Coppersmith Studios Presents

Myths of How to Handle a Trout During the Catch and Release Process

There are many people who have viewed my films of trout streams and told me that I don't know how to handle a trout. These people get their information from the outdoor media which deliberately misinforms them for self-serving purposes. In this article I am going to demonstrate that I know how to handle trout better than the vast majority of anglers and how the trout fishing community has been mislead by the outdoor media. While I am not trying to teach anyone how to handle a fish it is very possible that anyone who reads this will learn information that will be useful regarding fish handling. I should also point out that the subject of trout, slime and skin infection has been given its own article that you can read HERE. There is also a separate article on fanaticism in fly fishing that may be read HERE.

Causes of Trout Mortality

Let us begin our investigation of how to handle trout by first finding out what tends to kill them. I am aware of 4 studies conducted between 1980 and 2005 indicating the causes of trout mortality due to being caught and released by anglers. One was done in Alberta Canada, one in the upper Midwest Driftless area, and the two others done elsewhere in the USA. They all agreed on the following points:

1. The mortality rate for trout ranged from 1.5% to 3% with 2% being the general average.

2. The main cause of death by far was lactic acid build up - basically exhaustion.

3. The second main cause of death by far was hypoxia - basically oxygen deprivation.

4. The third main cause of death was use of natural bait.

5. The remaining causes of death were attributed to various factors such as barbed treble hooks, dropping fish, shaking fish, squeezing fish, damage to the gills, eyes, or internal organs.

I would like to point out that these studies were generally conducted with average fishermen during the peak fishing season. During that time the water temperatures tend to be moderate and the size of fish tends to be modest. Both of those qualities help to contribute to a low mortality rate of around 2%. On the other hand, most of the people releasing the fish were not fanatically obsessed with careful handling of the fish as can be indicated by issues such as shaking fish off the hook or using bait or barbed treble hooks. This would tend to increase the mortality rate. Also to be noted is that the majority of anglers participating in these surveys used artificial lures. Studies have shown that fish caught on live bait can have mortality rates of up to 84% (Hunsaker et al., 1970).

How to Handle a Trout

Much has been written about the proper way to hold a trout and generally treat the trout during the catch and release process. The information is generally somewhat reasonable for a trout that is on the verge of death but they never tell you that. They tell you of the way to handle the trout, they say this is how you are supposed to do it, and this is all done in such a manner to give the impression that if you don't follow that method you are doing it "wrong" and the fish is likely to die. This can be extremely misleading to many people who then think anyone handling the trout in a different manner is killing the fish. Unless you are fishing in water that is too warm for the fish, in which case you perhaps shouldn't be fishing, or unless you just caught a large fish on light line and it has fought itself to exhaustion, in which case you either got really lucky or you should have known better and fished with heavier line, this "proper" way of handling a trout is highly unnecessary. Much of the evidence for this is discussed below. Keep in mind the topic of slime removal and skin infection is explained in a separate article.

About the only thing I agree that is almost always a good idea in the recommendations given by the outdoor media is that if a trout requires some assistance being rejuvenated you certainly don't want to hold it in the water pointing it downstream. If the fish is breathing on its own then that is usually enough to get it to recover. Calm water is often as good or better than putting it in a current.

When I release a fish I take into consideration the water temperature, the length of time the fish fought, the species of trout, its size, the amount of time it was out of the water, its body language as an indication of what condition it is in and the layout of the stream nearby. All of this information is quickly analyzed and I make a decision about how this fish probably needs to be treated when put back into the water. I cannot emphasize enough the cluelessness of the outdoor media when telling you how to handle your trout when they know nothing about these factors.

It may be a shock to some people who have been deceived by the outdoor media for much of their lives, but there are a lot of times when I just toss the fish underhand back into the water. If I showed that on film I would have dozens of angry viewers accusing me of maliciously killing trout and disrespecting them. I wonder how many people are aware that trout are commonly stocked in remote locations by being dropped from a helicopter. Keep in mind I do this when my vast experience and substantial studies of scientific investigations informs me that it is a good thing to do. Tossing a trout back into the water gets it back into the water in the fastest manner possible, which is a good thing, and the impact of hitting the water helps to wake it up in case it went into shock. I almost never toss a trout into the water unless it is a situation where I can retrieve the fish in case it does not appear to be recovering. My success rate of knowing when to do this is about 98%.

If a trout requires assistance with recovery and it isn't breathing then I give it a wiggle to try and wake it up. If the fish doesn't respond then you could try putting it into a fast current which will act like an artificial respirator but if a fish is that deep in a coma then any revival is likely to be temporary and it will probably die shortly after it swims away. Because I fish with relatively heavy line for the size trout I catch I get them in quickly and almost never encounter such a problem.

