Put and Kill -so disgusting

[Gene C]

I find this extremely depressing on many levels.

I was out of town for a couple of days in the middle of last week. I
got home and knew that they were supposed to complete the fall
stocking for Elk Creek in Cecil County Maryland. They did. On Friday
afternoon they completed it. They put a lot of nice fish in the
creek. Me, and two other fly fisherman must have a caught a dozen
fish. Most of them were in the 12 to 15 inch range. That was
amazing! Even more amazing was the fact that within a couple of hours
of going into the water they were going after woolly buggers! Of the
12 or so fish we caught, one guy kept one.

I fished again on Sunday for a while and the vast majority of the fish
were gone! One guy had 5 real nice ones on a stringer laying in
shallow water.

Now I know put-and-take has it's place in fisheries management but
these fish could have been there all winter. The water temps are
right. The food might be a little scarce for that many fish but we
could have had fun catching them for the next 5 months!

I'm not a fan of PETA but I also see no point in pushing fish to a
slow death of suffocation.

Maybe I'm misguided but that mentality seems so selfish, so short
sighted? I know this is the reality but….? Maybe all streams should
have delayed harvest for a couple of weeks after stocking. That would
allow the people who want to CATCH fish a chance to do so before the
meat men arrive and yank them all out of the water for good.
Any comments?

[Wayne Harrison]

Gene C wrote in message >...
>I find this extremely depressing on many levels.


timbo must have lost his isp.

wayno

[Ken Fortenberry]

Gene C wrote:
>
> ... Even more amazing was the fact that within a couple of hours
> of going into the water they were going after woolly buggers! ...

What's amazing about that ? A wooly bugger is a spot on imitation
of a trout chow pellet. You may as well be using power bait.

> Maybe I'm misguided ...

Do you think ?

--
Ken Fortenberry

[George Adams]

>From: Ken Fortenberry

>What's amazing about that ? A wooly bugger is a spot on imitation
>of a trout chow pellet. You may as well be using power bait.

Huh? I've never yet seen a Wooly Bugger that looks even remotely like Trout
Chow. In my experience freshly stocked trout will attack anything with a lot of
action and/or flash. He would likely have done as well with any streamer.

You may be confusing a Wooly Bugger with a Glo-Bug, which is an egg imitation.
In the smaller sizes, trout could take one to be a pellet. You gotta lay off
the dries a bit and do a little dredging with the rest of us, so you can get
your pattern identification straight. <G>


George Adams

"All good fishermen stay young until they die, for fishing is the only dream of
youth that doth not grow stale with age."
---- J.W Muller

[Scott Seidman]

Ken Fortenberry > wrote in
.com:

>
> What's amazing about that ? A wooly bugger is a spot on imitation
> of a trout chow pellet. You may as well be using power bait.
>

No, a bomber with no hackle, now that's a spot on imitation of the chow
pellet!!

At least it's a dry fly ;)

Scott

[Ken Fortenberry]

George Adams wrote:
>>From: Ken Fortenberry
>
>> A wooly bugger is a spot on imitation
>>of a trout chow pellet.
>
> Huh? I've never yet seen a Wooly Bugger that looks even remotely like Trout
> Chow.

Huh yourself, a little brown wooly bugger looks EXACTLY like the trout chow
pellets I watched them feed to the stockers at the hatchery near the Montauk
trout park in Missouri. And in the interests of protecting the guilty I
won't divulge how I know this, but a little brown wooly bugger must be a
near 'nuff match to the trout chow used in North Carolina too.

--
Ken Fortenberry

[Paul Goodwin]

"George Adams" > wrote in message
...
> >From: Ken Fortenberry
>
> >What's amazing about that ? A wooly bugger is a spot on imitation
> >of a trout chow pellet. You may as well be using power bait.
>
> Huh? I've never yet seen a Wooly Bugger that looks even remotely like
Trout
> Chow. In my experience freshly stocked trout will attack anything with a
lot of
> action and/or flash. He would likely have done as well with any streamer.
>

So that begs the question why would anyone go fishing after freshly stocked
trout unless they wanted to stroke their ego or to stock a freezer.

Paul

[Tim J.]

"Ken Fortenberry" wrote...
> George Adams wrote:
> >>From: Ken Fortenberry
> >
> >> A wooly bugger is a spot on imitation
> >>of a trout chow pellet.
> >
> > Huh? I've never yet seen a Wooly Bugger that looks even remotely like Trout
> > Chow.
>
> Huh yourself, a little brown wooly bugger looks EXACTLY like the trout chow
> pellets

I wonder what it would cost to have them make the trout pellets look like a
Royal Wulff or an Adams. It sure would help me out.
--
TL,
Tim
------------------------
http://css.sbcma.com/timj

[Wolfgang]

"Paul Goodwin" > wrote in message
...
>
> "George Adams" > wrote in message
> ...
> > >From: Ken Fortenberry
> >
> > >What's amazing about that ? A wooly bugger is a spot on imitation
> > >of a trout chow pellet. You may as well be using power bait.
> >
> > Huh? I've never yet seen a Wooly Bugger that looks even remotely
like
> Trout
> > Chow. In my experience freshly stocked trout will attack anything
with a
> lot of
> > action and/or flash. He would likely have done as well with any
streamer.
> >
>
> So that begs the question why would anyone go fishing after freshly
stocked
> trout unless they wanted to stroke their ego or to stock a freezer.
>
> Paul

Well, it beats sitting at home watching football, soccer, baseball,
hockey, golf, auto racing, or horse racing.

Wolfgang
women's volleyball, on the other hand..........

[Ken Fortenberry]

Paul Goodwin wrote:
>
> So that begs the question why would anyone go fishing after freshly stocked
> trout unless they wanted to stroke their ego or to stock a freezer.

The original poster said he wanted to play with his food ...
for 5 months !

--
Ken Fortenberry

[George Adams]

>From: Ken Fortenberry

>Huh yourself, a little brown wooly bugger looks EXACTLY like the trout chow
>pellets I watched them feed to the stockers at the hatchery near the Montauk
>trout park in Missouri.

Well, the pellets they feed them around here are about 1/4" dia by 5/16" long
and are greyish tan in color. Also, they float...not exactly well imitated by a
bugger.


