I really enjoyed the article in the latest issue about jigging for great lakes salmon. Even though I do not live near the great lakes I think this info may be useful for lakers and browns here in the west. makes me think about alternate ways to catch them other than trolling. good job.

Brian

pete i can't see why jigging wouldn't work on the land locks in seneca.......when we had the land locks in gull lake in michigan, i was very successful jigging spoons around the thermalcline. i did have a steelie hit a 3" gulp/smelt on a jig under a slipbobber this last spring thou here in ohio.

hey hi,new to posting, not really intererested in doing too much of it. To whom it may concern, I've been a member for a fewyears now n love the mag , love to fish, would vote Lindner/ Parker for next Presidental race. I work hard for my dough, just like everyone i dont get tospend my every second fishin when i'm not thou i enjoy reading about fishing, all i can get and who knows how many times i'll re read it a mag i get. One thing for some reason i dont like is seeing pictures of foul hooked . Granted it happens and is part of fishing but i dont like seeing pics of it and that fish in the article looks foul hooked. Note wisconsin law one thing that isnt legal
to fish by snagging, foul-hooking, or attempting to hook fish other than in the
mouth.
• to keep foul-hooked, snagged or any fish not hooked in the mouth.
So the question, by holding that fish in the manner and size was that fish released unharmed? Was it kept and cooked? Just curious, wondering if the fishing club , or just me , can get the fate of that fish.
Not so related, while i am posting here would also like to mention i'm not interested in emails of videos of people jumping out of helicoptors on top of marlins or otherlarge fish minus great whites, have at that all ya want. record that in hd , because after all we NAfc deserve the best .
Tv host pros, gonna mention one for your end, paid to represent, have viewed a couple foul hooked and kept, at least , not verified released, and one that was released, would like to mention the episode of city limits were mike released a foul hooked invasive carp, how would that one be scored by the rules if in fact state law states to release an invasive species, law 40.23 or somethin, not a lawyer.
,,,(23) “Introduce” means to stock, plant, release or otherwise
put an invasive species into the outdoor environment or use an
invasive species in this state anywhere except within an indoor
facility which is designed to physically contain the organism,
including but not limited to a laboratory, greenhouse, growth
chamber or fermenter.
to release it alive wouldnt be a correct course of action due to foul hooking laws not applying to the invasives, guess my point is, hey big shots lucky to be front and center in the fishing industry , your being seen, keep it clean. thanks

On foul hooked fish. Here in Il. the capture of bighead and silver carp by any means other than poison or explosives is not only legal, but encouraged. I have heard of bighead being taken by hook and line but not silvers. Possesion of these fish live IS illegal. I'm sure that you are aware that City Limits fishing is in no way connected to the NAFC. Tom

Correct you are welcome to snag invasives , but to release alive, thats covered in the last post, but game species such as trout , salmon, bass, those are not welcome to be snagged and kept, foul hooked must be released. So my question remains, of that fish on page 47? what came of it? was it released , was it harvested? I want to know and no i dont like pics of foul hooked, gimme a break , the pros show pics of snagged fish, thats rookie in my book, another reason i"m not a life member. will be watching for an answer about the fate of that fish.

I guess I will have to revisit that article. I missed that one. The main reason for my post was that It made me intersted in some out of the box methods for browns and lakers in my area.

Brian

the pic in ? shows a hook on the mouth not in the mouth.....not sure about wi. laws but in mi. that would have been a legally hook fish. because of the area the hook had penetrated at-- it's in/on the mouth area. it shoes that the fish struck at the bait and was not drag across the fish in a way to hook it.
another thought on the pic is.....maybe the bait and jig was placed were it was at--in the pic-- to show you what they were using. the reason i'm thinking that is, that a fish that size, hook there would have had the upper hand in the battle and would have either pulled the hook out or broken the line before it could have been landed.

That fish would be considered legally hooked in Il. also as it was (if the fish is in fact hooked and that is not a staged picture) hooked in an area that could reasonably considered the result of a strike at the bait. One more thing- snagging is legal in certain areas of Il. during the "false spawning run" that chinook and coho make on the Il shoreline of Lk Michigan. These fish are for all purposed swimming dead fish, as they are at the end of their life cycle. Tom

The law in my state as well as wisconsin law states the hook must be IN the mouth , meaning by detail, the hook must start from inside the mouth and penetrate outward, showing clearly the fish bit, not swung and missed, that pic on 47 is clearly foul hooked and by law that can be easily found online, MUST BE RELEASED , so once again i'm posting to clear this up, i do not want my money paying for a subscription that shows pictures of foul hooked fish, which that one is. Again the law states for wisconsin IN the mouth, NOT at the mouth, easy solution, remove the hook before taking and publishing the picture, if this cannot be done i can subscribe to any other fishing magazine. Thats no problem, not out to make a big deal of anything, not out to change the world, but can easily exercise my right of choise, and choose a different mag to pay for. Now , argue all you want, maybe the crew of NAFC can get a game wardens take on the law , what the true technicalities would be , but i still want an answer from the people who know, was that fish released unharmed or not, you can argue your state laws all you want, IN the mouth, not at it, that is still a foul hooked fish and keeping it is poaching. deny, argue, whatever, take the hook out then take the pics , hide the fact you didnt in all rights and laws actually legally harvest, might keep me from having to speak up.