When I determine a trout may need assistance in the recovery process I try to get a firm grip on it as I put it in the water. I am aware that too firm a grip can injure internal organs, but I am also aware of a trout's anatomy well enough to know what parts of its body I can squeeze the most without causing injury. My gloves which so many misinformed individuals fear are killing the trout help a lot to improve my grip at this time and reduce the required pressure exerted on the fish.

When the trout is first placed in the water there is often an instinctive surge of effort to try and get away. If I determined the fish needs assistance then I try to maintain a hold on it. Sometimes the fish succeeds in getting away from me at this step and if it does it usually had more energy than I anticipated and is probably in good enough shape to be immediately released, although sometimes it just slips out, swims 5 feet away, and then goes belly up. I only hold the fish with one hand at this time. My other hand is always free to protect myself in case I fall. Rich Osthoff in his book Fishing the Rocky Mountain Backcountry tells of a time when he fell while releasing a 10 inch brown trout in a remote stream in Idaho, knocked his head on a rock and fell unconscious face down in a shallow pool of water. Never place a fish's well-being over your own. In those rare times when I have caught a trout too large to hold with one hand (it doesn't happen enough!) I hold it with two hands but take great care in making sure of my footing.

I hold the fish until I decide it is time to release it. That determination is based on my knowledge of the entire situation and especially the fish's body language. Rather than writing 5 additional pages on this step and trying to explain this I will just advise the reader to think, pay attention, education yourself and make your best determination. If you are no good at those things then sure, let the clueless outdoor media advise you. They are very willing to do that.

After the fish is released I try to watch it for a moment and intervene should the fish appear to be having trouble. That rarely happens. I apparently know what I am doing.

Removing Trout from the Water

Many people have criticized me for removing trout from water. They appear to be under the impression that doing so will greatly increase the mortality rate of the trout. As mentioned previously, the trout mortality rate is usually around 2% and that assumes most of the fish have been taken out of the water to remove the hooks.

While I could not find any study determining what impact removing trout from the water had on the mortality rate, at least for normal fishing conditions, I did find such a study done with bluegills. In this study it was found that 7% of the bluegills caught and removed from the water to be de-hooked died where as none of the bluegills released without being removed from the water died. I am fairly certain this is where the outdoor media picked up on the idea that trout should not be removed from the water.

I have to admit that even though the study involved bluegills and not trout it should still be concerning to a trout angler that such a difference was noted. For a while I was puzzled as to why there was such a dramatic difference but after some thought I eventually realized the cause of the high 7% mortality rate. Note that bluegills were being caught and released. Unlike trout, there is very little catch and release ethic regarding bluegills. They tend to over populate a body of water and become stunted. Often when fishing worms for other fish your bait gets pestered by little bluegill which many people find annoying. When large bluegill are caught they are thrown in the fish basket. Limits of 50 bluegill per day are common in many states. Also note bluegills have spines on their bodies and if you aren't careful you can get a painful poke when handling them.

All of this adds up to a tendency for everyone to release their bluegills by tossing them back into the water. If a bluegill where to go into shock it would float belly up after being released and might not recover. Trout, on the other hand, are generally treated with much more respect and care during the release process. Most people hold the trout in the water until it regains its bearings before releasing it. If a person tosses the trout in the water they usually keep an eye on it to make sure it doesn't go belly up and if it does they usually try to hold it upright until it recovers. If I let go my trout with the same reckless abandon practiced by typical bluegill anglers then I wouldn't be surprised if my trout experienced a mortality rate of more than 7%. And if bluegill anglers were to hold their fish upright until the fish recovers from shock and are able to swim on its own power I would expect the mortality rate for bluegills removed from the water to be significantly lower than 7%.

Another issue with trying to release a trout without removing it from the water is the fish tends to struggle a lot more. As mentioned earlier, the number one cause of death for trout is exhaustion. I have found that netting the fish ends the fight a lot sooner and reduces the trout's overall exhaustion level. The majority of the time this should result in a higher survival rate.

Furguson and Tufts

In the June 1992 edition of the Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences an important study was done by R. A. Furguson and B. L. Tufts. Rainbow trout were chased for 10 minutes (simulating being fought by an angler), then removed from the water, then subjected to a brief surgical procedure to determine chemical analysis of blood and tissue samples, and then observed for the next day or two to see if they died. Fish that were not removed from the water had an 88% survival rate. Fish that were removed from the water for 30 seconds after the exercise had a 62% survival rate and fish that were removed for 60 seconds had a survival rate of a mere 28%. These are significant figures but unfortunately they have been grossly misinterpreted by the outdoor media.

