Connect with us

Lifestyle

3 Myths About Deep Sea Catch-And-Release Fishing

mm

Published

on

When divers resurface too quickly from deep water, the intense change in pressure can make gasses dissolved in their blood bubble up. This problem can lead to nausea, fatigue, joint pain, and paralysis. In the worst cases, it can be fatal. 

This is known as barotrauma, and it doesn’t only affect us. Dolphins, fish, and sea turtles can suffer severe injuries from sudden pressure changes. 

When anglers pull fish from water 30 feet deep and more, their catch is susceptible to barotrauma. Coming rapidly to the surface can make the swim bladder in fish inflate or rupture. This can lead to the death of the fish. 

If you’re deep-sea fishing and want to release a fish instead of eating it, you should know some myths about barotrauma: 

#1: If The Fish Isn’t Bloated, There Is No Barotrauma

Bloating is indeed the most common sign in a fish you’ve caught. However, some fish – including sharks and cobia – lack swim bladders. They might not show bulging eyes or float on the surface after you release them, but they still could suffer from gasses in their tissues, just like people. 

#2: A Fish That Swims Away Is Fine

Some anglers believe if a deepwater fish swims away with no apparent injuries that it doesn’t have barotrauma. Not necessarily. 

Research indicates that barotrauma can have effects later that we don’t always see when we release the fish. A fish might swim away but still be injured. Then, it could get eaten by a predator as it swims back to the reef. 

A barotrauma study on red snapper found that at least 15% of fish taken from deepwater died almost immediately. About 13% of fish were able to swim away but died within three days. So, nearly one out of three fish in the study did not survive catch and release. 

Reef fish, particularly the oldest and biggest females that produce the most eggs per year, are too valuable to the ecosystem to be lost at that rate. It’s essential for anglers who catch and release to use release methods that provide fisher with a better chance of living another day. Even a small improvement in survival rates for these fish can mean millions more fish are saved every year. 

#3: Venting Is The Only Way To Treat Barotrauma

Venting means puncturing the side of a fish’s body with a metal tool. When it is done right, venting can release the built-up gasses so they can escape from the bladder. This improves its ability to go back down deep and hopefully survive. 

But venting comes with problems. First, it can be hard to vent the fish correctly. You need to have a decent knowledge of fish anatomy. If you poke it a few inches the wrong way, you could damage the fish’s internal organs. Also, you should not vent a fish when the stomach is sticking from the mouth or when the intestines come out of the anus. This can kill the fish. 

Even if you vent the fish correctly, it still can suffer from the procedure, including a damaged swim bladder or infections. 

Venting does improve the chance the fish will survive, but there are other options. 

Try A Descending Device

A descending device returns the fish to deep water, where it can usually recover from barotrauma. You can use a descending device on any fish species, and you don’t even need to know fish anatomy!  The more anglers that use descending devices, the more likely deepsea fish will thrive. And that is good for our planet.

Michelle has been a part of the journey ever since Bigtime Daily started. As a strong learner and passionate writer, she contributes her editing skills for the news agency. She also jots down intellectual pieces from categories such as science and health.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Lifestyle

What “Reasonable Person” Standard Is Applicable When Determining Negligence?

mm

Published

on

In order to determine negligence, the reasonable person test asks if a person’s actions are consistent with what would be anticipated of a generally careful and sensible person in the same situation. Stated otherwise, did the accused act in a way that would have been expected of a reasonable person? 

In Florida, determining who is legally liable for an accident depends critically on the issue of carelessness. The “reasonable person standard” is the foundation of this assessment. Your personal injury lawyer can explain the “reasonable person standard” and how it can apply to your case if you are hurt in an accident in Florida. 

The Reasonable Person Standard: What Is It?

Legally speaking, the reasonable person standard offers a yardstick by which someone’s actions are assessed in cases of negligence. “How would a reasonable person have acted under the same circumstances?” is the central question it poses. Jurors and judges are asked this question in order to assist them in determining whether a person’s acts (or inactions) fall short of the expected standard of care that a reasonably prudent person would follow.

Like in many other jurisdictions, Florida does not base its reasonable person criterion on what an especially cautious or risk-averse person would do. Rather, it represents the behaviors of a composite of what the community expects of each individual. A reasonable individual would, for example, observe traffic laws when driving, heed warning signs, and refrain from needlessly endangering other people.

Utilizing the Reasonable Person Standard to Determine Negligence

The activities of the parties involved in a personal injury lawsuit are rigorously examined in light of this reasonable person standard. If it is determined that an individual’s actions do not correspond with what a reasonable person would have done in the same situation, negligence has been proven.

According to the law, proof of someone’s negligence is insufficient; strong, convincing evidence is required. Your personal injury lawyer is essential to this procedure because they have to painstakingly gather evidence showing how the negligent party strayed from what a reasonable person would have done. Piecing together facts, testimony, and any footage or recordings that can definitively demonstrate that their activities were in violation of the recognized norms of safety and care is more important than simply focusing on what they did or did not do.

This proof could take the form of eyewitness statements that refute the version of events provided by the person at fault or security footage that captures the moment of negligence. Something as small as skipping a scheduled maintenance or ignoring a warning alert might have a big impact. Your personal injury attorney seeks to establish beyond a shadow of a doubt that the defendant’s acts were not just improper but directly caused others to be put in danger by providing a thorough picture of their negligence. 

How Does This Impact Your Case for Personal Injury?

In a personal injury case, knowing the reasonable person standard is essential. In the event of an accident, this standard might assist you in proving liability if you think the other person was careless.

You should be aware that your activities will be evaluated in comparison to the hypothetical reasonable person’s behavior in situations where you might be held culpable. It doesn’t matter what you meant or thought was appropriate; what matters is what the community would anticipate from someone in your situation.

Although navigating the complexities of the reasonable person standard might be challenging, Florida’s negligence law heavily relies on this standard. A fair appraisal of the facts is essential when seeking justice following an injury accident, and comprehending this criterion is crucial.

Continue Reading

Trending