Tell ya what , instead of posting our opinions , lets get a known fishing spotlight person like hal schramm , steve pennaz, al lindner, to share whats truely correct on this topic. And still i want to know , was that fish released or harvested, meanwhile since you all think thats a fair fish to keep , maybe i'm wrong, my state laws reflect the same aswisconsin on this topic, will show the pic to a few game wardens soon when possible and get their opinion on this , becuase that pic clearly shows that hook entered the fish from outside the mouth in, thats completely different from in the mouth.

HEY mr. bill,
your state law
Hook and Line Fishing: Fish so taken must be hooked in the mouth. Fish not hooked in the mouth must be returned to the water immediately. source : http://www.michigan.gov/dnr/0,1607,...--,00.html

Still waiting for my answers, better hurry before its time for me to renew a membership.

All the picture clearly shows is a bait lying against the side of the fish's mouth. A legal oppinion on 'in the mouth' would be interesting, as an argument could be made that even hooked outside in, part of the hook is in the fish's mouth. Tom

Too bad the 10,000 law state of MN just have an absolute no snagging rule so that ends the discussion for me. You either got a bite and hooked a fish as a result of that or you either snagged the fish in any other part other than the mouth. We have conservation officers that disagree in the interpretation of the rule.

ya the rule is in the mouth......it does say inside the mouth....that is why that fish in the pic is a legally hooked fish. also i stayed i would bet a dollar on the fact that the hook was placed there so we could see what was used for the bait and for the pic.

i caught a 4 lb smallie today that hit my rapala, the hook was in the upper lip just on the outside edge of the mouth. i could have kept that fish because it was hooked in the lip.

Posted By slipperybob on 15 Jul 2010 08:18 PM
Too bad the 10,000 law state of MN just have an absolute no snagging rule so that ends the discussion for me. You either got a bite and hooked a fish as a result of that or you either snagged the fish in any other part other than the mouth. We have conservation officers that disagree in the interpretation of the rule.

i hear ya on that slipperybob....we had a co that claimed that if hunting hrs are to end by such and such a time you must be out of the woods at that time or he would write you up for hunting after hrs. it didn't matter that ya had yer arrows in the quiver or yer gun totally open or apart...it was because you were still in the woods....so you must be hunting....not walking from yer stand orthat you shot a deer at 5pm and you track it until 9pm and now you are draging it out of the woods.

couple things n i'm done, i was taught to fish by 2 great men, my grandfather and my great uncle. Lucky am i for this . Both lived the same time era, both honest, well known and loved by many, both a strong love for fishing. I'm not 100% certain they ever met but i do know they both knew fishing. One thing i remember them both agree on was the definition of a fair caught fish, the hook must point out. There was a difference between hooked at the mouth and hooked in the mouth. the hook pointed out and anything less had to be released. Not sure it mattered to them if it was a law or not they both taught that. For 2 men from that same era to both know and follow this theory, of course i am gonna follow it too. Its whats good for fishing , the fish gets the benifit of the doubt, the way it should be. If you were a fish wouldnt you feel the same? The fish is the most important denominator in fishing, it deserves, demands,and should receive that respect. And for t he magazine group that i subscribe to show anything less than that is below my taste for fishing related reading material.

Yea your probly right, for picture reasons, product placement i'm sure. I would use that excuse as well to get out of admitting to the members you just got caught with your act of poaching in a national mag. I say, lets get some official word on this, reguardless, for future knowledge due to the fact we have multiple opinions and isnt that what this group is for ? So we know whats good for fish and whats good for fishing. How bout it Steve, Hal? lets get the skinny, lets get the true story of the fish, its fate, the picture and lets get a ruling on which way the law swings on outside hooks pointing in.

Heres to you that know hooks point out . Rock on , catch and release anyways .

opithemious, i believe most of us will agree with you on what you are saying about rightly caught fish and release anything else. i also think that the majority of us do the same thing-- release the fish if the hook is not inside the mouth-- except maybe a pannie er 2 that was planned on having a meal with. and these fish were not snagged, just not hook with hook pointing out.

i'm not double talking here or riding the fence per say. just don't want you to think that i don't agree with you. i believe yer ? or statement was that the fish in the pic. was snagged and we all just pointed out that the hook placement shows that the fish was not snagged because it was in the mouth.

also i would like to add and i might add that this is more important than anything else here----- we can agree on not agreeing ------and we are not making this a shouting, name calling match. but an interesting thread with different ways of thinking about something and how each law-- no matter what the purpose or intent of that law is--- can be read by 5 people and have 5 different answers to what they just read. plus this will tell me that if you and i ever got together to go fishing and i caught a fish with a hook on the mouth then i would release it. because the hook was not in the mouth..............so opithemious HAPPY FISH'N

oh ya i almost forgot........don't hold yer breath waiting for an answer from the club........you might get lucky and kurt will see this and bring it to someones attention at the mag. and if you do get any answer it will be printed in the mag. at a time when you lease expect it and in a place were you most likely don't rely look........good luck on yer answer from the club there......