Before getting to the important point, let me also say the water temperature was 59 F. That must be known before jumping to any conclusions and I have seen no one other than myself mention this. Rainbow trout usually are OK up to 62 degrees and start suffering from heat stress above that temperature. A temperature of 59 F is enough to give the trout a high metabolism so that it can quickly reach a point of exhaustion. I should also point out that after the exercise and handling these fish were subject to a minor surgery to check their body chemistry. The study explained this in detail but did not discuss what impact this surgery may have had on the survival rate. I am not in a position to speculate on the matter other than to say it probably didn't help.

I find it highly suspicious that while many people have cited the high mortality rate for fish removed from the water for 30 or 60 seconds, few have mentioned that these fish were first chased to complete exhaustion for 10 minutes. Yes, complete exhaustion. Even the researchers say the fish were so tired they would no longer respond to being chased. They were so exhausted that 12% of them died even when they were not removed from the water at all. I have never in my fishing career played a fish to such exhaustion.

A careful chemical analysis of the deceased fish showed they died due to exhaustion. Excessive levels of lactic acid had accumulated in the fish's blood stream and white muscle tissue. The lack of oxygen for 30 to 60 seconds inhibited the fish's ability to correct this chemical imbalance in a timely manner and thus it died. But the key point is the fish had been chased to exhaustion for a full 10 minutes. I also have to wonder what impact the surgical procedure immediately after the exercise may have had on the fish.

I've caught a lot of trout in my time. 90% of the trout I catch are netted within 10 seconds. That is 60 times sooner than 10 minutes! The trout I catch have lactic acid levels that are literally 60 times less than the fish that died in the above mentioned study! 99.8% of the trout I catch are netted within a minute. That is 10 times less exhaustion than the trout that died in this study. And yet there are large numbers of people, mislead by the outdoor media, who believe I am killing every trout I catch because I remove it from the water.

I use a landing net to end the fight as soon as possible (something many people have wrongly criticized me for) and as heavy a line as I can get away with. Often time I use line which has a higher break strength than the rod I'm using. Often times I am more worried about the rod breaking than the line breaking. By getting the fish in fast you are reducing its exhaustion levels. A fish that is not exhausted can handle being out of the water for a long time. How long do you ask? While there are many variables involved, a study by Loftus et. al. in the 1988 vol 45 of the Canadian Journal of Fish and Aquatic Sciences (p. 1473-1479) caught trout and exposed them to air for as long as 5 minutes without the fish dying. But note they did not fight the fish to exhaustion.

I do not recommend taking too much time in getting a trout back to the water, but the idea most trout die when removed from the water for up to a minute is clearly incorrect. One of the little things I do to help in this regard is to pose the trout in front of the camera for only a couple seconds. I then slow down the film so the viewer has enough time to see the fish. You can see when I do this by observing the current of the stream in the background moving much slower than normal. I almost hesitate to say this because some fanatical anglers will interpret this as indicating it is vital to get the fish back in the water a few seconds faster. It is not vital and it probably makes no difference 99% of the time.

I have commonly heard of people bragging about using 2 pound line to fool and catch a 20 inch trout in a highly pressured body of water. I have never heard of anyone criticizing this practice, which ends up being harmful to the trout because the trout will experience a much higher level of exhaustion. Oh, but these same people are quick to criticize anyone for removing a trout from the water under any circumstance! I discuss the reasons for this contradictory behavior in my article on Fanaticism in Fly Fishing.

An interesting little side story on exhaustion occurred many years ago when as a teenager I hooked into a large carp in a little warm water stream using 4 pound line. I fought that fish for 6 hours but couldn't bring it to the surface of the deep hole from where it had been hooked. Just as it was getting dark I made a desperate attempt to apply as much pressure to the line as I dared, and the fish was finally brought to the surface. The site of such a behemoth was frightening. Unfortunately during the 6 hour fight my net had gotten tangled with some sticks and now acted more like a big tennis racket than a net. I scoped up the fish but it quickly flopped out. The sinker became tangled in the net and for 2 seconds I watched the fish swinging from the net (I was reaching down from a high bank at the time). Then the line broke and the fish splashed back into the water, never to be seen again. If you ever gutted a carp you should know they have a tremendous amount of blood than does a trout. This blood helps clear out the lactic acid during a fight, making death by exhaustion very difficult to achieve. Catfish have a similar physiology. I heard of a similar story of my grandfather who fought a monster catfish for 4 hours late in the night. When he and his fishing partner got a sight of the monster fish they gave up all hope of ever landing it and just cut the line and went home. Catfish, like carp, can fight for hours without succumbing to exhaustion. A trout can usually not fight for more than 10 minutes.

Gill Damage

I have had people tell me I should not remove trout from the water otherwise they will experience gill damage and die. People have told me the moment the water stops dripping off a trout the gill damage begins and its death is not long off. They even say there are scientific studies backing this up.

This is complete nonsense, especially for trout. At a molecular level it may be technically correct to say some damage to a trout's gills may occur when taken out of the water. This is equivalent to saying when you walk to your car for 1 minute in bright sun light the UV radiation damages your skin which may cause skin cancer which may kill you. That is actually a true statement, but what is missing is that the amount of damage is so miniscule that it is insignificant and just doesn't matter.

The gills of a fish have a delicate structure called lamellae which is attached to the gill filaments and is responsible for extracting oxygen from the water. When a trout is out of the water their lamellae collapses on itself. This prevents it from extracting oxygen from the air but interestingly actually protects itself from damage from the air drying it out. Other fish species such as bass, pike and especially catfish have gills that don't collapse as much when exposed to the air and can actually breathe slightly while out of the water. I remember getting ready to fillet a catfish that had been out of the water and exposed to air at 85 degree Fahrenheit for 2 hours. That fish was still alive. I had to whack it on the head several times before beginning the procedure. There is no way a trout would survive that long. If there is one fish whose gills are the least immune to damage from being out of the water it would be a trout. A trout would die of hypoxia/oxygen deprivation long before it would experience any life threatening gill damage. I am unaware of any study finding trout to have died due to gills being damaged from exposure to the air.

Returning the Fish to its Spot

I have read from the outdoor media many times that you should return the fish to the spot you caught it from. I always wondered how a person can know if that is a good idea when they do not know what the layout of the stream is or about the specifics of where the fish was caught. I have come to the conclusion that the outdoor media is just trying to make it look like they know what they are talking about. Fact of the matter is they do not know what they are talking about.

I am sure we have all seen shallow streams where there is one small deep pocket holding a fish. If you were to catch a fish out of that small pocket and let it go anywhere other than directly back in the small pocket the fish would have a very challenging time getting re-established and might even perish. Most of the time the need to return the fish to its exact spot of origin is not so important. This is especially true in spring creeks and larger freestone streams.

There have been times when I caught a trout when the temperature was getting a bit on the warm side and, judging by many factors such as its body language, decided it needed a little extra care during the release process. Instead of returning the fish to its spot of origin I put it in a shallow calm pool. I put the fish directly on the bottom so it could just lie there without having to make any effort at maintaining its position against the current. So long as the gills are moving you don't need to put the fish in the current in order for it to breathe effectively. I made sure the pool was shallow so I could easily observe it and if it went belly up I would be able to intervene and give it some assistance. I then spent 20 minutes eating my lunch. When I stood up the fish saw me and bolted away. I could tell by the way it swam that it was clearly on the road to recovery and was not going to die.

Had I released the fish in the spot from where it was caught it would have been subjected to a strong current. There is probably some calmer water close to the bottom but it would be questionable if the fish had the ability when initially released to get down to the bottom without being swept downstream. In the event the fish had not been able to get to the bottom and began to faulter I would not have been in a position to help. This type of scenario is common. What is not common is the outdoor media recognizing these scenarios.

There are other scenarios when releasing the trout from where it was caught might put the angler in danger. Please, under no circumstance should you ever put yourself in danger for the well being of a trout or any other fish. Anyone who does that has their priorities mixed up.

Treble Hooks verses Single Hooks

During the past 5 years I have fished mostly with a fly rod. I'm always filming the trout stream while fishing and fly rods look better on film and there are some people who get upset when seeing a person fish with a spinning reel. When the fly rod won't work well for a certain situation I put a spinning reel on my spin-fly rod and fish a lure with a fly or two behind it. Often times that lure has a treble hook on it, although not always. When people see me fishing with a treble hook lure I get a lot of comments that I shouldn't use treble hooks because they kill fish. While treble hooks can kill fish so can single hooks. The whole matter has been blown out of proportion by the outdoor media and many fly fishers have taken the bait.

G. E. Stinger published an article in the 1967 vol 39 publication of Canadian Fish Culture (p. 17-21) regarding his findings on the lethalness of various fishing methods. He found rainbow trout had a 36% mortality rate when caught on bait using single hooks. Single hook flies had a mortality rate of 7.9% and treble hooked spoons had a mortality rate of 2.8%. Some people might say the study was a bit old, but have hooks changed much since 1967? I mean, didn't treble hooks back then still have 3 prongs on them? And did you notice in this study that single hook flies had a mortality rate more than twice as high as treble hook spoons? The reason for the higher mortality rate for single hook flies is due to the bite (also referred to as throat) and gap of a single hook tends to be larger than that of a treble hook. This results in deeper and more serious wounds.

Spoons are my favorite lure to use when trout fishing. Sometimes I will cut off one of the prongs on the treble hook and sometimes I do not. There is one type of spoon I sometimes use, a Bantam Scyclops, that comes with a single hook. There have been at least two occasions when the single hook became entangled in a trout's gills resulting in bleeding and eventual death. I do not recall that ever happening with a spoon having a treble hook on it, even though I fish treble hook spoons about 4 times more often than single hook spoons. My experience aligns with that of G. E. Stinger's results.

In 1970 scientists D. Hunsaker, L. Marnell and P. Sharpe published a study in vol. 32 of Progressive Fish Culture, p. 231-235, involving mortality rates for cutthroat trout. They found no substantial difference in mortality rates between fish caught on barbed treble hooks verses barbed single hooks. One area that all studies appear to agree on is that fishing with artificials, whether that be lures with treble hooks or flies with single hooks, has a much lower mortality rate than fishing with natural bait. I have heard of some studies showing the mortality rate when fishing with bait to be as high as 84%, a truly unacceptable level and is the reason all streams requiring release of all trout caught universally prohibit the use of bait (at least I have never heard of an exception to this rule).

One issue I sometimes have with barbed treble hooks is when one prong is embedded in a fish's jaw and the other prong is stuck in the mesh of the net. To quickly resolve such situations I carry a small pocket knife in my vest pocket. A quick slash at the net mesh and the fish is freed. It is rare for a treble hook to become hopelessly stuck inside a fish's mouth. For all of the many trout I have caught I can recall not more than 3 times when that happened. In such instances I use my knife to quickly cut an incision to get the hook out. I believe all 3 trout survived the process.

In 1974 scientists M. Falk, D. Gillman and L. Dahlke conducted a study on barbed verses barbless hooks. The findings were that while barbed hooks caused more tissue damage in trout they did not have a higher mortality rate than barbless hooks. This is another one of those studies that the outdoor media has chosen to ignore.

Temperature

In these days of global warming temperature is gaining increased attention. This attention is well deserved. The general consensus among various studies is that mortality rates tend to stay level up to 62 degrees for brook trout, cutthroat trout, lake trout and rainbow trout. The limit for brown trout is 66 degrees and bull trout have a surprisingly low limit of 54, although I suspect that might be a side effect of the larger size of the fish and the tendency for the fight to last longer. As the temperature increases beyond those values the mortality rate also increases and it does so at an exponential level.

A big question then occurs as to at what temperature should you stop fishing? This is not a simple answer although there are plenty of people who like the throw out an answer. I would disregard their answers since they don't know any details of a specific scenario.

Most people are aware that as temperatures rise the water holds less oxygen. However, consider a stream with a lot of rapids and plunge pools will have more oxygen than a stream having mostly flat water even if they are of the same temperature. This should be taken into consideration. Also consider the length of time a fish fights will also be a factor, so fishing a stream having mostly small trout verses a stream with larger fish could make a difference. If large trout are present then the strength of your rod and line must also be considered. A strong current could extend the length of a fight. Studies have indicated that trout are impacted not just by the current water temperature but also suffer from long term stress if the temperature has been high for several days.

My experience with the outdoor media is they like to give simple generic solutions for these types of matters. Having one cut-off temperature for trout fishing in general is a very simple approach and very inaccurate for many situations. Brook trout certainly will have a lower maximum temperature ceiling than rainbow and cutthroat trout and brown trout will be able to endure warmer temperatures than the others.

Considering all of the many variables involved I would be hesitant to offer any advice regarding at what temperature to stop trout fishing. I would offer a suggestion to spend more time resuscitating a trout as the water temperature rises toward the upper limits of tolerance. I carry a laser thermometer with me which I use to quickly sample the water temperature, especially on warm days, and I have a tendency to think. So that would be my recommendation: check the water temperature, educate yourself on the matter, and think.

Conclusion

This article is dedicated to all of those misguided individuals who have arrogantly and ignorantly told me to learn how to handle a fish. At this point it is my hope that everyone can plainly see I know quite a lot about handling a fish, and now hopefully so too do you.

Regards,

Dan Coppersmith 07/17/2024

Created by: Dan Coppersmith 2024| www.CoppersmithStudios.com

Navigation

Contact Us

Coppersmith Studios Presents

Myths of How to Handle a Trout During the Catch and Release Process