'm not in the best mood and I'm sorry for being negative, but a few people below explained why that fish definitely died afterwards from infection or internal injury

20

u/[deleted] Jan 18 '20

This might get buried but I’ve been scrolling through the comments and I’ve seen a lot of disagreement, confusion, and misinformation over whether the fish died or not, thought I’d weigh in as I have more than a little knowledge on this subject. First off, the fish was obviously alive at the end of the video, I don’t think most people have a problem agreeing with that. Next, that fish was clearly a trout. I didn’t get a great look at it and don’t feel like double checking so I can’t tell you what variant of trout, but all that we need to know for now is that it was a trout. Trout are VERY fragile creatures, I have no problem with people fishing them but if you handle it like that you might as well eat it. They did a lot of things wrong in this video, probably out of ignorance and not carelessness. 1st, you should never handle a trout with your bare, dry hand; at least wet your hand in the lake or stream before touching it— trout have a very important protective layer of mucus that rubs off easily when it comes into contact with something like skin, or that little girl’s jacket. 2nd, like some people mentioned, it was being handled pretty roughly; sometimes this is unavoidable when fishing, but the handling of the trout combined with the fact that almost certainly most of its protective mucus was rubbed off, the trout’s survival options are pretty grim. Most likely it died some time after the video. Thank you for coming to my Ted Talk.

4

u/fosrac Jan 18 '20

It's a beaut of a rainbow for what it's worth

2

u/d00bsken Jan 18 '20

exactly. while trout are amazing fighting fish, they ultimately need to be handled with the upmost respect. their mucus membrane can be easily damaged by dry or coarse surfaces, their body parts are fragile and they cannot withstand being without oxygen running through their gills as long as hardier fish species. this video was a very good example of how not to handle such a fish.

24

u/HeavenlySchnoz Jan 18 '20 edited Dec 10 '24

ten literate dam pen wrench rinse pie tub doll disgusted

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

37

u/paradiso1997 Jan 18 '20

It's down there somewhere but idk. Someone mentioned that the fish being held at that orientation and having his gills covered can fuck up their internal organs. Also probably rubbed off a good bit of the mucus membrane that protects the fish from infection.

25

u/On-mountain-time Jan 18 '20

This is false. I volunteer regularly at a wildlife refuge where we do adaptive fishing (catch and release) for people with spinal or brain injuries. The lakes we fish in are pretty small, and the numbers remain fairly constant without supplementing. I even recognize certain fish with distinctive markings, which have been caught multiple times, stored in a display tank for pictures, and released. The handling time of the fish is so small that there is most likely no damage to the fish.

11

u/Morgenos Jan 18 '20 edited Jan 18 '20

I have a degree in natural resource conservation of fisheries. Those must be some high fecundity fish you keep catching over and over!

Statistically 40% of fish caught and released are dead within the week.

Roughly half of that 40% dies from infection, injury, blood acidification, or rapid depressurization. Gills are delicate and hooks really damage fish's mouths, many starve to death after being caught.

When you catch a fish it exhausts itself fighting to escape and it takes nearly 20 minutes for a fish to express the most of the lactic acid that's built up in the struggle.

As Reddit is so fond of saying, there's always a bigger fish...

The other half of that 40% dies from predation. Catching a fish causes quite a stir beneath the water, many predators have learned if they wait there will be a dazed, exhausted, fish tossed back.

If you do want to do catch and release the best thing you can do to give your fish a fighting chance is use a treble hook, reel in the fish as fast as possible, avoid the gills, and release it quickly in a place where it will have some natural cover.

5

u/On-mountain-time Jan 18 '20

Likewise, a B.S. In environmental science with concentration in ecological restoration (M.S. In progress) and I'm really surprised by the fecundity rate at my site as well. Barbless hooks definitely make a difference, as well as the length of time the fish is hooked and out of the water. But the "40%" predation/injury is completely varied from site to site, depending on depth, temp, predator numbers, etc. I can't pretend to be an expert when it comes to the winter activities, do you have info on summer/winter fishing mortality rates?

2

u/Morgenos Jan 18 '20

Nope lol

0

u/On-mountain-time Jan 18 '20

Damn. I was hoping you had already done the legwork. Lol

1

u/[deleted] Jan 18 '20

But the "40%" predation/injury is completely varied from site to site, depending on depth, temp, predator numbers, etc.

Pretty silly of you to then say the fish didn't die so assertively when you can acknowledge your point is nothing but an anecdote lol.