George Adams

"All good fishermen stay young until they die, for fishing is the only dream of
youth that doth not grow stale with age."
---- J.W Muller

[George Adams]

>From: "Paul Goodwin"

>
>So that begs the question why would anyone go fishing after freshly stocked
>trout unless they wanted to stroke their ego or to stock a freezer.

Well, it ain't much of an ego stroker, so it must be to stock the freezer. Kind
of hard to avoid that situation on C&R water, though. I usually fish areas
where they don't normally stock, if I know a stream has been freshly planted.


George Adams

"All good fishermen stay young until they die, for fishing is the only dream of
youth that doth not grow stale with age."
---- J.W Muller

[James Ehlers]

It does not really matter, in my mind, as long as people eat them and have
fun doing it. It is now different than buying fish from the grocery store
except that you get to enjoy being outside rather than standing in line at
the store.

--
James Ehlers

Outdoors Magazine
www.outdoorsmagazine.net



"Gene C" > wrote in message
om...
> I find this extremely depressing on many levels.
>
> I was out of town for a couple of days in the middle of last week. I
> got home and knew that they were supposed to complete the fall
> stocking for Elk Creek in Cecil County Maryland. They did. On Friday
> afternoon they completed it. They put a lot of nice fish in the
> creek. Me, and two other fly fisherman must have a caught a dozen
> fish. Most of them were in the 12 to 15 inch range. That was
> amazing! Even more amazing was the fact that within a couple of hours
> of going into the water they were going after woolly buggers! Of the
> 12 or so fish we caught, one guy kept one.
>
> I fished again on Sunday for a while and the vast majority of the fish
> were gone! One guy had 5 real nice ones on a stringer laying in
> shallow water.
>
> Now I know put-and-take has it's place in fisheries management but
> these fish could have been there all winter. The water temps are
> right. The food might be a little scarce for that many fish but we
> could have had fun catching them for the next 5 months!
>
> I'm not a fan of PETA but I also see no point in pushing fish to a
> slow death of suffocation.
>
> Maybe I'm misguided but that mentality seems so selfish, so short
> sighted? I know this is the reality but..? Maybe all streams should
> have delayed harvest for a couple of weeks after stocking. That would
> allow the people who want to CATCH fish a chance to do so before the
> meat men arrive and yank them all out of the water for good.
> Any comments?

[Wayne Harrison]

"Paul Goodwin" > wrote in message
...


In my experience freshly stocked trout will attack anything with a
> lot of
> > action and/or flash.

which brings to mind an experience that has always puzzled me. couple
years ago i was fishing the hatchery supported section of snowbird with my
youngest son, and as we geared up beside a beautiful run under a bridge that
ran about 10 feet above the creek, up drives the stocking truck, and the
guys start literally dumping trout from nets into the water. the fish made
belly flop sounds as they cascaded into the waist deep run. off goes the
truck, and ol' anthony says, sheepishly, "i don't suppose it would be right
to try to catch them, would it, dad?" to which i responded, "hell, son, the
only reason they are in the water is to be caught!", and told him to have at
it. i watched him as he manufactured one excellent float after another
right over the noses of several of the fish, who were lined up, facing
upstream, just sort of treading water. nothing doing. i finally applied my
(ahem!) deft, artful touch to the t&t, time after time, to no avail. long
story short: we tried six or eight combinations of dry flies, nymphs, and
boogers, and never moved a single fish.

explanations?

yfitons
wayno

[rb608]

"Ken Fortenberry" > wrote in message
> What's amazing about that ? A wooly bugger is a spot on imitation
> of a trout chow pellet.

Never would have made that association. When I stayed at a resort in NY
state (Mohonk), they had a coin-operated machine tourists could use to buy
little pellets to feed the trout in the lake adjacent to the pavilion. Big
trout. Huge trout. Well-fed trout. In successfully resisting the
temptation, however, I decided the closest imitation in my box would have
been a size 12 GRHE. Right size, right color.

Joe F.

[Tom Gibson]

(Gene C) wrote in message...
> I find this extremely depressing on many levels.
>
> I was out of town for a couple of days in the middle of last week. I
> got home and knew that they were supposed to complete the fall
> stocking for Elk Creek in Cecil County Maryland. They did. On Friday
> afternoon they completed it. They put a lot of nice fish in the
> creek. Me, and two other fly fisherman must have a caught a dozen
> fish. Most of them were in the 12 to 15 inch range. That was
> amazing! Even more amazing was the fact that within a couple of hours
> of going into the water they were going after woolly buggers! Of the
> 12 or so fish we caught, one guy kept one.

So it's OK for you to follow the stocking truck...

> I fished again on Sunday for a while and the vast majority of the fish
> were gone! One guy had 5 real nice ones on a stringer laying in
> shallow water.

But not OK for this guy. And I'll bet that this uncouth savage wasn't
even fly fishing. Did he have all of his teeth?

> Now I know put-and-take has it's place in fisheries management but
> these fish could have been there all winter. The water temps are
> right. The food might be a little scarce for that many fish but we
> could have had fun catching them for the next 5 months!

Do you have any idea how few trout anglers will wet a line over then
next five months? I'd bet that it's a *very* small minority.

> I'm not a fan of PETA but I also see no point in pushing fish to a
> slow death of suffocation.

??? Are you refering to the stringer? Many anglers whack 'em on the
head before they put 'em on the stringer. Did you see fish struggling
against the stringer? Even so, statistically speaking, one of the
fish you or your buddies C&R'd on Friday likely died as a C&R
mortality.

> Maybe I'm misguided but that mentality seems so selfish, so short
> sighted? I know this is the reality but?.? Maybe all streams should
> have delayed harvest for a couple of weeks after stocking. That would
> allow the people who want to CATCH fish a chance to do so before the
> meat men arrive and yank them all out of the water for good.
> Any comments?

Selfish & Shortsighted. Welcome to America, buddy. Sounds to me like
you CAUGHT just as many fish on Friday as the 'meat man' did on
Sunday--and at least HE had the courtesy to give the fish 48 hours out
of the stocking truck before he did it.