WOW, I looked at the pic and your all worked up over that ? amazing and yet unbelievable. A fish caught is a fish caught and should be treated as nothing more or less. Amazing, big boats using big nets that catch anything in its way and just because a hook is facing in you think it shouldn't be in my freezer. Steve, nothing is needing explaining here for this pic. Thanks for letting us know what was used for bait. Maybe Opi you should be on a green peace boat chasing tuna fisherman. I had better stop here, this is not something I want to get going on as we all have our opinions. enjoy letting your fish go when you want and don't tell me I can't put one in the freezer just beacuse you think it may have been hooked in and not out. I'll be sure to post a sign on my hook next time for the fish to read how to properly attack a bait.

Ok real quick before i go to work....

1.... Apparrently this isnt about one fish , anymore. Since ya'll are postin you do it too, at the mouth counts as in the mouth for most that are replying to my comments .

2...This was never about the one fish, thiswas about my subscription, i dont want pics of dirty poachers in the mag i pay good money to subscribe to.

3..... The difference between a good fisherman and a great one shouldnt require a game warden/conservation officer to enforce the rules that clearly state "in the mouth"

4 ....The easiest way to look like a retard is to argue with one but you wouldnt know anything about that would ya fishalot, hey make sure i get a pic of that hook sign, your mommas been wanting new inner thigh ink.

5....If i'm such a dirty tree hugger why is it i'm the one point out the laws in this string? Still waitin for offical answer on the fate of that fish or was it just a product placement picture? Lets keep an open line! pfft

Gosh All I wanted was to say that I enjoyed the article and How it gave me some good tips for lakers and browns in my area. Sorry it got so many people worked up. Now if anyone has some comments about What they got from the article I would sure like to hear them.

using non traditional methods!
How the water temps affect fishing!
etc etc.
No offense to those who already did this.

Brian

Hi all:
I just got back from the big tackle show and found this thread. What a great discussion. I love it when the back-and-forth centers on fishing, like this one does. Just too bad it got a little goofy at the end there.

Couple of things: First, you can bet your life that we observe fish and game laws to the letter. There's just no other way to do it, right? Second, yes sometimes photos are staged a bit, not so much for product placement as someone wrote, but to best illustrate vital facts and information for the readers. Finally, I encourage Opit and anyone else to watch the show (http://www.fishingclub.com/video/ar...r-salmon), then come back and tell me what you think.

Hey, MrBill--you hurt my feelings. Well, not really, but you do make me wonder when you write, "you might get lucky and Kurt will see this and bring it to someone's attention at the mag." Check out the editorial masthead on your last issue of North American Fisherman. It might also change your mind about needing luck to get a response from the Club.

Thanks everyone.

kurt thank you for your response and of late i have been seeing things to start looking up for the better on the site-- this one and the hunting clubs.

Yes Kurt thanks for the response. Keep articles like this coming. Even though I don't fish the great lakes the info still was relevant.

Brian

So the answer is that the fish was caught by legal means and this was really just a picture? The video doesnt clarify but for what i could see it looks as if the hooks were all good, granted i dont know which fish was which. But if just a photo op i can understand its just that it seems your spreading bad info to show a pic like that as if it were a fair catch. This could lead to more people thinking they have fair catches as well when in fact they dont. Also seems like maybe we need a mag covering the laws, maybe just the basics , to clarify the actual rules.
From reading your responce i conclude that i am right about the hook placement in this situation, that if you state NAFC follows all laws and this was just a pic then if the fish had come aboard hooked as in the pic it would have been illegal to keep, am i correct? and if others notice this tiny detail would it also spread misinformation in fishing that it is ok to keep fish that are hooked this way? I mean lets face it , how many responded in this post stating they do it as well, with as many members as the NAFc may have, alot will follow suit. This isnt good, this shouldnt be risked for the sake of the fish.
Onelast thing while i post,can we get more info on vhs , snakehead , asian carp. More info, mooooooore . and lets get some info rolling on the death toll in the gulf and what bp plans on doing for restocking , if possible.
Thanks again, i might renew.

also , i know this isnt NAFC related but anything fishing related in North America seems to fit the bill. Was watching Nat geo recently about the world record halibut and they told the story as to how the man who caught the fish thought he had snagged the bottom, so his buddy touched his rod and line to see and states he had one massive fish on the line and wasnt snagged, this was stated by both people in question and ran in the story nat geo did , IFGA rules state

The following acts will disqualify a catch

2. The act of persons other than the angler in touching any part of the rod, reel, or line (including the double line) either bodily or with any device, from the time a fish strikes or takes the bait or lure, until the fish is either landed or released, or in giving any aid other than that allowed in the rules and regulations. If an obstacle to the passage of the line through the rod guides has to be removed from the line, then the obstacle (whether chum, floatline, rubber band, or other material) shall be held and cut free. Under no circumstances should the line be held or touched by anyone other than the angler during this process

Thought i'd share, seems this should be looked into but granted not NAFC . Not your mistake , only posting to share info. could someone pass this along to nat geo? not out to dethrone anyone of world records, just seems , well , fishy.