A Comparison of Circle Hook and “J” Hook Performance in Recreational Catch-And-Release Fisheries for Billfish
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
*MS07 Prince 4/11/02 11:26 AM Page 1 American Fisheries Society Symposium XX: pp. xxx–xxx, 2002 © Copyright by the American Fisheries Society 2002 A Comparison of Circle Hook and “J” Hook Performance in Recreational Catch-and-Release Fisheries for Billfish Eric D. Prince, Mauricio Ortiz, and Arietta Venizelos National Marine Fisheries Service Southeast Fisheries Science Center 75 Virginia Beach Drive Miami, Florida 33149, USA Abstract.—This study evaluates the performance of circle and comparable-size “J” hooks on Atlantic and Pacific sailfish Istiophorus platypterus and, to a lesser extent, on Pacific blue marlin Makaira nigricans. Terminal gear performances were assessed in terms of fishing success, hook location, and bleeding associated with physical hook damage and trauma. Evaluations of trolling with dead bait took place off Iztapa, Guatemala, during the spring and summer of 1999, and assessment of drifting/kite fishing with live bait took place off South Florida, during the summer of 1999. Three hundred and sixty Pacific sailfish were caught in Iztapa, Guatemala, to assess terminal gear perfor- mance; 235 sailfish were on circle hooks, and 125 were on “J” hooks. Circle hooks used on sailfish had hooking percentages (i.e., fish hooked/fish bite) that were 1.83 times higher compared with “J” hooks. Once the fish were hooked, no difference in catch percentage (i.e., fish caught/fish hooked) between hook types was detected. Sig- nificantly more sailfish were hooked in the corner of the mouth using circle hooks (85%), as compared with “J” hooks (27%). In contrast, significantly more sailfish were deep hooked in the throat and stomach with “J” hooks (46%), as compared with circle hooks (2%). Only one sailfish (1%) was foul hooked using circle hooks, while 11 (9%) sailfish caught on “J” hooks were foul hooked. Sailfish caught on “J” hooks are 21 times more likely to suffer hook-related bleeding than those caught on circle hooks. Seventy-five Atlantic sailfish were caught using circle hooks in the South Florida live bait recreational fish- ery to assess possible differences in hook performance between circle hooks with and without an offset point. No difference in catch percentage or bleeding was found between circle hooks with: no offset; minor offset (about 4 degrees); or severe offset points (about 15 degrees). However, the percentage of deep hooking in the throat and stomach for circle hooks with a severe offset (44%) was comparable to the deep hooking percentage for “J” hooks (46%) used in the Guatemala study. A comparison of circle and “J” hook catch rates of Pacific sailfish and blue marlin, using logbook catch statistics from recreational fishing off Iztapa, Guatemala, was also conducted. In gen- eral, use of circle hooks resulted in measures of fishing success that were comparable to or higher than “J” hooks. Circle hooks also minimized deep hooking, foul hooking, and bleeding. Thus, the use of circle hooks has con- siderable potential for promoting the live release of billfish into recreational fisheries. Introduction stock status and biomass for these species are expected to continue to decline. In response to the need to Stocks of Atlantic sailfish Istiophorus platypterus, reduce mortality, particularly for the marlins, ICCAT blue marlin Makaira nigricans, and white marlin mandated a 25% reduction in landings from 1996 Tetrapturus albidus have been identified as overex- levels, to be implemented by 1999. Given the current ploited or fully exploited by the International Com- prohibition on retention of billfish in the U.S. com- mission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas mercial longline fishery and the increasingly restric- (ICCAT), for more than two decades (ICCAT 1998). tive management measures imposed on the U.S. The most current summaries of stock status for recreational billfish fishery (SAFMC 1988), alterna- Atlantic sailfish and marlin note the historically high tive approaches for reducing mortality are warranted. rates of fishing mortality observed in recent years Recent reports indicate that circle hooks used in (ICCAT 2000). Under the current harvest rates, the rod and reel recreational fisheries for striped bass 1 *MS07 Prince 4/11/02 11:27 AM Page 2 2 prince, ortiz, and venizelos Morone saxatilis, chinook salmon Oncorhynchus tshawytscha, and Atlantic bluefin tuna Thunnus thynnus have been shown to reduce deep hooking significantly, and thus promote the live release of these species (Grover et al; Lukacovic and Uphoff Jr; Skomal et al, all this volume). Circle hooks have been used for many years in both commercial pelagic and demersal longline fisheries, but rod and reel recreational fisheries for sailfish and marlin have not traditionally used circle hooks