All cynicism & sarcasm aside, the state stocks those fish to sell
licenses. Did the 'meat man' have a license? If so, then the state
got exactly what they wanted in exchange for those fish. You can rail
against this system all you'd like, but I doubt that you'll change
much. The put & take system exists to sell licenses and thereby
employ as many state workers as possible in a futile endeavor. The
socio-political reality of stocking has practically nothing to do with
fish, fishing, watersheds, ecosystems or conservation. It has
everything to do with money. License fees are a voluntary tax, and in
order to maximize the number of volunteers, the state puts fish in the
creeks. If you're willing to pay the tax, catch the fish and then
release them for the next licensed angler, the state thanks you.

Tom G
licensed angler

[Wolfgang]

"Wayne Harrison" > wrote in message
m...


> explanations?

Trauma.

Wolfgang
mumble mumble unspeakable in pursuit of the indelible, mumble mumble.

[Tim J.]

"Wayne Harrison" wrote...

> couple
> years ago i was fishing the hatchery supported section of snowbird with my
> youngest son, and as we geared up beside a beautiful run under a bridge that
> ran about 10 feet above the creek, up drives the stocking truck, and the
> guys start literally dumping trout from nets into the water. the fish made
> belly flop sounds as they cascaded into the waist deep run. off goes the
> truck, and ol' anthony says, sheepishly, "i don't suppose it would be right
> to try to catch them, would it, dad?" to which i responded, "hell, son, the
> only reason they are in the water is to be caught!", and told him to have at
> it. i watched him as he manufactured one excellent float after another
> right over the noses of several of the fish, who were lined up, facing
> upstream, just sort of treading water. nothing doing. i finally applied my
> (ahem!) deft, artful touch to the t&t, time after time, to no avail. long
> story short: we tried six or eight combinations of dry flies, nymphs, and
> boogers, and never moved a single fish.

Let's drop YOU from a truck in a belly flop and see if YOU'RE hungry! :)

When they're first stocked / dropped like that, they're usually just in a shock
mode. If you had been there the next day, chances are it would have been a
different story.
--
TL,
Tim
------------------------
http://css.sbcma.com/timj

[Ernie]

Yes,
1. Stocked trout don't belong in any water where natural reproduction is
possible.
2. Only Catch and Release should be allowed in these waters.
I came across a bunch of hatchery trout in a lake that people were trying
to catch. I told them to throw a hand full of small gravel at them. They
did, which sent the fish into a feeding frenzy and they started catching
them. I walked away in disgust and wondered if any of the people knew what
it was like to catch a real trout with a full set of fins.
Ernie

"Gene C" wrote
> Even more amazing was the fact that within a couple of hours
> of going into the water they were going after woolly buggers!
> Any comments?

[James Ehlers]

Why be disgusted at something that gives people pleasure? Happy people are
nicer to be around :) Relatively harmless activity in most states where
put and take stocking occurs where natives would not exist anyway.

--
James Ehlers

Outdoors Magazine



www.outdoorsmagazine.net
"Ernie" > wrote in message
. ..
> Yes,
> 1. Stocked trout don't belong in any water where natural reproduction is
> possible.
> 2. Only Catch and Release should be allowed in these waters.
> I came across a bunch of hatchery trout in a lake that people were
trying
> to catch. I told them to throw a hand full of small gravel at them. They
> did, which sent the fish into a feeding frenzy and they started catching
> them. I walked away in disgust and wondered if any of the people knew
what
> it was like to catch a real trout with a full set of fins.
> Ernie
>
> "Gene C" wrote
> > Even more amazing was the fact that within a couple of hours
> > of going into the water they were going after woolly buggers!
> > Any comments?
>
>

[Wolfgang]

"James Ehlers" > wrote in message
. net...
> Why be disgusted at something that gives people pleasure?

Ever heard of coprophagy?

Wolfgang
next time you see somebody out on the crick with a **** eatin'
grin......... :)

[James Ehlers]

I knew I would be opening myself up to something like that :)

Hey, whatever floats your septic :)

--
James Ehlers

Outdoors Magazine
www.outdoorsmagazine.net
"Wolfgang" > wrote in message
...
>
> "James Ehlers" > wrote in message
> . net...
> > Why be disgusted at something that gives people pleasure?
>
> Ever heard of coprophagy?
>
> Wolfgang
> next time you see somebody out on the crick with a **** eatin'
> grin......... :)
>
>

[Tim J.]

"rw" wrote...
> Wayne Harrison wrote:
> >
> > explanations?
>
> Wrong fly? :-)
>
> Seriously, consider what they'd been through. Suppose you'd been rousted
> out of the only home you'd ever known, trucked in the dark to some
> unknown place, and dumped in sudden daylight into strange smelling
> water. Would eating be the first thing on your mind?

Ask Frank Reid. I think this exact same thing happened to him at Penns 2002.
--
TL,
Tim
------------------------
http://css.sbcma.com/timj

[Wayne Harrison]

"rw" > wrote in message
. ..
> Wayne Harrison wrote:
> >
> > explanations?
>
> Wrong fly? :-)
>
> Seriously, consider what they'd been through. Suppose you'd been rousted
> out of the only home you'd ever known, trucked in the dark to some
> unknown place, and dumped in sudden daylight into strange smelling
> water. Would eating be the first thing on your mind?

well, no, steve, it wouldn't. having a damn stout see-through would be.
but thanks for asking.

wayno

[Ernie]

James,
I have no objection to stocking where natural reproduction can't take
place. Stocking places where natural reproduction is possible is
detrimental to natural trout.
Ernie

"James Ehlers" > wrote in message
. net...
> Why be disgusted at something that gives people pleasure? Happy people
are
> nicer to be around :) Relatively harmless activity in most states where
> put and take stocking occurs where natives would not exist anyway.
>
> --
> James Ehlers
>
> Outdoors Magazine
>
>
>
> www.outdoorsmagazine.net
> "Ernie" > wrote in message
> . ..
> > Yes,
> > 1. Stocked trout don't belong in any water where natural reproduction is
> > possible.
> > 2. Only Catch and Release should be allowed in these waters.
> > I came across a bunch of hatchery trout in a lake that people were
> trying
> > to catch. I told them to throw a hand full of small gravel at them.
They
> > did, which sent the fish into a feeding frenzy and they started catching
> > them. I walked away in disgust and wondered if any of the people knew
> what
> > it was like to catch a real trout with a full set of fins.
> > Ernie
> >
> > "Gene C" wrote
> > > Even more amazing was the fact that within a couple of hours
> > > of going into the water they were going after woolly buggers!
> > > Any comments?
> >
> >
>
>

[Stan Gula]

"rw" > wrote in message
. ..
> Wayne Harrison wrote:
> >
> > explanations?
>
> Wrong fly? :-)
>
> Seriously, consider what they'd been through. Suppose you'd been rousted
> out of the only home you'd ever known, trucked in the dark to some
> unknown place, and dumped in sudden daylight into strange smelling
> water. Would eating be the first thing on your mind?
>

My first though would be: "How can I get laid", but then I'm a man, not a
fish.

