Talk:Longline fishing

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fisheries and Fishing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fisheries, aquaculture and fishing on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Fisheries and FishingWikipedia:WikiProject Fisheries and FishingTemplate:WikiProject Fisheries and FishingFishing articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Occupational Safety and Health

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Occupational Safety and Health, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to occupational safety and health on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Occupational Safety and HealthWikipedia:WikiProject Occupational Safety and HealthTemplate:WikiProject Occupational Safety and HealthOccupational Safety and Health articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

there's a confusing line

there's a confusing line in the last paragraph that says "...juvenile or unwanted fish can be identified and returned to the sea, very often unharmed depending on the species. However, due to the length of time fish remain on the hook, many are inadvertently killed." sounds to me like opposing points of view. someone needs to get in here with a reference or two. --Jaardon 10:31, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

rewrite on last para, McFudd 08:28, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

made the suggested change of having long-lining redirect to this article. Long-lining was a stub with no new information.

This article seems

This article seems more about bycatch than longlines or longlining. There are some longline fisheries with minimal bycatch. I'll try to post something a little more informative after I register and read the rules.74.61.116.21 12:10, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

rewrite on last para, McFudd 08:28, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Seafloor vs drifting

The article doesn't mention the difference... Needed. —Pengo 03:31, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

pelagic and demersal, added internal links McFudd 08:28, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Line length

It would be useful to know how long the line can be. I understand them to be up to 80 miles in length. If that's the case how long does it take to lay a line? 209.130.141.130 14:02, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

added info and ext link McFudd 08:28, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RE: LINE LENGTH

Hi, i actually work on a long liner. I catch tuna, and swordfish, a few makos, and some mahi mahi ... we typically use 21- 25 miles of main line, which is roughly 1,250 - 1,500 hooks, and takes about 4 - 5 hours to set out, it takes longer to bring them in i'll tell you thay much. What you probably heard about 80 miles of length, was japanese or russian long liners we fished constantly with altering crew. Im on a 2 deck hand, 1 captain rig. = ]

80 miles.. wow, does the line ever break? How do you keep it at the right depth, floats and/or sinkers? Sagittarian Milky Way 07:16, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A couple of apparent contradictions are worth mentioning

1) Can "environmentally friendly" (or the adjective "friendly" at all) in the fourth paragraph of the article really apply to this commercial fishing method? The exceptions making it environmentally unfriendly are substantial.

And...

2) Saying that long line fishing "has good selectivity" is at variance with the by-catch problem mentioned under the heading "Incidental Catch" that we are told makes longlining "controversial in some areas." So bycatch alone, not including the 100,000 albatross or endangered sea turtles killed each year by longlining, makes long-line fishing terribly indiscriminate at best.

Yes, well the paragraph also said: "The exception is that longline fishing can be prone to the incidental catching and killing of seabirds and sea turtles". But I appreciate your point that it seems to be glossing over this a bit. The paragraph is referenced to a source, so it can't deviate from the spirit of what that source actually says. Anyway, I have reworded it. It is also relevant to acknowledge that longline fishng has some strengths compared to other methods. --Geronimo20 (talk) 11:05, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Photo does not show a longliner.

The vessel in the first photograph (from New Zealand) is not a longliner - it's a squid jigger. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.231.244.66 (talk) 05:11, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Photo not relevant to article

As a reader I was confused by the first photograph ["Long-lining"_for_mackerel_off_Hopeman_-_geograph.org.uk_-_1410170.jpg]. It is a picture of a small boat with 2 persons. Not enhancing the meaning of the topic. Also no visual relation between the picture and its caption "Longlining for mackerel". Suggesting removal of this picture from this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.77.192.107 (talk) 21:16, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Salmon Longlining?

I worked in the commercial fisheries in Alaska for approximately fifteen years in the '80s and '90s and never heard of longlining for salmon either presently or historically. Salmon is fished almost exclusively by nets, either through seining or gill netting, but gill nets of a limited length, the Bristol Bay fishery being the primary example with generally a maximum limit of 900 feet of net. Moreover, it doesn't seem to make sense to longline them, as for one thing most longlining is done for bottom fish like cod and halibut (although tuna is fished by subsurface longlines) and salmon generally are not eating during this phase of their reproductive cycle and thus would not be attracted to bait.Tom Cod (talk) 04:43, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. Still these are in the NOAA historic photo collection, and I doubt they were placed there without some verification. There are pelagic longlines. Might not these be ocean phase salmon? I was the one who added the images. I added them, not because I wanted to illustrate salmon fishing, but because I wanted to illustrate commercial longlines and these were the clearest I could find. Anyway, I've remove the references to "salmon", since they are really not necessary. --Epipelagic (talk) 08:18, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Longline fishing. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100529211656/http://www.npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/birds/icatch/index.htm to http://www.npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/birds/icatch/index.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:41, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Longline fishing. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:57, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Longline fishing. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:15, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Advertising for the Hookpod

The last paragraph of the Incidental Catch section mentions the Hookpod and its only reference is its own website. As interesting as it is it should probably be at the least rephrased in a more neutral way, if not removed 174.251.132.41 (talk) 10:57, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]