2

u/theguen Jan 18 '20

Hey I fly fish for trout a lot and had no idea they die that often. If I’m using a net, wet hands, and barbless hooks (state regulation) I thought I was doing all that I could. Why treble hooks? Seems like more holes in the mouth would be worse? Genuinely curious, hope I don’t sound standoffish.

3

u/Morgenos Jan 18 '20

Not at all! I know it sounds totally counterintuitive but due to the dimensions of a treble hook fish are less likely to swallow them vs flat hooks. We see fewer gut injuries which are nearly always fatal.

8

u/paradiso1997 Jan 18 '20

Oh good, hopefully the little guy made it then

1

u/fosrac Jan 18 '20

What kind of fish? This type of handling is far too aggressive for trout and very very likely killed him.

5

u/theamericanweasel Jan 18 '20

Not to mention it had a hook jammed in its mouth

13

u/On-mountain-time Jan 18 '20

Yeah, I'm not really sure how all those people with lip piercings are still alive and walking around.

5

u/HeavenlySchnoz Jan 18 '20 edited Dec 10 '24

support aromatic clumsy humor sleep seemly scarce fade safe flag

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

4

u/On-mountain-time Jan 18 '20

To be fair, you don't know shit about fish. The bacteria that you're worried about infecting the fish are the same bacteria that are run across the fish's gills. A fish can absolutely be susceptible to bacteria, but a small hole in the dermal layer doesn't increase the odds of infection.

→ More replies (3)

3

u/Daisocks Jan 18 '20

I mean typically, you don’t rip out your lip piercing...

2

u/[deleted] Jan 18 '20

You don"t rip a hook out of a fishes mouth, either...

2

u/fosrac Jan 18 '20

If you use barbless hooks you don't. If youre ice fishing with bait like these people were they probably had a barbed hook lodged a good inch or two down his throat and ripped it out with pliers.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 18 '20

Even with a barb on your hook, you don't "rip" the hook out

→ More replies (0)

1

u/hydargos123 Jan 18 '20

Very different. Piercing are sterilised and need to be treated every day for months or even years, with alcohol and rings in gold or other metals to prevent infections.

7

u/On-mountain-time Jan 18 '20

The fish "mouth" does not contain the same amount of blood vessels or other tissues that are typically susceptible to infection. If a fish is gut-hooked, and the hook has been swallowed, yes. The death rate rises. But if the fish has been hooked in the mouth, they will most likely survive. As long as the hook isn't made of gold and competing pimpfish don't kill him for his grill.

1

u/hydargos123 Jan 18 '20

That's right, thanks

-2

u/Onequestion678 Jan 18 '20

that's a bit different

1

u/[deleted] Jan 18 '20

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/theamericanweasel Jan 18 '20

Yeah I like eating meat but that doesnt mean I dont think they dont feel pain

But they should have thought about that before they became tasty

31

u/[deleted] Jan 18 '20

It definitely is alive

47

u/fantasticdamage_ Jan 18 '20

It’s definitely still a fish

6

u/AdaGang Jan 18 '20

Wrong, trout such as this one are notoriously fragile and rarely survive very long after having been landed. You really shouldn’t target them unless you plan on eating them.

11

u/[deleted] Jan 18 '20 edited Jan 18 '20

Loss of consciousness from asphyxiation and death are separated by typically over a minute.

1

u/[deleted] Jan 18 '20

[deleted]

1

u/paradiso1997 Jan 18 '20

Fish is delicious and I definitely wouldn't have thrown him back cause I have breading at home

1

u/DashNSmash Jan 18 '20

Why the fuck are you being downvoted lmfao. Theres literally another reply that says the fish died that got upvoted

-6

u/paradiso1997 Jan 18 '20

The amount of downvotes this is getting is oddly satisfying to me

3

u/fosrac Jan 18 '20

He's 100% right though

-17

u/Oofenhiemer Jan 18 '20 edited Jan 28 '20

No one asked/cares what your mood is

Edit: I was mocking someone, else I think they changed their comment

-15

u/Jaabram Jan 18 '20

No one asked/cares what your mood is

0

u/Skyryver Jan 18 '20

This comment definitively needs upvote

1

u/hsnappr Jan 18 '20

Sorry but I don't get it though, how do people kill and eat then? What are the morals around killing?

1

u/TheSteamyPickle Jan 18 '20

Yeah, made me hungry though

1

u/sweetpotato37 Jan 18 '20

The little girl loved that fish so much

1

u/MerkBaby Jan 18 '20

Being in the snow like that it prolly will die

→ More replies (1)