[Ernie]

Wolfie,
Don't tell me some one actually eats hatchery trout!
Ernie

Wolfgang" wrote >
> Ever heard of coprophagy?
> Wolfgang
> next time you see somebody out on the crick with a **** eatin'
> grin......... :)

[Tim J.]

"Stan Gula" wrote...
> "rw" wrote...
> > Wayne Harrison wrote:
> > >
> > > explanations?
> >
> > Wrong fly? :-)
> >
> > Seriously, consider what they'd been through. Suppose you'd been rousted
> > out of the only home you'd ever known, trucked in the dark to some
> > unknown place, and dumped in sudden daylight into strange smelling
> > water. Would eating be the first thing on your mind?
> >
>
> My first though would be: "How can I get laid", but then I'm a man, not a
> fish.

<SPLORK!> Ooooo, that one hurt.

--
TL,
Tim
------------------------
http://css.sbcma.com/timj

[rw]

Wayne Harrison wrote:
>
> explanations?

Wrong fly? :-)

Seriously, consider what they'd been through. Suppose you'd been rousted
out of the only home you'd ever known, trucked in the dark to some
unknown place, and dumped in sudden daylight into strange smelling
water. Would eating be the first thing on your mind?

I'll bet if you'd come back the next day you'd have caught them one
after another.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

[Willi]

Tim J. wrote:


>>My first though would be: "How can I get laid", but then I'm a man, not a
>>fish.

Depending on the time of year, that's high on a fish's priorities too.
This morning I saw a huge Brown in the irrigation ditch that runs on my
property going through the motions of spawning even though she? had no mate.

Willi

[Willi]

Wayne Harrison wrote:

> Gene C wrote in message >...
>
>>I find this extremely depressing on many levels.
>
>
>
> timbo must have lost his isp.

Although it's probably a troll, I'll take it up.


I assume from your post that the trout put in that stream can't live
through the Summer. So you want the fish left in the stream so they'll
die from temps that are too high to support them just so you can have
fun catching them? Who's the one that's selfish and short sighted?

I'm not a fan of put and take fisheries. I would much prefer that the
funds spent there be used for improving self sustaining fisheries. In
put and take waters, harvesting the fish before they die seems very
appropriate to me.

Willi

[slenon]

> I have no objection to stocking where natural reproduction can't take
>place. Stocking places where natural reproduction is possible is
>detrimental to natural trout.
>Ernie

I'd be curious to know the exact number of states which have naturally
reproducing trout populations. Of that number, how many had to have trout
introduced into them to establish that population?

While hatchery trout may not taste or fight like wild trout, and while put &
take fishing is far less desirable than stalking and catching fish from
natural populations, such programs do provide money that goes into
conservation budgets. The people who make use of such programs not only buy
licenses but rods, reels, flies, lines and all the cute little gadgets that
make other fly fishers happy. Many of them will never fling flies anyplace
else. Some will progress and move onto other waters.

Having such places actually does decrease pressure on natural populations in
marginal waters.

While the purists among us can sneer and moan about such things, there are
many people who are quite happily served by such fishing arrangements. And
everyone of them who fishes there is not standing next to you throwing his
line over yours.

When I grew up, where I grew up, seafood consisted of breaded, fried shrimp
shipped frozen and tasteless. I was fortunate to move and find out that
other seafood existed. Even today, there are parts of the nation where "red
lobster" provides the best seafood available. Sad but true.

----
Stev Lenon 91B20 '68-'69
Drowning flies to Darkstar

http://web.tampabay.rr.com/stevglo/index.html/slhomepage92kword.htm

[Frank Reid]

> > Seriously, consider what they'd been through. Suppose you'd been rousted
> > out of the only home you'd ever known, trucked in the dark to some
> > unknown place, and dumped in sudden daylight into strange smelling
> > water. Would eating be the first thing on your mind?
>
> Ask Frank Reid. I think this exact same thing happened to him at Penns
2002.

That's just wrong, but true on many levels. I think there were a few folks
upstream of me using ultra light waders to filter what beano should have
stopped.

--
Frank Reid
Reverse email to reply

[Jonathan Cook]

(Gene C) wrote in message >...

> I find this extremely depressing on many levels.

Ahh, well you are in good company! :-)

Gene, the oldtimers on ROFF have seen more arguments for and against
catch and release than you can ever imagine...indeed if you did a
google search it'd keep your mind spinning for days (not that there's
anything wrong with it!).

> The food might be a little scarce for that many fish but we
> could have had fun catching them for the next 5 months!
>
> I'm not a fan of PETA but I also see no point in pushing fish to a
> slow death of suffocation.

As arguments go, bringing the ethical treatment of animals into
the mix (e.g., PETA) can backfire...I mean, once you start to
thinking, then which is worse -- suffocation over an hour, or
starvation over 5 months, intermixed with the occasional violent
hook, drag, can't breath, photo-flashed, and finally put back?

Besides, properly stringered fish breathe just fine -- the longer
they stay alive, the better they taste :-)

> Any comments?

I bet more than you expected, eh? Anyways, happy fishing,

Jon.