as the pri- mary terminal gear. Although nonconsumptive fish- ing practices (i.e., catch-and-release fishing) among U.S. recreational billfishermen in the Atlantic Figure 1. Terminal gears rigged on ballyhoo Hemirammphus started in the late 1960s, and has increased dra- brasiliensis, used in the troll/pitch bait recreational fishery for billfish in Iztapa, Guatemala. Top, long shank “J” hook matically in recent years to about 90% release (Far- (Mustad model 3407, size 8/0), used prior to 1998; middle, ber et al. 1997), it was only recently that advances short shank “J” hook (Mustad model 9175, size 6/0); and in circle hook rigging techniques using natural bait bottom, circle hook (Eagle Claw model L2004, size 7/0), allowed increased use of circle hooks for used in this study. trolling/pitch baiting or live bait drifting for sailfish eration of the fishing fleet, insuring that sufficiently and marlin1, 2. This study was initiated in response high sample size targets could be obtained in a min- to requests for more information on the use of cir- imum amount of time for a species that is commonly cle hooks for catching billfish, in order to promote known as a rare event species (Prince and Brown the live release of these important resources 1991). The fishing fleet in Iztapa, Guatemala con- (USDOC 1999). Specific objectives were: to com- sisted of five modern recreational vessels 30–40 feet pare hooking and catch percentages between ter- in length, all of which participated in the study, the minal gear (circle and “J” hooks) used in the F/V Captain Hook, the F/V Magic, the F/V Inten- trolling/pitch bait recreational fisheries for billfish; sity, the F/V Pelagian, and the F/V Classic. to assess the hook location and degree of hook- In order to promote valid comparisons of termi- associated physical damage and bleeding between nal gears, both hook types were rigged in the same terminal gears; and to evaluate the different levels manner on the forehead of ballyhoo Hemiram phus of offset points in circle hooks relative to catch per- brasiliensis (Figure 1). Ballyhoo are the bait of centages, hook location, and bleeding in the live bait choice for trolling/pitch baiting Pacific sailfish off recreational fishery for sailfish. Iztapa, Guatemala, and were used in this study. Our choices of hooks were the Mustad2, 3 short shank “J” Materials hook (size 6/0, model 9175) and the Eagle Claw2, 3 circle hook (size 7/0, model L2004), which has a Terminal Gear Comparisons Using Dead minor offset point of less than four degrees. An off- Natural Bait set is a deviation of the hook point relative to the We defined circle hooks as hooks having a point that main axis of the hook shaft. The Mustad “J” hook is perpendicular to the main hook shaft, whereas “J” has no offset point and a silver finish, while the cir- hooks are defined as hooks having a point parallel cle hook has a pearl gray finish. The difference in to the main hook shaft (Figure 1). Iztapa, Guatemala, hook color between hook types helped facilitate was chosen as the primary research site because of identification of hooks embedded in live sailfish at high seasonal catch rates for sailfish and local coop- boatside, where hook location and hook-related 1. Fogt, J. 1999. Circle of life. Marlin Magazine 18(3):44–50. 2. Rizzuto, J. 1998. Get to the point. Marlin Magazine 17(3):46–50. 3. The mention of commercial products or entities does not imply endorsement by the National Marine Fisheries Service or the authors. *MS07 Prince 4/11/02 11:27 AM Page 3 comparison of circle hook and “j” hook performance 3 damage assessment were conducted. Circle hook styles and sizes are not consistent between models, nor do they correspond to hook size for traditional “J” hooks1, 2. Although the commercially-listed sizes of the two hooks used in this study were different (“J” hook was 6/0 and circle hook was 7/0), the actual sizes of the hook types were almost identical (Figure 1). Traditional hook setting techniques of jerking the fishing rod vertically were used for sail- fish caught on “J” hooks. These techniques were modified for circle hooks1, 2 to a more passive approach, by simply reeling the line tight as the fish swam away from the vessel. Catch/Hooking Performance and Hooking Figure 2. Eighty-five percent of sailfish caught on circle hooks had them lodged in the hinge of the jaw. Arrow indi- Injury: A fish bite was considered to be a strike that cates hook location. resulted in the line being pulled out of the outrigger pin while trolling, or a bite witnessed visually dur- ing pitch bait fishing. Visual confirmations of species identification were made to ensure sailfish catch- and-hooking percentages were only for sailfish. Hooking percentage was defined as the number of fish hooked divided by the number of fish bites. A fish was considered hooked when it took drag and continued to remain on the line for at least 10 sec- onds.