I know, but I'm not sure that has anything to do with people harvesting large lings. If the fishery was shut down and harvesting large lings was the cause, would the re-opening not be followed up with some sort of reg to protect them? We have a Minimum size requirement, which to me means someone thinks there is value in protecting the small guys. I don't know know anything to be honest and I'm not a biologist, but I find it weird how LOTs of people get up in arms about killing this big fish, and there is nothing really supporting it.
Lings......How big is too big?
- Thread starter Mark L
- Start date
I know, but I'm not sure that has anything to do with people harvesting large lings. If the fishery was shut down and harvesting large lings was the cause, would the re-opening not be followed up with some sort of reg to protect them? We have a Minimum size requirement, which to me means someone thinks there is value in protecting the small guys. I don't know know anything to be honest and I'm not a biologist, but I find it weird how LOTs of people get up in arms about killing this big fish, and there is nothing really supporting it.
I think there if the big ones are thrown back the ling population will continue to re populate. You could compare it to the halibut population on the inside. With slot limits in place over the years halibut are slowly returning to areas that have not had a population for years. Halibut are being caught up towards sandheads now.
tincan
Well-Known Member
I prefer to eat a 10lb ling, 15 max and try to let go anything bigger than that for the many reasons listed above. There is plenty of literature out there regarding conservation status and general growth and maturity rates for both male and female lings. If you have the luxury of deciding on what size of lings to keep it would be best to let the big ones swim free from a conservation / population standpoint.
Peahead
Well-Known Member
You may be mixing issues up. My understanding is that the larger halibut are to be released by sporties ONLY due to TAC....nothing to do with conservation measures. This is why commercials can keep the big ones we release because they have a huge TAC. This is done so that we don't reach our 18% before end of summer or fall and get shut down. With our small quota we'd be over pretty quick if we were allowed big barn doors.
Clint r
Well-Known Member
Well thank you for the explanation. I've been saying for years it's unfair to sporties if commies can keep what we have to throw back. Your the first person to offer an explanation that makes sense. Wish that DFO would just say that rather than the old bigger fish more eggs horseshit.
wildmanyeah
Crew Member
are lings like rockfish and die if you catched them deep and release them? I have heard of people using a seaqualizer but from studies done apparently even using them still causes a high death rate when caught and released. I am pretty sure last time I read the Regs DFO was against catch and release of rockfish. To keep what you catch.
Last edited:
Canso
Well-Known Member
No, they are like halibut. Catch and release causes very little harm.
They don't have an air bladder
wildmanyeah
Crew Member
Thanks I was confused as people in this thread were comparing them to rockfish.
I suppose i should've just googled it
"Tagging studies show that lingcod are largely non migratory and colonize or "recruit" in localized areas. Lingcod live on the bottom, but may feed throughout the water column. And unlike many other bottom fish species like rockfish, lingcod do not have an air bladder, which enables them to freely swim up and down the water column without injury. Sport or commercial anglers can haul lingcod from depths of 500-feet or more to the surface and release them unharmed".
Seems like the worst thing for them is over fishing in an area the as Thebigguy Mentioned. If your fishing all day and get 1 10 pounder probably best to let them go. If you have screaming hot fishing in an area keep 1. Also yeah letter the big ones go help too!
Last edited:
Peahead
Well-Known Member
Yeah thanks....... I am either a greedy sportfisher or just way too positive lol
Lingcod release well coming from deeper, unlike rockfish where they can't get back down. Using one of the available release devices at depth for rockfish apparently work enough that using one is better than not. Avoiding rockfish areas if possible (moving) is good practice. "Keep what you catch" only works if you want the fish and will consume it......and you aren't contunually hooking more than you want or are allowed to keep (which is pretty easy on the inside with 1 per person)
Last edited:
TheBigGuy
Well-Known Member
A little off topic, but if you want to limit your rockfish bycatch while fishing for lings, fish areas with high current flow, and keep your line 5-10 feet off bottom. You will have far fewer bottom breakoffs, and you will catch very few if any rockfish. Ling and Halibut will rise off bottom to take a suspended bait, rockfish will rarely leave the safety off the bottom. You might think you'd catch far fewer ling and Hali off bottom, but they feed at many different levels.
Breaking_Shimanos
Member
Unreal that lings lay 100k to half a million eggs and the fishery is in the shape it is. Havnt done much lingcod fishing myself but would like to try before the fishery goes totally belly up. I lost track of my most recent read but I believe I got the recommendation off this forum sometime ago, Cod by M. Kurlansky if anyone's interested.
UkeeDreamin
Well-Known Member
I hope you realize that book is about Atlantic Cod, which is a true cod, rather than the Pacific Lingcod, which is from the greenling family. While many of us believe lingcod is the best tasting white meat out there, it isn't the "fish that changed the world".