[Ernie]

Steve,
Most of California's lakes and streams are capable of natural reproduction.
The ones that aren't are usually because man screwed them up with logging,
mining, damming, and overgrazing.
The Department of Fish and Game spends a huge percentage of their budget
on fish hatcheries, but they should be restoring the habitat. There are
miles and miles of mountain streams where cattle, sheep and horses have
overgrazed the National Forests and trampled the streams into mud, yet
nothing is done about it. It wouldn't be difficult or expensive to install
electric fences powered by solar batteries to keep the livestock back.from
the edges of the streams.
There is a stream in Northern California named Yellow Creek by Lake
Almanor. I went there and found a shallow stream with small trout. They
did an experiment where they fenced the cattle back. I went there again
three years after the installation and found a deep clear cold running
stream full of big natural trout. There were waist high wild flowers along
the stream. It was a joy to see.
For some reason our nearsighted Fish and Game and National Forest Service
can't see the advantage of having clear running streams with stable banks
and clean water with natural reproducing fish. It would beat the hell out
of fishing for finless rubber hatchery trout.
Ernie


slenon" wrote in message
> I'd be curious to know the exact number of states which have naturally
> reproducing trout populations. Of that number, how many had to have trout
> introduced into them to establish that population?
> Stev Lenon 91B20 '68-'69

[Scott Seidman]

"Stan Gula" > wrote in
:

> "rw" > wrote in message
> . ..
>> Wayne Harrison wrote:
>> >
>> > explanations?
>>
>> Wrong fly? :-)
>>
>> Seriously, consider what they'd been through. Suppose you'd been rousted
>> out of the only home you'd ever known, trucked in the dark to some
>> unknown place, and dumped in sudden daylight into strange smelling
>> water. Would eating be the first thing on your mind?
>>
>
> My first though would be: "How can I get laid", but then I'm a man, not a
> fish.
>
>

Actually, the described scene somewhat describes some of my intimate
encounters already!

Scott

[slenon]

> For some reason our nearsighted Fish and Game and National Forest Service
>can't see the advantage of having clear running streams with stable banks
>and clean water with natural reproducing fish. It would beat the hell out
>of fishing for finless rubber hatchery trout.
>Ernie

I whole-heartedly agree with you. Cattle do not make good foresters. I'd
love to see more land protected and kept wild.

Not to play devil's advocate, really curious, do you think CA could manage a
trout fishery that would meet the needs of its populace without using some
hatchery stocking procedures?

----
Stev Lenon 91B20 '68-'69
Drowning flies to Darkstar

http://web.tampabay.rr.com/stevglo/index.html/slhomepage92kword.htm

[Tom Gibson]

"Wayne Harrison" > wrote...
> long story short: we tried six or eight combinations of dry flies, nymphs, and
> boogers, and never moved a single fish.
>
> explanations?

Aside from the 'shock' answer offered by others, perhaps they were fed
at the hatchery?

HTH,
Tom G

[Wayne Harrison]

"Tom Gibson" > wrote in message
om...
> "Wayne Harrison" > wrote...
> > long story short: we tried six or eight combinations of dry flies,
nymphs, and
> > boogers, and never moved a single fish.
> >
> > explanations?
>
> Aside from the 'shock' answer offered by others, perhaps they were fed
> at the hatchery?
>
> HTH,
> Tom G

upon reflection, i suppose it must be the trauma factor. i think trout
will eat even if not "hungry".

yfitons
wayno

[Ernie]

Steve,
If they only planted hatchery fish in waters that couldn't reproduce, used
catch and release in waters that could, kept livestock back from the
streams, stopped loggers from destroying the habitat, kept mining under
control, stopped pollution and restricted water projects from taking the
water needed for the fisheries, this state would be one great fishing
statye.
Ernie

"slenon" wrote
> Not to play devil's advocate, really curious, do you think CA could manage
a
> trout fishery that would meet the needs of its populace without using some
> hatchery stocking procedures?
> Stev Lenon 91B20 '68-'69

[Wolfgang]

"Ernie" > wrote in message
.. .
> Wolfie,
> Don't tell me some one actually eats hatchery trout!
> Ernie


:)

Wolfgang
sometimes, all you can do with really beauty is just smile at it.

[Wolfgang]

"Ernie" > wrote in message
y.com...

> .....For some reason our nearsighted Fish and Game and National Forest
Service
> can't see the advantage of having clear running streams with stable banks
> and clean water with natural reproducing fish......

The problem goes well beyond the auspices of a few federal or state
agencies, all the way back to the institution of a form of government that
allows the putative elected representatives of ranchers, loggers, miners,
professional guides, and sundry other multi-generational welfare parasites
to have a voice equal to (and all too often greater than) that of rational
human beings. It ain't gonna go away soon......or, not without some much
needed bloodshed, anyway.

Wolfgang
but hell, that ain't ****....just wait till the water wars start! :)

[daytripper]

On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 14:04:26 -0400, "Tim J."
> wrote:
>Let's drop YOU from a truck in a belly flop and see if YOU'RE hungry! :)
>
>When they're first stocked / dropped like that, they're usually just in a shock
>mode. If you had been there the next day, chances are it would have been a
>different story.

Empirical Counterpoint: I helped Mass F&W do some stocking work a few times
when I was a much younger flyfishingperson. The first time they stocked the
Otter River (after many years off their stocking route) we put 600 browns and
rainbows in via float pens lashed to canoes. It took a couple of hours to do
the three-odd miles.

When we returned to the put-in we had to cross a bridge over the river.
On that bridge were a handful of locals, a couple of which were already
gutting out a few trout.

One of them pointed out the trout were packed full of debris - small stones,
sticks, etc. The nitwit fish were gorging on whatever items they spotted - if
it didn't look like part of a concrete tank, and they could cram it through
their mouths, they ate it...

So it would seem it wasn't that the trouties wouldn't "eat", it was they
already "ate", too well.

/daytripper (next time tie up a realistic "stone fly")

[Bob Patton]

"Wayne Harrison" > wrote in message
m...
>
//snip//
> upstream, just sort of treading water. nothing doing. i finally applied
my
> (ahem!) deft, artful touch to the t&t, time after time, to no avail. long
> story short: we tried six or eight combinations of dry flies, nymphs, and
> boogers, and never moved a single fish.
>
> explanations?
>
> yfitons
> wayno

Maybe they were 'under the influence'. Anybody we know in the cabin or was
there a clave in progress upstream?

Bob
Who's been skunked in Missouri's trout parks.

[Paul Goodwin]

"daytripper" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 14:04:26 -0400, "Tim J."

[snip]
>
> One of them pointed out the trout were packed full of debris - small
stones,
> sticks, etc. The nitwit fish were gorging on whatever items they spotted -
if
> it didn't look like part of a concrete tank, and they could cram it
through
> their mouths, they ate it...
>
> So it would seem it wasn't that the trouties wouldn't "eat", it was they
> already "ate", too well.
>
> /daytripper (next time tie up a realistic "stone fly")

They probably weren't taking those off of the stream bed. One day after
float stocking (the same river I'd bet) I saw some of the meat fishermen
toss out their power bait and toss a handfull of small pebbles over it.
Aparently the splashing was like feeding time and they always got a hook up.

I've heard of the same thing happening at White's.

Paul

[daytripper]

On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 22:23:59 -0400, "Paul Goodwin" >
wrote:

>
>"daytripper" > wrote in message
...
>> On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 14:04:26 -0400, "Tim J."
>
>[snip]
>>
>> One of them pointed out the trout were packed full of debris - small
>stones,
>> sticks, etc. The nitwit fish were gorging on whatever items they spotted -
>if
>> it didn't look like part of a concrete tank, and they could cram it
>through
>> their mouths, they ate it...
>>
>> So it would seem it wasn't that the trouties wouldn't "eat", it was they
>> already "ate", too well.
>>
>> /daytripper (next time tie up a realistic "stone fly")
>
>They probably weren't taking those off of the stream bed. One day after
>float stocking (the same river I'd bet) I saw some of the meat fishermen
>toss out their power bait and toss a handfull of small pebbles over it.
>Aparently the splashing was like feeding time and they always got a hook up.
>
>I've heard of the same thing happening at White's.

It was the opinion of the head of the central mass f&w hatchery program that
fresh stockers will eat anything they can fit in their mouths, and that it
took a couple of weeks before they would figure out what gave them energy and
what didn't...

Couple that with the fact that those fish gutters came over to us and asked
about the stones and sticks (and cigarette filter and bottle cap) and why
these fish were eating all that stuff, and I suspect I'll go with the f&w dude
on this issue...

/daytripper (but that's just me ;-)

[riverman]

"Wayne Harrison" > wrote in message
m...
>
> "Paul Goodwin" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>
> In my experience freshly stocked trout will attack anything with a
> > lot of
> > > action and/or flash.
>
> which brings to mind an experience that has always puzzled me. couple
> years ago i was fishing the hatchery supported section of snowbird with my
> youngest son, and as we geared up beside a beautiful run under a bridge
that
> ran about 10 feet above the creek, up drives the stocking truck, and the
> guys start literally dumping trout from nets into the water. the fish
made
> belly flop sounds as they cascaded into the waist deep run. off goes the
> truck, and ol' anthony says, sheepishly, "i don't suppose it would be
right
> to try to catch them, would it, dad?" to which i responded, "hell, son,
the
> only reason they are in the water is to be caught!", and told him to have
at
> it. i watched him as he manufactured one excellent float after another
> right over the noses of several of the fish, who were lined up, facing
> upstream, just sort of treading water. nothing doing. i finally applied
my
> (ahem!) deft, artful touch to the t&t, time after time, to no avail. long
> story short: we tried six or eight combinations of dry flies, nymphs, and
> boogers, and never moved a single fish.
>
> explanations?
>

Sure. Same reason that whoever just got out of the ring with Tyson or Lewis
doens't rush right over to the best restaurant in town for a top-notch meal.

--riverman

[Jeff Miller]

Wolfgang wrote:

>>
>> explanations?
>
>
> Trauma.
>
>

vaudeville

[Jeff Miller]

Willi wrote:


>
>>> My first though would be: "How can I get laid", but then I'm a man,
>>> not a
>>> fish.
>
>
> Depending on the time of year, that's high on a fish's priorities too.
> This morning I saw a huge Brown in the irrigation ditch that runs on my
> property going through the motions of spawning even though she? had no
> mate.
>>

quoting mr. seidman, "the described scene somewhat describes some of my
intimate encounters already!"

[Jeff Miller]

i agree. we need more conveniently-placed, handicap-accessible put and
take fisheries.

jeff

James Ehlers wrote:

> Why be disgusted at something that gives people pleasure? Happy people are
> nicer to be around :) Relatively harmless activity in most states where
> put and take stocking occurs where natives would not exist anyway.
>

[Willi]

Ernie wrote:

> Steve,
> Most of California's lakes and streams are capable of natural reproduction.
> The ones that aren't are usually because man screwed them up with logging,
> mining, damming, and overgrazing.
> The Department of Fish and Game spends a huge percentage of their budget
> on fish hatcheries, but they should be restoring the habitat.

In Colorado, a positive aspect to the introduction of whirling disease
was the end of stocking catchables in streams and rivers. "All" the
hatcheries were infected with WD and they decided to halt stocking in
streams and rivers with natural reproduction.

Now that they have clean hatcheries again, they have started stocking
some streams and rivers, but the numbers are WAY down. Charlie W. and I
have talked about this and we both feeling that fish populations (and
the quality of fish) have increased when stocking halted. I hope our DOW
doesn't go back to their old ways.

Willi

[Willi]

Ernie wrote:


> For some reason our nearsighted Fish and Game and National Forest Service
> can't see the advantage of having clear running streams with stable banks
> and clean water with natural reproducing fish. It would beat the hell out
> of fishing for finless rubber hatchery trout.
> Ernie

Montana's division of wildlife did a series of studies on the effects of
stocking catchable trout in rivers with populations of naturally
reproducing fish. They found that stocking "catchables" actually reduced
the overall fish carrying capacity of the sections of rivers they studied.

Willi

[Wolfgang]

"Jeff Miller" > wrote in message
news:3p9lb.95857$AH4.44122@lakeread06...
> i agree. we need more conveniently-placed, handicap-accessible put
and
> take fisheries.

Hm.......

As handicap access is not your area of particular expertise,
counselor, I hasten to remind you that "a marginal capacity to jog up
six miles of indiscernible trail in the dark, wade wet for several
hours in marrow freezing water, and then sprint back down the trail,
leaving a parched fishing companion choking in dust, to get the pick
of a rapidly dwindling beer supply back at the truck" is not a
universally accepted definition of "handicapped". We do things
somewhat differently up here. :(

Wolfgang
not to mention the disconcerting reflection on being left alone with
all the bitey things in the woods.

[slenon]

>If they only planted hatchery fish in waters that couldn't reproduce, used
>catch and release in waters that could, kept livestock back from the
>streams, stopped loggers from destroying the habitat, kept mining under
>control, stopped pollution and restricted water projects from taking the
>water needed for the fisheries, this state would be one great fishing
statye.
>Ernie

I agree. Now what do you plan to do with all the people who live there?

----
Stev Lenon 91B20 '68-'69
Drowning flies to Darkstar

http://web.tampabay.rr.com/stevglo/index.html/slhomepage92kword.htm

[Outdoors Magazine]

Ernie,
I agree with you 100 percent.

--
James Ehlers

Outdoors Magazine
www.outdoorsmagazine.net
"Ernie" > wrote in message
. ..
> James,
> I have no objection to stocking where natural reproduction can't take
> place. Stocking places where natural reproduction is possible is
> detrimental to natural trout.
> Ernie
>
> "James Ehlers" > wrote in message
> . net...
> > Why be disgusted at something that gives people pleasure? Happy people
> are
> > nicer to be around :) Relatively harmless activity in most states
where
> > put and take stocking occurs where natives would not exist anyway.
> >
> > --
> > James Ehlers
> >
> > Outdoors Magazine
> >
> >
> >
> > www.outdoorsmagazine.net
> > "Ernie" > wrote in message
> > . ..
> > > Yes,
> > > 1. Stocked trout don't belong in any water where natural reproduction
is
> > > possible.
> > > 2. Only Catch and Release should be allowed in these waters.
> > > I came across a bunch of hatchery trout in a lake that people were
> > trying
> > > to catch. I told them to throw a hand full of small gravel at them.
> They
> > > did, which sent the fish into a feeding frenzy and they started
catching
> > > them. I walked away in disgust and wondered if any of the people knew
> > what
> > > it was like to catch a real trout with a full set of fins.
> > > Ernie
> > >
> > > "Gene C" wrote
> > > > Even more amazing was the fact that within a couple of hours
> > > > of going into the water they were going after woolly buggers!
> > > > Any comments?
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

[Outdoors Magazine]

Well said, Stev.

--
James Ehlers

Outdoors Magazine
www.outdoorsmagazine.net
"slenon" > wrote in message
m...
> > I have no objection to stocking where natural reproduction can't take
> >place. Stocking places where natural reproduction is possible is
> >detrimental to natural trout.
> >Ernie
>
> I'd be curious to know the exact number of states which have naturally
> reproducing trout populations. Of that number, how many had to have trout
> introduced into them to establish that population?
>
> While hatchery trout may not taste or fight like wild trout, and while put
&
> take fishing is far less desirable than stalking and catching fish from
> natural populations, such programs do provide money that goes into
> conservation budgets. The people who make use of such programs not only
buy
> licenses but rods, reels, flies, lines and all the cute little gadgets
that
> make other fly fishers happy. Many of them will never fling flies anyplace
> else. Some will progress and move onto other waters.
>
> Having such places actually does decrease pressure on natural populations
in
> marginal waters.
>
> While the purists among us can sneer and moan about such things, there are
> many people who are quite happily served by such fishing arrangements.
And
> everyone of them who fishes there is not standing next to you throwing his
> line over yours.
>
> When I grew up, where I grew up, seafood consisted of breaded, fried
shrimp
> shipped frozen and tasteless. I was fortunate to move and find out that
> other seafood existed. Even today, there are parts of the nation where
"red
> lobster" provides the best seafood available. Sad but true.
>
> ----
> Stev Lenon 91B20 '68-'69
> Drowning flies to Darkstar
>
> http://web.tampabay.rr.com/stevglo/index.html/slhomepage92kword.htm
>
>
>

[Outdoors Magazine]

We are trying to do just that here in Vermont.

--
James Ehlers

Outdoors Magazine
www.outdoorsmagazine.net


"Jeff Miller" > wrote in message
news:3p9lb.95857$AH4.44122@lakeread06...
> i agree. we need more conveniently-placed, handicap-accessible put and
> take fisheries.
>
> jeff
>
> James Ehlers wrote:
>
> > Why be disgusted at something that gives people pleasure? Happy people
are
> > nicer to be around :) Relatively harmless activity in most states
where
> > put and take stocking occurs where natives would not exist anyway.
> >
>

[Ernie]

Willi,
Now is your chance to get them to spend the money on improving habitat
instead of spending it on hatcheries.
Montana studies show that stocking hatchery trout will reduce the overall
number of stocked and non stocked trout that will live in the stream.
California Fish & Game is too dense to accept this, but perhaps Colorado DOW
will.
I would like to see an electric fence unit which ran on solar cells. It
should have a built in radio transmitter that would transmit an occasional
coded radio signal to show that the unit was operating ok, or was in trouble
(line went open, became grounded, had low batteries). This would alert
someone to come and fix it. The unit should be maintenance free and easily
replaced.
One man with a Jeep and pulling a trailer full of wire and metal fence
posts could easily set the posts, string the wire and install the units. Two
strands of barbed wire should be about right. Livestock should be kept
fifty feet from the stream. This would let the banks stabilize, improve
water quality, and provide good habitat for fish and small game.
Ernie

"Willi" > wrote in message
...
> In Colorado, a positive aspect to the introduction of whirling disease
> was the end of stocking catchables in streams and rivers. "All" the
> hatcheries were infected with WD and they decided to halt stocking in
> streams and rivers with natural reproduction.
>
> Now that they have clean hatcheries again, they have started stocking
> some streams and rivers, but the numbers are WAY down. Charlie W. and I
> have talked about this and we both feeling that fish populations (and
> the quality of fish) have increased when stocking halted. I hope our DOW
> doesn't go back to their old ways.
> Willi

[asadi]

Corporate welfare.

john

"Gene C" > wrote in message
om...
> I find this extremely depressing on many levels.
>
> I was out of town for a couple of days in the middle of last week. I
> got home and knew that they were supposed to complete the fall
> stocking for Elk Creek in Cecil County Maryland. They did. On Friday
> afternoon they completed it. They put a lot of nice fish in the
> creek. Me, and two other fly fisherman must have a caught a dozen
> fish. Most of them were in the 12 to 15 inch range. That was
> amazing! Even more amazing was the fact that within a couple of hours
> of going into the water they were going after woolly buggers! Of the
> 12 or so fish we caught, one guy kept one.
>
> I fished again on Sunday for a while and the vast majority of the fish
> were gone! One guy had 5 real nice ones on a stringer laying in
> shallow water.
>
> Now I know put-and-take has it's place in fisheries management but
> these fish could have been there all winter. The water temps are
> right. The food might be a little scarce for that many fish but we
> could have had fun catching them for the next 5 months!
>
> I'm not a fan of PETA but I also see no point in pushing fish to a
> slow death of suffocation.
>
> Maybe I'm misguided but that mentality seems so selfish, so short
> sighted? I know this is the reality but..? Maybe all streams should
> have delayed harvest for a couple of weeks after stocking. That would
> allow the people who want to CATCH fish a chance to do so before the
> meat men arrive and yank them all out of the water for good.
> Any comments?

[Jeff Miller]

hmmm...hint-hint: if we get all those other folks focused on the easy
access, lotsa big fish areas by the well-traveled roads, that trail we
were on can be run without bumpin into anybody else.

and, as far as up there, being slowly but incessantly devoured by flies
and skeeters makes a jog down a nc mountain trail seem quite pleasant,
don't it? ...

jeff

Wolfgang wrote:

> "Jeff Miller" > wrote in message
> news:3p9lb.95857$AH4.44122@lakeread06...
>
>>i agree. we need more conveniently-placed, handicap-accessible put
>
> and
>
>>take fisheries.
>
>
> Hm.......
>
> As handicap access is not your area of particular expertise,
> counselor, I hasten to remind you that "a marginal capacity to jog up
> six miles of indiscernible trail in the dark, wade wet for several
> hours in marrow freezing water, and then sprint back down the trail,
> leaving a parched fishing companion choking in dust, to get the pick
> of a rapidly dwindling beer supply back at the truck" is not a
> universally accepted definition of "handicapped". We do things
> somewhat differently up here. :(
>
> Wolfgang
> not to mention the disconcerting reflection on being left alone with
> all the bitey things in the woods.
>
>

[Wolfgang]

"Jeff Miller" > wrote in message
news:X_ulb.97364$AH4.95108@lakeread06...
> hmmm...hint-hint: if we get all those other folks focused on the
easy
> access, lotsa big fish areas by the well-traveled roads, that trail
we
> were on can be run without bumpin into anybody else.

Oh......um.....yeah, that's exactly what I meant.

> and, as far as up there, being slowly but incessantly devoured by
flies
> and skeeters makes a jog down a nc mountain trail seem quite
pleasant,
> don't it? ...

Well, yeah, there is that. Matter of fact, pack a few pasties and
some olives, it could be a real idyllic outing. :)

Wolfgang

[slenon]

>hmmm...hint-hint: if we get all those other folks focused on the easy
>access, lotsa big fish areas by the well-traveled roads, that trail we
>were on can be run without bumpin into anybody else.
>jeff

Why not go a little further and get them disabled access to all the golf
courses. If they're playing golf, they aren't on the trout streams at all.

----
Stev Lenon 91B20 '68-'69
Drowning flies to Darkstar

http://web.tampabay.rr.com/stevglo/index.html/slhomepage92kword.htm

[Outdoors Magazine]

Very, very funny indeed ... better yet ... trout ponds on golf courses so
licenses still get sold

--
James Ehlers

Outdoors Magazine
www.outdoorsmagazine.net
"slenon" > wrote in message
m...
> >hmmm...hint-hint: if we get all those other folks focused on the easy
> >access, lotsa big fish areas by the well-traveled roads, that trail we
> >were on can be run without bumpin into anybody else.
> >jeff
>
> Why not go a little further and get them disabled access to all the golf
> courses. If they're playing golf, they aren't on the trout streams at
all.
>
> ----
> Stev Lenon 91B20 '68-'69
> Drowning flies to Darkstar
>
> http://web.tampabay.rr.com/stevglo/index.html/slhomepage92kword.htm
>
>
>

[slenon]

>Very, very funny indeed ... better yet ... trout ponds on golf courses so
licenses still get sold
>James Ehlers

Works for me. Add some real hazard to the water.

----
Stev Lenon 91B20 '68-'69
Drowning flies to Darkstar

http://web.tampabay.rr.com/stevglo/index.html/slhomepage92kword.htm

[riverman]

"Jeff Miller" > wrote in message
news:Uk9lb.95844$AH4.79652@lakeread06...
>
>
> Willi wrote:
>
>
> >
> >>> My first though would be: "How can I get laid", but then I'm a man,
> >>> not a
> >>> fish.
> >
> >
> > Depending on the time of year, that's high on a fish's priorities too.
> > This morning I saw a huge Brown in the irrigation ditch that runs on my
> > property going through the motions of spawning even though she? had no
> > mate.
> >>
>
> quoting mr. seidman, "the described scene somewhat describes some of my
> intimate encounters already!"
>

Hah! RWBNS!

--riverman
(GMTA)

[Jeff Miller]

jeezus... thought the wind blowin through your ears might carry a clue
or two. anyway, enjoy your time on the links.

jeff

slenon wrote:

>>hmmm...hint-hint: if we get all those other folks focused on the easy
>>access, lotsa big fish areas by the well-traveled roads, that trail we
>>were on can be run without bumpin into anybody else.
>>jeff
>
>
> Why not go a little further and get them disabled access to all the golf
> courses. If they're playing golf, they aren't on the trout streams at all.
>
> ----
> Stev Lenon 91B20 '68-'69
> Drowning flies to Darkstar
>
> http://web.tampabay.rr.com/stevglo/index.html/slhomepage92kword.htm
>
>
>

[no]

> "Wayne Harrison" > wrote in message
> m...
> >
> //snip//
> > upstream, just sort of treading water. nothing doing. i finally applied
> my
> > (ahem!) deft, artful touch to the t&t, time after time, to no avail. long
> > story short: we tried six or eight combinations of dry flies, nymphs, and
> > boogers, and never moved a single fish.
> >
> > explanations?

How long after they were planted did you continue to fish? I have been
told they wont bite 2 -4 hours after being planted due to the stress.

[W. D. Grey]

In article >, Ken
Fortenberry > writes
>What's amazing about that ? A wooly bugger is a spot on imitation
>of a trout chow pellet. You may as well be using power bait.
>
>> Maybe I'm misguided ...
>
>Do you think ?

Perhaps we should be posting to ROFTPF

Rec. Outdoor Fishing Trout Pellet Fly :-)
--
Bill Grey
http://www.billboy.co.uk