Catch and Release Hurts our Quality of Life
 

On Sat, 8 Mar 2008 09:53:10 -0800 (PST), Halfordian Golfer
wrote:

A few years ago fishing on the flat tops, a small fish of about 5
inches took my fly and I accidentally pulled him into a side-pocket
where he escaped under a crack. The side pocket would dry up in a day
or two, it was more like a rain basin. I took off my vest and set down
my rod and tried in vain to free him back to the main river.
Incidental and unavoidable? Certainly. Doesn't mean I'll ever, ever
not respect that this was a wild animal that I killed for no good
reason.

Tim, all of us have experienced similar tragedies while we fly fish.
Either get over it quickly, or let it rot in your gut. **** happens.

I once heard of a man that did not want to shoot any more
deer/moose/bear. But he still wanted to pursue them - track them -
hunt them without killing them. His solution was to mount a 35 mm
camera on a gun stock with the shutter connected directly to the
trigger. His "kill" was pictures of the many animals that he "shot".

I suggest you do something similar. Perhaps do as I do on occasion:
break off the hook and fish just the feathers/dubbing/whatever. If
you get a rise and feel the take, consider it a caught fish. The same
would be true if nymphing (although I have never tried it with a
nymph). To me the take is the entire adventure; you've figured out
what the fish wants, how he wants it presented, and where to present
it. After the take there is very little excitement unless, of course,
it is one humungous 32 inch Russian rainbow, or a seven pound Labrador
brookie.

I leave for Chile in a couple of days. I hear tell their brown trout
actually jump like landlocked salmon. Been terribly ill for a week
with a virus - not the flu, but just as bad. I hope I am better by
then. I'll be gone for about 10 days and will not have my beautiful
bride to take care of me. d;o( But, then again, I won't have to push
any more rocks up the mountain. d;o)

Dave (Sisyphus in disguise)

Catch and Release Hurts our Quality of Life
 

On Sat, 8 Mar 2008 09:54:46 -0800 (PST), Halfordian Golfer
wrote:

Makes sense, protects the spawn. When is the best? I'd imagine
september? Right now?

The end of May and all of June. By early July the river warms and the
brook trout head out into Pond in the River and its spring holes.

Fishing picks up again in late August and is pretty good in September.

Catch and Release Hurts our Quality of Life
 

On Sat, 8 Mar 2008 09:40:12 -0800 (PST), Halfordian Golfer
wrote:

What do you believe would have happened if the regulations were
changed such that the minimum size limit was 22" and you could only
keep one?

Esentially that would be pure C&R for there were few 22 inch trout in
those days. However, those big trout are healthy and strong, able to
defend themselves from the bass (when they arrived), and essential to
the breeding cycle.

The ratio of brookies to landlocks was about 1 to 10 before c&r.
Since the no-kill implementation, the brookies have rebounded and now
the ratio is more even, say 50/50 (an educated guess). It seems now
that I catch just as many brookies as I do landlocks.

Dave

Catch and Release Hurts our Quality of Life
 

On Sat, 8 Mar 2008 09:40:12 -0800 (PST), Halfordian Golfer
wrote:

The brook trout are thriving under the current regs which protect them
but allow harvesting bass. You can not subtract that from the
equation, can you? I mean, it's the way it is.

If bass were protected and brook trout were not...what would the
predictable outcome be?

What of these landlocked salmon? They sound delicious!

Sorry.... I did not read your entire post before answering.....

The bass problem occured AFTER the no-kill implementation. They
played no role in the state's ruling to protect the brook trout in
this river. The no-kill edict was because the size and quantity of
the native brook trout had declined by the c&k crowd. Within a year
of the no-kill edict, the river bounced back with some healthy fish.
Within two years trophy fish were being taken - of both species,
brookies and salmon. Catch and release saved this river.

I needn't tell you that if the bass were protected and the brook trout
and salmon were not, the river would no longer be the finest brook
trout water on the East Coast.

Landlocks are delicious. Think of an Atlantic Salmon. Basically the
same animal although the largest I have seen was only 27 inches.
Their meat is just as good as a wild Atlantic Salmon. Delicious!
And they fight like hell with aerial displays that leave you
awestruck.

Dave

Catch and Release Hurts our Quality of Life
 

Halfordian Golfer wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
A few dead fish do not matter one whit to me

While I do not believe mortality alone is a litmus of ethicity, this
stark and wanton disregard for killing wildlife solely for your
pleasure shocked even me.

It spanks of no conscience.

If you're going to reply to my posts I'm going to have to
insist that you quote full sentences only. You know that
posting only that sentence fragment was a distortion of
what I posted. It was dishonest. I will have an honest
discussion with an honest correspondent but I will not get
into a conversation with a dishonest fruitcake. And "spanks"
of no conscience ? What in the hell is that supposed to mean ?

--
Ken Fortenberry

Catch and Release Hurts our Quality of Life
 

On Mar 8, 1:14 pm, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:
Halfordian Golfer wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
A few dead fish do not matter one whit to me

While I do not believe mortality alone is a litmus of ethicity, this
stark and wanton disregard for killing wildlife solely for your
pleasure shocked even me.

It spanks of no conscience.

If you're going to reply to my posts I'm going to have to
insist that you quote full sentences only. You know that
posting only that sentence fragment was a distortion of
what I posted. It was dishonest. I will have an honest
discussion with an honest correspondent but I will not get
into a conversation with a dishonest fruitcake. And "spanks"
of no conscience ? What in the hell is that supposed to mean ?

--
Ken Fortenberry

Here is the full quote. Didn't think it changed anything.

"Nope. My recreation is every bit as important as the few
fish which accidentally die as a result of my C&R. Where
regulations permit I will eat the fish I kill and where
it's illegal to keep a fish the turtles and otters will
eat them. A few dead fish do not matter one whit to me, "

"Spanks of" is just something we say around here..smacks of spanks of
stinks of same same.

Halfordian Golfer

Catch and Release Hurts our Quality of Life
 

Halfordian Golfer wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
If you're going to reply to my posts I'm going to have to
insist that you quote full sentences only. You know that
posting only that sentence fragment was a distortion of
what I posted. It was dishonest. I will have an honest
discussion with an honest correspondent but I will not get
into a conversation with a dishonest fruitcake. And "spanks"
of no conscience ? What in the hell is that supposed to mean ?

Here is the full quote. ...

No, here is the full quote:

"Nope. My recreation is every bit as important as the few
fish which accidentally die as a result of my C&R. Where
regulations permit I will eat the fish I kill and where
it's illegal to keep a fish the turtles and otters will
eat them. A few dead fish do not matter one whit to me,
I look at the bigger fishery management picture. As do
most of the folks who have grown weary of your tedious
and tiresome anti-C&R crusading."

You are obviously not interested in an honest discussion.
Which is fine, your jihad is not an honest one so there
is really no point in your making an inevitably futile
attempt to discuss it.

--
Ken Fortenberry

Catch and Release Hurts our Quality of Life
 

On Mar 8, 1:01 pm, Dave LaCourse wrote:
On Sat, 8 Mar 2008 09:40:12 -0800 (PST), Halfordian Golfer

wrote:
The brook trout are thriving under the current regs which protect them
but allow harvesting bass. You can not subtract that from the
equation, can you? I mean, it's the way it is.

If bass were protected and brook trout were not...what would the
predictable outcome be?

What of these landlocked salmon? They sound delicious!

Sorry.... I did not read your entire post before answering.....

The bass problem occured AFTER the no-kill implementation. They
played no role in the state's ruling to protect the brook trout in
this river. The no-kill edict was because the size and quantity of
the native brook trout had declined by the c&k crowd. Within a year
of the no-kill edict, the river bounced back with some healthy fish.
Within two years trophy fish were being taken - of both species,
brookies and salmon. Catch and release saved this river.

I needn't tell you that if the bass were protected and the brook trout
and salmon were not, the river would no longer be the finest brook
trout water on the East Coast.

Landlocks are delicious. Think of an Atlantic Salmon. Basically the
same animal although the largest I have seen was only 27 inches.
Their meat is just as good as a wild Atlantic Salmon. Delicious!
And they fight like hell with aerial displays that leave you
awestruck.

Dave

Are they the same thing as Kokanee which, I think are landlocked
sockeyes we have in Colorado...silver bullets jump way out of the
water, orange meat.

Halfordian Golfer

Catch and Release Hurts our Quality of Life
 

On Mar 8, 4:49 pm, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:
Halfordian Golfer wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
If you're going to reply to my posts I'm going to have to
insist that you quote full sentences only. You know that
posting only that sentence fragment was a distortion of
what I posted. It was dishonest. I will have an honest
discussion with an honest correspondent but I will not get
into a conversation with a dishonest fruitcake. And "spanks"
of no conscience ? What in the hell is that supposed to mean ?

Here is the full quote. ...

No, here is the full quote:

"Nope. My recreation is every bit as important as the few
fish which accidentally die as a result of my C&R. Where
regulations permit I will eat the fish I kill and where
it's illegal to keep a fish the turtles and otters will
eat them. A few dead fish do not matter one whit to me,
I look at the bigger fishery management picture. As do
most of the folks who have grown weary of your tedious
and tiresome anti-C&R crusading."

You are obviously not interested in an honest discussion.
Which is fine, your jihad is not an honest one so there
is really no point in your making an inevitably futile
attempt to discuss it.

--
Ken Fortenberry

Ken,

You said you only cared about posting full sentences, not the full
quote.

Specifically you said:: I'm going to have to insist that you quote
full sentences only

So I did,

Bone

Catch and Release Hurts our Quality of Life
 

Halfordian Golfer wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
You are obviously not interested in an honest discussion.
Which is fine, your jihad is not an honest one so there
is really no point in your making an inevitably futile
attempt to discuss it.

Ken,

You said you only cared about posting full sentences, not the full
quote.

Specifically you said:: I'm going to have to insist that you quote
full sentences only

So I did,

This is a full sentence:

"A few dead fish do not matter one whit to me,
I look at the bigger fishery management picture."

You posted a sentence fragment, twice, which was
a dishonest distortion of my post and then you
expounded on your dishonest distortion to accuse
me of being a man with no conscience who had a
wanton disregard for killing wildlife. Not only
is that dishonest it's despicable.

--
Ken Fortenberry

--
Ken Fortenberry