Cheers!
Ukee
Cheers!
Ukee
SpringVelocity
Crew Member
This is an interesting debate.
I dont know if I buy the catch a big ling cod and you will ruin the population theory to putting in a size restriction. Honestly DFO has not done enough research on present populations. Also we need to quit talking like RCA's are working. Again no data on that either. I think before we jump to conclusions and using bro science on the forum we need to establish if we have a problem or not. Again that would be up to us to push DFO to do that.
So lets say you fill every spot on license with ling cod (which you dont need BTW). Is it fair to blast a guy that takes a big ling-cod? Your equal in my mind.
In my case I have retained a few big ones last year, but I favor the smaller ones as better eating. I don't really go after larger ones. This year I have none on my license at all.
If you guys are concerned about though it would be awesome if you go to your local SFAB and SFAC guys to speak to them on it if it really bugs you. Sometimes it is better asking these questions directly where they have actual facts and figures in front of them. That is just my view.
I dont know if I buy the catch a big ling cod and you will ruin the population theory to putting in a size restriction. Honestly DFO has not done enough research on present populations. Also we need to quit talking like RCA's are working. Again no data on that either. I think before we jump to conclusions and using bro science on the forum we need to establish if we have a problem or not. Again that would be up to us to push DFO to do that.
So lets say you fill every spot on license with ling cod (which you dont need BTW). Is it fair to blast a guy that takes a big ling-cod? Your equal in my mind.
In my case I have retained a few big ones last year, but I favor the smaller ones as better eating. I don't really go after larger ones. This year I have none on my license at all.
If you guys are concerned about though it would be awesome if you go to your local SFAB and SFAC guys to speak to them on it if it really bugs you. Sometimes it is better asking these questions directly where they have actual facts and figures in front of them. That is just my view.
Last edited:
TheBigGuy
Well-Known Member
I can't say for sure that the RCA's themselves are solely responsible for better fishing. I do know that when the larger size restriction was introduced in the inside strait it was very difficult to even catch a legal size ling in the gulf islands. At that time I personally believe the populations there were on the verge of collapse. I have fished the Gulf islands for 45 years, so I have a pretty good view of the populations ups and downs for a long time. Once the size restrictions were introduced the populations very slowly began to rebuild. The greatest increase in size and numbers has occurred since the introduction of the RCA's. That is not scientific proof that the RCA's are working. It is merely anectdotal evidence that they have helped the stocks rebound. I would not like to see any more RCA's over there as much of the better areas are already closed. I was initially very resentful that almost all of my favorite locations were closed. Now I realize the closures were necessary and I don't gripe about them anymore.
I am no fisheries biologist, but I think the idea could be improved upon by rotating closed areas occasionally over time. Maintain the same number of closures but open an area for fishing that has been closed for many years for one season, and close a different area to give stock there a chance to rebuild. Only a thought, but it might give great opportunities for fishing while helping another area in decline.
Just my opinion
Last edited:
Tidal Chaos
Active Member
The strait was over fished commercially in the 80's for bottom fish which led to the major decline; then we were hit with a closure and the RCA's were put in to help stop it from declining any more. the populations are rebounding and if you talk with local divers they will tell you there are a lot more ling around now than there has been in a long time, which is a good thing. unfortunately now we have the party boats from the mainland coming across the strait to fish the island side as there has been a decline and closures on the mainland side, so only time will tell how long the ling and rock fish on the island side will last before these boats wipe out the easily accessible places.
SpringVelocity
Crew Member
I watched a three year RCA study by students at the local SFAC in Nanaimo in spring. They admitted they dont know if RCA are working, and were doing same and also looking at if people were following it. The graphs they took didn't seem to lead in any conclusion. I wish we could have a link to that study it was a good presentation.
That being said I fished 1970 and 1980 in saanich inlet and those populations were reduced. Although there is a lot still there just not in known spots!
fogged in
Well-Known Member
So...have you come to a conclusion on how big it too big??
What size will you be targeting down the road?
scott craven
Well-Known Member
They are so scarce down here that I don't target , and release them all.
Breaking_Shimanos
Member
I just thought I rementioned the book as it seems appliccable to the general idea of a fishery. A highly sought after fish and potentially or already has collasped from glory days past. Haven't finished the book and lost track of the read after a vacation, but from what I recall without a major spoiler alert is supply and demand was under estimated for an over fished fishery that an industry (Boston/New England and the maritimes) were built upon.
I hadn't noted the two were not truely related and assumed they were because of the cod name and that they appeared to both have the potential for exponential spawning rate.
Last edited:
