Fishing for stocked fish.
 

Considerations on angling for stock fish.

I have a numbre of objections to angling for stocked rainbow trout.
These are based entirely on the facts known to me, and are not a
result of "snobbery" or any other such silly considerations, as some
people seem to assume.

1. The use of such fish is a massive drain on the environment.

2. There is no sensible comparison whatsoever between such fish and
any wild fish.

3. Although such fish may appear outwardly similar to wild fish,
after a period in suitable conditions, they do not behave like wild
fish. In many cases being almost tame, and can be caught easily using
various tricks, or completely outlandish concoctions such as power
bait, to which they have been accustomed artificailly. They may also
be easily caught using crushed trout pellets. Many of the flies used
to catch such fish have no counterparts in nature, and are taken by
the fish mainly as a result of their extreme conditioning during
rearing to react to food items in a particular manner. They have been
been conditioned to do so, and rarely possess even a fraction of the
wariness of wild fish. Especialy when in shoals, which they often
maintain until they are caught or die, they are extremely competitive.

4. In the majority of cases, these fish are badly contaminated with
accumulated poisons and toxins. This is also a result of being fed on
processed fishmeal, which concentrates various toxins, mainly in the
fatty cells of such fish, and also the chenical and other complex drug
residues used in their production.

5. I find the production of such animals purely for the purpose of
playing with them distasteful. They are produced at great cost,
damage, and danger to the environment, purely for the personal
gratification of anglers who wish to fish for them. This is not at all
the same thing as directly farming a food source.

6 As a result of the concentration on such practices, rivers and other
natural environments are being more and more negelected, and even
considered "inferior", because nothing even remotely resembling the
number and amount of fish can be caught there, and anglers
expectations have as a result of this, been raised far beyond what is
normal, or even remotely sensible in this regard. massive amounts of
money and resources are being wasted in order to provide personal and
"convenient" gratification to anglers, which would be far better spent
on improving the environment, and not in activel destroying it.

7. Also as a result of conditioning, many of these fish will only
feed at certain times, corresponding to the feeding times in the
hatcheries and feeding stews in which they were reared. Such aberrant
behaviour is often referred to as "the evening rise". In some places
where the fish have time to become acclimatised, ( although they never
entirely lose their conditioning), this may even be the case, but it
is mainly the result of conditioning to feed at a certain time.

There are a number of other reasons as well, but those are the main
ones.

TL
MC

Fishing for stocked fish.
 

One other point here, which is mainly an ethical one, and as such
dependent on one´s personal point of view. Fishing for such fish on a
catch and release basis is the ultimate mockery of the creature. It
reduces the creature to a complete plaything, which is artificially
produced under awful unnatural conditions, and then lives and dies
purely to provide a few moments of struggling for its life, resulting
in the personal gratification of an "angler". I find this abhorrent in
the extreme.

Many fisheries now are offering this, and many many anglers are
canvassing for it as well. Such people have no soul, and no conception
of what angling is.

If anybody cares to disagree with any of this, please feel free. If
anybody has any positive arguments in favour of such, please feel free
to voice them.

Just do me one favour, and don´t keep telling me you "have no choice",
or it is "convenient".

TL
MC

Fishing for stocked fish.
 

You may of course, like many "anglers", simply stick your head in the
sand, ( or as in the case of Kenny Boy, perpetual performing ****er of
this parish, up your arse), it is however certain that the known
problems, and possibly quite a few unknown ones will catch up with you
before long, and will also be visited upon your children. You are
actively aiding and abetting environmental destruction on a large
scale, for no other reason than convenient personal gratification.

Oh and Kenny Boy, before you start your usual nonsense, since you are
far too ignorant and stupid to refute or even discuss any of this
sensibly, I would suggest you go and jerk off somewhere else.

TL
MC

Fishing for stocked fish.
 

On 16-Sep-2007, Mike wrote:

ne other point here, which is mainly an ethical one, and as such
dependent on one´s personal point of view. Fishing for such fish on a
catch and release basis is the ultimate mockery of the creature. It
reduces the creature to a complete plaything, which is artificially
produced under awful unnatural conditions, and then lives and dies
purely to provide a few moments of struggling for its life, resulting
in the personal gratification of an "angler". I find this abhorrent in
the extreme.

Many fisheries now are offering this, and many many anglers are
canvassing for it as well. Such people have no soul, and no conception
of what angling is.

If anybody cares to disagree with any of this, please feel free. If
anybody has any positive arguments in favour of such, please feel free
to voice them.

Just do me one favour, and don´t keep telling me you "have no choice",
or it is "convenient".

TL
MC

You make a very good point here.
However the way tye world is going wthe population explosion, global
warming and the everyday degradation of the environment
It seems like this is the way the world is headed for anglers.
Whose numbers are also growing.
Ido not see wild fish are in the distanbnt future for this planet.

I have always wondered - and have never been there - on an overpopulated
island - like Japan
What kind of frsheater fish do they fish for?
Re there any wild bnative species left?

Fred

Fishing for stocked fish.
 

On 16-Sep-2007, Mike wrote:


You may of course, like many "anglers", simply stick your head in the
sand, ( or as in the case of Kenny Boy, perpetual performing ****er of
this parish, up your arse), it is however certain that the known
problems, and possibly quite a few unknown ones will catch up with you
before long, and will also be visited upon your children. You are
actively aiding and abetting environmental destruction on a large
scale, for no other reason than convenient personal gratification.


Oh and Kenny Boy, before you start your usual nonsense, since you are
far too ignorant and stupid to refute or even discuss any of this
sensibly, I would suggest you go and jerk off somewhere else.

TL
MC

Again - in the beginning of this post you made a good point
Why did you have to add this lunatic crap at the end?

Fred

Fishing for stocked fish.
 

On 16 Sep, 19:09, wrote:
On 16-Sep-2007, Mike wrote:

You may of course, like many "anglers", simply stick your head in the
sand, ( or as in the case of Kenny Boy, perpetual performing ****er of
this parish, up your arse), it is however certain that the known
problems, and possibly quite a few unknown ones will catch up with you
before long, and will also be visited upon your children. You are
actively aiding and abetting environmental destruction on a large
scale, for no other reason than convenient personal gratification.
Oh and Kenny Boy, before you start your usual nonsense, since you are
far too ignorant and stupid to refute or even discuss any of this
sensibly, I would suggest you go and jerk off somewhere else.

TL
MC

Again - in the beginning of this post you made a good point
Why did you have to add this lunatic crap at the end?

Fred

Well Fred, I don´t know anything much about Japan, except what I can
read on the web, and I have not even read much of that. I try to
address the problems in my own neighbourhood, although this can only
be in a relatively small way. Acquiring specific information on some
of these things is also becoming increasingly difficult, as a number
of the extremely large industrial concerns, which operate globally,
actively conceal all sorts of things, because they don´t want people
to know the extent of their control, and the massive damage they are
causing for profit.

Many anglers are simply unaware of the facts, and there are also a
number who refuse to believe them, as well as a few who know them, and
continue anyway, because they put their own doubtful "enjoyment" above
any other considerations.

Which brings us back to the "lunatic crap" you mention. Fortenberry
is a problem. Not only because he is a pschopathic arsehole, who gets
his kicks by damaging others, but because his behaviour also
effectively suppresses information and common sense. Quite apart form
the fact that his behaviour generally prevents the free interchange of
information here, and severely affects the enjoyment of many.

Why you think I should address one severe problem, ( indeed a whole
complex of problems), in an orderly, sensible, logical and informed
fashion, and at the same time fail to address another problem which
has caused myself and others considerable grief, is rather odd don´t
you think?

Why do you think he should be allowed to continue abusing and
insulting people, or posting a load of propaganda against me, and
others, but that I should not be allowed to retaliate?

I really would like to know.

TL
MC

Fishing for stocked fish.
 

On 16-Sep-2007, Mike wrote:

Why do you think he should be allowed to continue abusing and
insulting people, or posting a load of propaganda against me, and
others, but that I should not be allowed to retaliate?

I really would like to know.

Mike

You are never going to stop him
Everytime you engage in diatribes against ea other you both look like fools
and it accomplishes nothing
In fact it detracts from your someimes informational and useful posts
Ignore him!
What else can you do?


Acquiring specific information on some
of these things is also becoming increasingly difficult, as a number
of the extremely large industrial concerns, which operate globally,
actively conceal all sorts of things, because they don´t want people
to know the extent of their control, and the massive damage they are
causing for profit.

I am disgusted and ****ing outraged with what people and corporaions do to
this planet
Esp in that the US is the largest single violator of world polution
standards
I am ****ing outraged by the wars that we perpetuate in the name of liberty
, frredom and the AAmerican way
while all they are is methiods for the wealth to exploit the poor - Jus
another facet of American - world imperialism

Bush, Cheney and their posse are only figurehgeads but thry are guilty of
the most heinous war crimes and environmental damage.
All for the ****ing dollar.

What can I do ?
- not much
It is enough io drive one nuts!
But I do not to let that happen

All I can do is open my BIG moth in outrage on these boards and a few other
places- react with my vote - but as the optioons are asinine so all that I
can really do
Is to mke sure that my own personal environment - family included- is a s
clean and as nurturing as possible.
We luckily have a lot of land
Throwing a cigarette butt or a beer can on the ground or other kinds of
detritus is specifiaclly banned from my property - One could get capped
I make sure that my duaghter - her family and grandchildren respect the
enviromnement as much as possible

There are a LOT of toxic assholes on this planet - way too ****ing many
I have unfortunately had occasion to throw people off of my land I suspect
that there will be quite a few more in the years to come.

I do not mean to say here that Fortenberry is one of the toxix ones
I like him in some ways
But if he drives you nuts-

Forgert and ignore Fortenberry!
That kind of venom and hate detracts from you

Use it in more positive ways.
My 2 cents
Fred

Fishing for stocked fish.
 

On 16 Sep, 20:12, wrote:

Use it in more positive ways.
My 2 cents
Fred

Sounds quite sensible Fred, but asking "what can I do", is not a
sensible substitute for actually doing something. It requires very
considerable patience and fortitude to do some things at all. For
many years I have been involved in the rearing, stocking, and release
of sea-trout for instance, only to see vast numbers of them caught on
the high seas by drift netters, or ambushed at river mouths, the size
of the few returnees steadily and constantly decreasing as their
ocean food chain is destroyed, among many other things to produce
artificial sterile monstrosities for other "anglers" But still I
continue, as do others, even though many of us think it is mainly a
rearguard action eventually doomed to failure. It "might" work, if
enough people come to their senses and actually do something. But if
nobody does anything at all then the chances dwindle to less than
zero.

One requires reliable information in order to achieve anything at all,
and one must ACT upon it. Even in a small way.

Fortenberry does not "drive me nuts" as you put it, he is just a major
nuisance in this environment. He prevents it working as it should,
for the free interchange of information. he never disagrees with
anybody about anything on the basis of fact, he just says something or
other must be so because he says it is. All you have to do to see
that, is to read his posts. He launches personal attacks and
propaganda campaigns. Most people give up and let him get away with
it, or decide to ignore him. I am just not the type to give up, either
with sea-trout or Fortenberries.

You can see the same effect creeping in with others. Look at Lacourses
reply to my post on Triploid fish. He doesn´t know anythingat all
about it, and he doesn´t want to. The selfish ******* couldn´t care
less as long as he can use his money to get what he wants in his
lifetime. He doesn´t care whether you or anybody can fish, or even if
there are any fish, except where he wants to catch them on his terms.

There is not only point in accepting such, it is a major part of the
problem.

Now I am sure you mean well with your advice, and even think it is
good advice, as do many others. But it is not good advice. It is
sticking one´s head in the sand, and no good will ever come of it.

TL
MC

Fishing for stocked fish.
 

On Sep 16, 9:16 am, Mike wrote:
Considerations on angling for stock fish.

I have a numbre of objections to angling for stocked rainbow trout.
These are based entirely on the facts known to me, and are not a
result of "snobbery" or any other such silly considerations, as some
people seem to assume.

1. The use of such fish is a massive drain on the environment.

2. There is no sensible comparison whatsoever between such fish and
any wild fish.

3. Although such fish may appear outwardly similar to wild fish,
after a period in suitable conditions, they do not behave like wild
fish. In many cases being almost tame, and can be caught easily using
various tricks, or completely outlandish concoctions such as power
bait, to which they have been accustomed artificailly. They may also
be easily caught using crushed trout pellets. Many of the flies used
to catch such fish have no counterparts in nature, and are taken by
the fish mainly as a result of their extreme conditioning during
rearing to react to food items in a particular manner. They have been
been conditioned to do so, and rarely possess even a fraction of the
wariness of wild fish. Especialy when in shoals, which they often
maintain until they are caught or die, they are extremely competitive.

4. In the majority of cases, these fish are badly contaminated with
accumulated poisons and toxins. This is also a result of being fed on
processed fishmeal, which concentrates various toxins, mainly in the
fatty cells of such fish, and also the chenical and other complex drug
residues used in their production.

5. I find the production of such animals purely for the purpose of
playing with them distasteful. They are produced at great cost,
damage, and danger to the environment, purely for the personal
gratification of anglers who wish to fish for them. This is not at all
the same thing as directly farming a food source.

6 As a result of the concentration on such practices, rivers and other
natural environments are being more and more negelected, and even
considered "inferior", because nothing even remotely resembling the
number and amount of fish can be caught there, and anglers
expectations have as a result of this, been raised far beyond what is
normal, or even remotely sensible in this regard. massive amounts of
money and resources are being wasted in order to provide personal and
"convenient" gratification to anglers, which would be far better spent
on improving the environment, and not in activel destroying it.

7. Also as a result of conditioning, many of these fish will only
feed at certain times, corresponding to the feeding times in the
hatcheries and feeding stews in which they were reared. Such aberrant
behaviour is often referred to as "the evening rise". In some places
where the fish have time to become acclimatised, ( although they never
entirely lose their conditioning), this may even be the case, but it
is mainly the result of conditioning to feed at a certain time.

There are a number of other reasons as well, but those are the main
ones.

TL
MC
"There is no sensible comparison whatsoever between such fish and
any wild fish. "
How many wild rainbows have you caugt?

Fishing for stocked fish.
 

On Sun, 16 Sep 2007 17:05:22 GMT, wrote:

I have always wondered - and have never been there - on an overpopulated
island - like Japan
What kind of frsheater fish do they fish for?
Re there any wild bnative species left?

Probably the primary freshwater game fish there is the LM bass, but there are
native trout as well - and of course stockers. A method of fishing similar to
high stick nymphing evolved there when the country was still closed to the west,
but western style fly fishing is more common there days.

A lot of Japan is mountainous and sparsely settled, the population is
concentrated in the big cities. I have fished for trout there, but the
regulations and methods of gaining access can be a bit confusing. The streams
are lovely, though, and worth the effort. I've also fished for bass in the
Imperial moat in Tokyo, which isn't quite as lovely in some places.
--
Charlie...
http://www.chocphoto.com

Fishing for stocked fish.
 

On 16 Sep, 20:50, Charlie Choc wrote:

Charlie...http://www.chocphoto.com

Nice to hear from you Charlie. Hope you are well and prospering. Some
really brilliant photos there.

TL
MC

Fishing for stocked fish.
 

Fred, why don't you find a more appropriate forum for your rantings - like
the outhouse or latrine I'm sure you have on your pristine property.


Hello ,

On 16-Sep-2007, Mike wrote:

Why do you think he should be allowed to continue abusing and
insulting people, or posting a load of propaganda against me, and
others, but that I should not be allowed to retaliate?

I really would like to know.

Mike

You are never going to stop him
Everytime you engage in diatribes against ea other you both look like
fools
and it accomplishes nothing
In fact it detracts from your someimes informational and useful posts
Ignore him!
What else can you do?
Acquiring specific information on some
of these things is also becoming increasingly difficult, as a number
of the extremely large industrial concerns, which operate globally,
actively conceal all sorts of things, because they don´t want people
to know the extent of their control, and the massive damage they are
causing for profit.
I am disgusted and ****ing outraged with what people and corporaions
do to
this planet
Esp in that the US is the largest single violator of world polution
standards
I am ****ing outraged by the wars that we perpetuate in the name of
liberty
, frredom and the AAmerican way
while all they are is methiods for the wealth to exploit the poor -
Jus
another facet of American - world imperialism
Bush, Cheney and their posse are only figurehgeads but thry are
guilty of
the most heinous war crimes and environmental damage.
All for the ****ing dollar.
What can I do ?
- not much
It is enough io drive one nuts!
But I do not to let that happen
All I can do is open my BIG moth in outrage on these boards and a few
other
places- react with my vote - but as the optioons are asinine so all
that I
can really do
Is to mke sure that my own personal environment - family included- is
a s
clean and as nurturing as possible.
We luckily have a lot of land
Throwing a cigarette butt or a beer can on the ground or other kinds
of
detritus is specifiaclly banned from my property - One could get
capped
I make sure that my duaghter - her family and grandchildren respect
the
enviromnement as much as possible
There are a LOT of toxic assholes on this planet - way too ****ing
many
I have unfortunately had occasion to throw people off of my land I
suspect
that there will be quite a few more in the years to come.
I do not mean to say here that Fortenberry is one of the toxix ones
I like him in some ways
But if he drives you nuts-
Forgert and ignore Fortenberry!
That kind of venom and hate detracts from you
Use it in more positive ways.
My 2 cents
Fred

Fishing for stocked fish.
 

On 16-Sep-2007, Jim Edmondson wrote:

Fred, why don't you find a more appropriate forum for your rantings - like

the outhouse or latrine I'm sure you have on your pristine property.


Hello

**** off ****bird!

If youdont like my rants too ****ing bad Scumbag!

Fishing for stocked fish.
 

On 16-Sep-2007, Charlie Choc wrote:

I have always wondered - and have never been there - on an overpopulated
island - like Japan
What kind of frsheater fish do they fish for?
Re there any wild bnative species left?

Probably the primary freshwater game fish there is the LM bass, but there
are
native trout as well - and of course stockers. A method of fishing similar
to
high stick nymphing evolved there when the country was still closed to the
west,
but western style fly fishing is more common there days.

A lot of Japan is mountainous and sparsely settled, the population is
concentrated in the big cities. I have fished for trout there, but the
regulations and methods of gaining access can be a bit confusing. The
streams
are lovely, though, and worth the effort. I've also fished for bass in the
Imperial moat in Tokyo, which isn't quite as lovely in some places.
--
Charlie...
http://www.chocphoto.com

Thanks

Fishing for stocked fish.
 

Mike wrote:
Considerations on angling for stock fish.

I have a numbre of objections to angling for stocked rainbow trout.
These are based entirely on the facts known to me, and are not a
result of "snobbery" or any other such silly considerations, as some
people seem to assume.

This is considerably more temperate and reasonable than what
you posted on fishing for stocked fish just three days ago:

"No responsible and conservation
minded angler in full possession of his senses, and the knowledge of
what he is fishing for, how it was obtained and treated, quite apart
form the side-effects of eating such heavily chemically treated filth,
would even contemplate "angling" for such."

1. The use of such fish is a massive drain on the environment. ...

And this is quite different than this from three days ago:

"Doubtless, but fishing for stocked rainbows causes heavy environmental
damage."

Most of your arguments against fish stocking are informed by an
unreasonable conflation of aquaculture and fisheries management
but at least you've learned to state them in a civil fashion
without calling those who fish for stocked fish, (which includes
the vast majority of roff btw), "criminally ignorant".

--
Ken Fortenberry

Fishing for stocked fish.
 

gee fred that doesn't sound very nurturing

with such eloquence, you really should consider sticking your head up your
....


On 16-Sep-2007, Jim Edmondson wrote:

Fred, why don't you find a more appropriate forum for your rantings -
like

the outhouse or latrine I'm sure you have on your pristine property.

Hello

**** off ****bird!

If youdont like my rants too ****ing bad Scumbag!

Fishing for stocked fish.
 

"Mike" wrote in message
ups.com...

4. In the majority of cases, these fish are badly contaminated with
accumulated poisons and toxins. This is also a result of being fed on
processed fishmeal, which concentrates various toxins, mainly in the
fatty cells of such fish, and also the chenical and other complex drug
residues used in their production.

5. I find the production of such animals purely for the purpose of
playing with them distasteful. They are produced at great cost,
damage, and danger to the environment, purely for the personal
gratification of anglers who wish to fish for them. This is not at all
the same thing as directly farming a food source.

But the fish are materially the same, viz. farmed fish are fed
artificially thus (if MC is right about the feed) have "accumulated
poisons and toxins." We can calculate the environmental loads of
creating a 3 lb. angling rainbow and a 3 lb. table rainbow, and
perhaps these are different, but if they eat the same food are both
not equally poisoned and poisonous?

--
Don Phillipson
Carlsbad Springs
(Ottawa, Canada)

Fishing for stocked fish.
 

On 16 Sep, 23:10, "Don Phillipson"
wrote:
"Mike" wrote in message

ups.com...

4. In the majority of cases, these fish are badly contaminated with
accumulated poisons and toxins. This is also a result of being fed on
processed fishmeal, which concentrates various toxins, mainly in the
fatty cells of such fish, and also the chenical and other complex drug
residues used in their production.

5. I find the production of such animals purely for the purpose of
playing with them distasteful. They are produced at great cost,
damage, and danger to the environment, purely for the personal
gratification of anglers who wish to fish for them. This is not at all
the same thing as directly farming a food source.

But the fish are materially the same, viz. farmed fish are fed
artificially thus (if MC is right about the feed) have "accumulated
poisons and toxins." We can calculate the environmental loads of
creating a 3 lb. angling rainbow and a 3 lb. table rainbow, and
perhaps these are different, but if they eat the same food are both
not equally poisoned and poisonous?

--
Don Phillipson
Carlsbad Springs
(Ottawa, Canada)

The feed is indeed exactly the same. Despite ongoing research, there
is no substitute for fishmeal in the production of salmonid fish ( and
quite a few others also). The same feed which produces contaminated
farmed salmon also produces contaminated rainbows, and if brown trout
are reared and stocked, the problems are the same, but somewhat worse,
as it takes longer to feed browns on, as they have much slower growth
rates.

There are plenty of informational sites about the problems of rearing
fish on fishmeal. The conversion ratios of willd fish protein to
fishmeal, and the problems with the concentration of contaminants.
This is independent of the drugs and chemicals being used at intensive
rearing stations, which cause a whole other range of problems.

The ONLY reared salmonid fish which are not dependent on fishmeal are
those which are bred, and then released at the fry stage. Up till that
point, they subsist on their egg-sacs. After that they must be fed, or
they simply die.

Despite intensive campaigns by various people and groups fish farming
both in marine and freshwater environments continues to devastate the
environment. The effluent form a trout farm will kill everything in a
river if allowed to escape untreated. The problems with marine salmon
farms are very considerably greater, as they also result in the
complete destruction of anadrompus fish runs in the catchments where
they are located. Despite this being known and well documented,
permissions are still being granted for new farms in the UK.

May be of interest; http://www.salmonfarmmonitor.org/pr201203notes.shtml

http://www.salmonfarmmonitor.org/

TL
MC

Fishing for stocked fish.
 

By the way, you might also like to look at some of these sites. I have
purposely avoided citing or posting any particular one, pick whichever
you like;

http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=mal...GGL_en___DE230

This is only ONE of the substances in common use, there are dozens of
them, not including carcinogenic colouring matter, other chemicals
used for parasite control, etc and some complex antibiotics and other
drugs.

TL
MC

Fishing for stocked fish.
 

With regard to the actual rearing, here is some info which may be
interesting;

http://www.fisheriesmanagement.co.uk...rown_trout.htm

TL
MC

Fishing for stocked fish.
 

Oops, sorry, this link should have been under the malachite green
reference;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malachite_green

TL
MC

Fishing for stocked fish.
 

Also of considerable interest in this regard;

http://www.cefas.co.uk/news-and-even...july-2000.aspx

TL
MC

Fishing for stocked fish.
 

And this , which is the newest edition publicly available, as a direct
PDF download;

http://www.cefas.co.uk/publications/...s/ffn3_web.pdf

Let´s see what Kenny boy makes of "conflating" all that. If he bothers
to read it at all.

TL
MC

Fishing for stocked fish.
 

Mike wrote:
And this , which is the newest edition publicly available, as a direct
PDF download;

http://www.cefas.co.uk/publications/...s/ffn3_web.pdf

Let´s see what Kenny boy makes of "conflating" all that. If he bothers
to read it at all.

Perhaps you'd like to indicate which of those 102 pages is
supposed to convince me that the farm-raised rainbow trout
sitting on ice in the seafood section of my local grocery
store is full of poisons and toxins. Every list I can find
of safe to eat commercial fish in the US lists farm-raised
rainbow trout as among the safest.

--
Ken Fortenberry

Fishing for stocked fish.
 

On 17 Sep, 01:38, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:
Mike wrote:
And this , which is the newest edition publicly available, as a direct
PDF download;

http://www.cefas.co.uk/publications/...s/ffn3_web.pdf

Let´s see what Kenny boy makes of "conflating" all that. If he bothers
to read it at all.

Perhaps you'd like to indicate which of those 102 pages is
supposed to convince me that the farm-raised rainbow trout
sitting on ice in the seafood section of my local grocery
store is full of poisons and toxins. Every list I can find
of safe to eat commercial fish in the US lists farm-raised
rainbow trout as among the safest.

--
Ken Fortenberry

Well now Kenny boy, at the risk of falling foul of another of your
stupid tactics, what we are discussing here is primarily European
stocked fish, because that is what I know about. That is what the
subject matter is, and your views on American stocked or farmed fish,
though doubtless interesting, if uninformed, are not entirely
relevant at the moment. No reason why one should not include them
specifically if people wish to.

Having said that, farmed salmonids from anywhere in the world all
suffer from the same problems, because they are all reared in the
same manner using the same feed, and with all the same attendant
problems. Even cursory research will prove that, even to your
satisfaction. There is no other way to do it.

I have no idea what lists you might be referring to, but whatever they
might be, they are in error, because fish which are fed on fishmeal,
and there is no alternative to fishmeal for salmonid farming,
regardless of whether it is for marine or freshwater farming,
accumulate more toxins than any other fish, most especially dioxins
and PCB´s . This is a direct result of feeding fishmeal, and is also
independent and regardless of the drugs and chemicals which are used
in all intensive farming operations.

So, if I were you, I would look for some other information than that
on the lists you have found. Or, you can just believe what it says on
your lists, and continue poisoning yourself. It is no skin off my
nose.

If you wish to believe your lists, then there is little point in you
discussing the matter at all, now is there?

MC

Fishing for stocked fish.
 

Mike wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
Mike wrote:
...
http://www.cefas.co.uk/publications/...s/ffn3_web.pdf
Let´s see what Kenny boy makes of "conflating" all that. If he bothers
to read it at all.
Perhaps you'd like to indicate which of those 102 pages is
supposed to convince me that the farm-raised rainbow trout
sitting on ice in the seafood section of my local grocery
store is full of poisons and toxins. Every list I can find
of safe to eat commercial fish in the US lists farm-raised
rainbow trout as among the safest.

snip
If you wish to believe your lists, then there is little point in you
discussing the matter at all, now is there?

Yeah, that's what I thought. Only those who already agree with
His Loony Mikeness have any point discussing the matter at all.
LOL !! Please, do carry on.

--
Ken Fortenberry

Fishing for stocked fish.
 

Here are some lists for you, the specific reasons for some
contamination may be water or area specific, but the dioxin, PCB and
some other high toxin levels in farmed salmonids is directly due to
the fish being fed on fishmeal;

http://www.oehha.ca.gov/fish/so_cal/nosierra.html

This link contains much of the same bull**** the UK government and its
various "advisory boards" are still producing on various salmon and
trout farms. It does not matter where these fish live, or the water
quality either. Grown on fish ( which can ONLY be grown on using
fishmeal), have extremely high levels of dioxin, PCB´s and other
toxins, because it is in the fishmeal.

http://pafeefishing.com/Angle%20Your...r%20Health.doc

http://www.northcountrygazette.org/n.../tainted_fish/

There are hundreds of such sites and stories.

I´m sure you can google up relevant information without my assistance.
I am not here to force feed you with information on the matter. If you
don´t believe what I say, then simply research it yourself.

MC

Fishing for stocked fish.
 

And just to forestall any nonsense that your controls are more rigid,
etc etc. Fishmeal is a global commodity, and the USA is one of the
largest importers. This is the SAME fishmeal which is causing problems
elsewhere;

http://www.globefish.org/index.php?i...tid=1611191922

MC

Fishing for stocked fish.
 

Gee, Mikey. You don't seem to be very successful in ignoring Kenny
Boy. Wot?

Fishing for stocked fish.
 

On 17 Sep, 02:15, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:


Yeah, that's what I thought. Only those who already agree with
His Loony Mikeness have any point discussing the matter at all.
LOL !! Please, do carry on.

--
Ken Fortenberry

Just what I thought as well, another one of your ploys so that you
could post more silly propaganda. The truth is, you are an ignorant
****bag, who does not want to discuss anything at all. You waste people
´s time, attack them personally. and simply ignore the facts.

If you can refute anything I have written, with lists or otherwise,
then do so. otherwise **** off and stop playing silly games. There are
people who may find this interesting and informative,

MC

Fishing for stocked fish.
 

On 17 Sep, 02:30, Dave LaCourse wrote:
Gee, Mikey. You don't seem to be very successful in ignoring Kenny
Boy. Wot?

**** off Lacourse.

MC

Fishing for stocked fish.
 

I dont debate the Iraq war anymore
Like Vietnam
If you are not against it you are for it and **** you - At this point in
time there is no more debate

If you don't like my political opinions which are part of my world view then
all that I can do wirth a ****ing
clueless jerk like you is

I think that whats going on in the environment caused by clueless fools like
you that do nothing
is quite releveant to fishing today -As there will not be many resources
left tomorrow
Because fools like yo do not want to hear about nor act on it

Here is an eloquent statement that a mindless fool like you can understand-
**** off Jack!
Shihead!

Plonk

Fishing for stocked fish.
 

On Sun, 16 Sep 2007 17:32:24 -0700, Mike
wrote:

On 17 Sep, 02:30, Dave LaCourse wrote:
Gee, Mikey. You don't seem to be very successful in ignoring Kenny
Boy. Wot?

**** off Lacourse.

MC

Twist..... Push.... Turn... Push....

d;o)

Fishing for stocked fish.
 

On Sep 16, 10:16 am, Mike wrote:
Considerations on angling for stock fish.

I have a numbre of objections to angling for stocked rainbow trout.
These are based entirely on the facts known to me, and are not a
result of "snobbery" or any other such silly considerations, as some
people seem to assume.

1. The use of such fish is a massive drain on the environment.

2. There is no sensible comparison whatsoever between such fish and
any wild fish.

3. Although such fish may appear outwardly similar to wild fish,
after a period in suitable conditions, they do not behave like wild
fish. In many cases being almost tame, and can be caught easily using
various tricks, or completely outlandish concoctions such as power
bait, to which they have been accustomed artificailly. They may also
be easily caught using crushed trout pellets. Many of the flies used
to catch such fish have no counterparts in nature, and are taken by
the fish mainly as a result of their extreme conditioning during
rearing to react to food items in a particular manner. They have been
been conditioned to do so, and rarely possess even a fraction of the
wariness of wild fish. Especialy when in shoals, which they often
maintain until they are caught or die, they are extremely competitive.

4. In the majority of cases, these fish are badly contaminated with
accumulated poisons and toxins. This is also a result of being fed on
processed fishmeal, which concentrates various toxins, mainly in the
fatty cells of such fish, and also the chenical and other complex drug
residues used in their production.

5. I find the production of such animals purely for the purpose of
playing with them distasteful. They are produced at great cost,
damage, and danger to the environment, purely for the personal
gratification of anglers who wish to fish for them. This is not at all
the same thing as directly farming a food source.

6 As a result of the concentration on such practices, rivers and other
natural environments are being more and more negelected, and even
considered "inferior", because nothing even remotely resembling the
number and amount of fish can be caught there, and anglers
expectations have as a result of this, been raised far beyond what is
normal, or even remotely sensible in this regard. massive amounts of
money and resources are being wasted in order to provide personal and
"convenient" gratification to anglers, which would be far better spent
on improving the environment, and not in activel destroying it.

7. Also as a result of conditioning, many of these fish will only
feed at certain times, corresponding to the feeding times in the
hatcheries and feeding stews in which they were reared. Such aberrant
behaviour is often referred to as "the evening rise". In some places
where the fish have time to become acclimatised, ( although they never
entirely lose their conditioning), this may even be the case, but it
is mainly the result of conditioning to feed at a certain time.

There are a number of other reasons as well, but those are the main
ones.

TL
MC

Good post Mike. There is definitely counter points to be,
respectfully, made.

1) In Colorado, there is an exceptional fishery in the mountain and
plain lakes that, up until a 100 years ago were completely devoid of
fish. A lot of private hatcheries stocked the water including the
famous boulder rod and gun club. This activity *created* teh fishery.

2) There is also the consideration that stocked trout in places like
St. Vrain State Park, old gravel quarries, absorb a tremendous amount
of recreational pressure.

3) The license revenue generated from stocked trout draws interest and
moneys for research.

4) 100% of the Brown, Rainbow and Brook trout fishery is the
descendant result of stocking programs.

5) In many cases the very nicest fish you catch, one full of color,
fight and firm healthy trout is simply the multiple year hold over.

Personally, I get the Jones to bang a few stockers and eat them at
least once or twice a season. Some of the new diets makes the flesh
orange and the fish relatively tasty, especially brined and smoked.

I'm not too proud to crack a cool one and take a few of the stocked
trout out of he

http://parks.state.co.us/Parks/StVrain/

In fact, they did something pretty cool out there last year. What used
to be the back ponds that you could drive all around have been closed
off as hiking access only. If you walk a mile or two you can leave
just about all the rest of the fishermen.
Best regards,

Tim

Fishing for stocked fish.
 

On Sep 16, 7:09 pm, Halfordian Golfer wrote:
On Sep 16, 10:16 am, Mike wrote:



Considerations on angling for stock fish.

I have a numbre of objections to angling for stocked rainbow trout.
These are based entirely on the facts known to me, and are not a
result of "snobbery" or any other such silly considerations, as some
people seem to assume.

1. The use of such fish is a massive drain on the environment.

2. There is no sensible comparison whatsoever between such fish and
any wild fish.

3. Although such fish may appear outwardly similar to wild fish,
after a period in suitable conditions, they do not behave like wild
fish. In many cases being almost tame, and can be caught easily using
various tricks, or completely outlandish concoctions such as power
bait, to which they have been accustomed artificailly. They may also
be easily caught using crushed trout pellets. Many of the flies used
to catch such fish have no counterparts in nature, and are taken by
the fish mainly as a result of their extreme conditioning during
rearing to react to food items in a particular manner. They have been
been conditioned to do so, and rarely possess even a fraction of the
wariness of wild fish. Especialy when in shoals, which they often
maintain until they are caught or die, they are extremely competitive.

4. In the majority of cases, these fish are badly contaminated with
accumulated poisons and toxins. This is also a result of being fed on
processed fishmeal, which concentrates various toxins, mainly in the
fatty cells of such fish, and also the chenical and other complex drug
residues used in their production.

5. I find the production of such animals purely for the purpose of
playing with them distasteful. They are produced at great cost,
damage, and danger to the environment, purely for the personal
gratification of anglers who wish to fish for them. This is not at all
the same thing as directly farming a food source.

6 As a result of the concentration on such practices, rivers and other
natural environments are being more and more negelected, and even
considered "inferior", because nothing even remotely resembling the
number and amount of fish can be caught there, and anglers
expectations have as a result of this, been raised far beyond what is
normal, or even remotely sensible in this regard. massive amounts of
money and resources are being wasted in order to provide personal and
"convenient" gratification to anglers, which would be far better spent
on improving the environment, and not in activel destroying it.

7. Also as a result of conditioning, many of these fish will only
feed at certain times, corresponding to the feeding times in the
hatcheries and feeding stews in which they were reared. Such aberrant
behaviour is often referred to as "the evening rise". In some places
where the fish have time to become acclimatised, ( although they never
entirely lose their conditioning), this may even be the case, but it
is mainly the result of conditioning to feed at a certain time.

There are a number of other reasons as well, but those are the main
ones.

TL
MC

Good post Mike. There is definitely counter points to be,
respectfully, made.

1) In Colorado, there is an exceptional fishery in the mountain and
plain lakes that, up until a 100 years ago were completely devoid of
fish. A lot of private hatcheries stocked the water including the
famous boulder rod and gun club. This activity *created* teh fishery.

2) There is also the consideration that stocked trout in places like
St. Vrain State Park, old gravel quarries, absorb a tremendous amount
of recreational pressure.

3) The license revenue generated from stocked trout draws interest and
moneys for research.

4) 100% of the Brown, Rainbow and Brook trout fishery is the
descendant result of stocking programs.

5) In many cases the very nicest fish you catch, one full of color,
fight and firm healthy trout is simply the multiple year hold over.

Personally, I get the Jones to bang a few stockers and eat them at
least once or twice a season. Some of the new diets makes the flesh
orange and the fish relatively tasty, especially brined and smoked.

I'm not too proud to crack a cool one and take a few of the stocked
trout out of he

http://parks.state.co.us/Parks/StVrain/

In fact, they did something pretty cool out there last year. What used
to be the back ponds that you could drive all around have been closed
off as hiking access only. If you walk a mile or two you can leave
just about all the rest of the fishermen.
Best regards,

Tim

Dang, I sure wish I would have proof-read that.

Fishing for stocked fish.
 

On 17 Sep, 03:09, Halfordian Golfer wrote:
On Sep 16, 10:16 am, Mike wrote:



Good post Mike. There is definitely counter points to be,
respectfully, made.

1) In Colorado, there is an exceptional fishery in the mountain and
plain lakes that, up until a 100 years ago were completely devoid of
fish. A lot of private hatcheries stocked the water including the
famous boulder rod and gun club. This activity *created* teh fishery.

2) There is also the consideration that stocked trout in places like
St. Vrain State Park, old gravel quarries, absorb a tremendous amount
of recreational pressure.

3) The license revenue generated from stocked trout draws interest and
moneys for research.

4) 100% of the Brown, Rainbow and Brook trout fishery is the
descendant result of stocking programs.

5) In many cases the very nicest fish you catch, one full of color,
fight and firm healthy trout is simply the multiple year hold over.

Personally, I get the Jones to bang a few stockers and eat them at
least once or twice a season. Some of the new diets makes the flesh
orange and the fish relatively tasty, especially brined and smoked.

I'm not too proud to crack a cool one and take a few of the stocked
trout out of he

http://parks.state.co.us/Parks/StVrain/

In fact, they did something pretty cool out there last year. What used
to be the back ponds that you could drive all around have been closed
off as hiking access only. If you walk a mile or two you can leave
just about all the rest of the fishermen.
Best regards,

Tim

If stocking is done with fry, or even fingerlings, in a natural
manner, and these fish are allowed to grow naturally, it can be, and
often is, extremely beneficial. Grown on stock fish rarely are, they
are a massive drain on resources. If that same money and effort was
invested in improving the environment, there would be far fewer
problems.

The argument that stocked fish relieve pressure on wild fish is an
attractive and plausible one, but when one considers the three pounds
minimum of wild fish protein required to produce one pound of stock
fish, it crumbles completely. This ratio n is actually often a great
deal higher. Robbing Peter to pay Paul, never works.

I have not eaten a stocked fish for nearly forty years now, and I
never will. I don´t eat any of the farmed stuff on offer either. I
know how it is produced, and have seen quite a few analyses of the
stuff.

Whatever, I am quite obviously wasting my time here.

TL
MC

Fishing for stocked fish.
 

stuff.

Whatever, I am quite obviously wasting my time here.

TL
MC

That was not a reflection on your post Tim, just a general
observation.

TL
MC

Fishing for stocked fish.
 

Mike wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
Yeah, that's what I thought. Only those who already agree with
His Loony Mikeness have any point discussing the matter at all.
LOL !! Please, do carry on.

Just what I thought as well, another one of your ploys so that you
could post more silly propaganda. The truth is, you are an ignorant
****bag, who does not want to discuss anything at all. You waste people
´s time, attack them personally. and simply ignore the facts.

If you can refute anything I have written, with lists or otherwise,
then do so. otherwise **** off and stop playing silly games. There are
people who may find this interesting and informative,

If you had bothered to read the three links you quickly
Googled up as a response to your response you would know
that you yourself have already refuted much of your loony
nonsense about the farm-raised rainbow trout at my grocery
store being poison and toxic.

I find that interesting and informative but I rather doubt
you will. LOL !!

--
Ken Fortenberry

Fishing for stocked fish.
 

On Sun, 16 Sep 2007 17:06:37 -0700, Mike
wrote:

On 17 Sep, 01:38, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:
Mike wrote:
And this , which is the newest edition publicly available, as a direct
PDF download;

http://www.cefas.co.uk/publications/...s/ffn3_web.pdf

Let´s see what Kenny boy makes of "conflating" all that. If he bothers
to read it at all.

Perhaps you'd like to indicate which of those 102 pages is
supposed to convince me that the farm-raised rainbow trout
sitting on ice in the seafood section of my local grocery
store is full of poisons and toxins. Every list I can find
of safe to eat commercial fish in the US lists farm-raised
rainbow trout as among the safest.

--
Ken Fortenberry

Well now Kenny boy, at the risk of falling foul of another of your
stupid tactics, what we are discussing here is primarily European
stocked fish, because that is what I know about.

BWAHAHAHAHAHA! Apparently, you've morphed into a nappy-headed cause
Nazi homo ho, and like most cause Nazis, you know damned little about
your "cause"...

That is what the subject matter is, and your views on American
stocked or farmed fish, though doubtless interesting, if uninformed,
are not entirely relevant at the moment. No reason why one should
not include them specifically if people wish to.

Having said that, farmed salmonids from anywhere in the world all
suffer from the same problems, because they are all reared in the
same manner using the same feed, and with all the same attendant
problems. Even cursory research will prove that, even to your
satisfaction. There is no other way to do it.

I have no idea what lists you might be referring to, but whatever they
might be, they are in error, because fish which are fed on fishmeal,
and there is no alternative to fishmeal for salmonid farming,
regardless of whether it is for marine or freshwater farming,

Er, wrong, wrong, wrong, at least according to actual textbooks,
bo-o-o-o-r-r-r-ring papers and the like, as well as feed producers and
fish farmers...you know, people that actually know something about that
of which they are writing. For example, a look at Stickley (Encycl. of
Aqua., Wiley, 2000, pp 717, 773) or "Fishmeal and Fish oil Facts and
Figures", GAFTA, shows that fish meal is, at most, 62% of the feed
(fingerlings), with 50% being more the average. 30% is more the US
average for trout, with 45% (salmon) and 35% (trout) being the average
in Europe. In fact, wheat and/or soy products often make up more of
the feed than fish meal. And fresh or salt water does play a role in
protein requirements, and as such and currently, freshwater feed is even
lower in fish meal content. Moreover, there are several alternatives to
both fish meal and fish oil in current use and some of the folks cited
at sites you yourself have posted indicate that, well, lessee: "the use
of fishmeal...in aquaculture...would actually decrease between 2005 and
2010" (As a percent of total ingredients). Fishmeal percentage as an
ingredient is down from 2000, as is overall percentage usage by the
salmonid sector.

There are several ways to "farm" fish, (and BTW, fish farming is
aquaculture, but not all aquaculture is fish farming), they are not
"reared in the same manner," and they do not have "all the same
attendant problems."

And the EU uses more fishmeal for land livestock than for aquaculture
(2/3 to 1/3).

Finally, near as can be figured, what started your latest spew of
incorrect pompous bull**** was a guy in England posting a simple trip
report about a particular stocked lake in England (not Europe), to which
you have not returned since running away many years ago nor to which you
have any interest in returning, at least according to you. You then
posted a pantload in response to a question about fishing in England and
were very politely told you didn't know what the **** you were talking
about, again by someone who lives in England. IAC, the OP's lake isn't
a farmop and the management of the lake in question apparently doesn't
feed the stocked fish, pointing out on the website (but not the specific
page) you yourself posted that the naturally-occurring insect population
accounts for the rapid growth, and claims, basically, they are the
best-tasting fish in the UK or something.

accumulate more toxins than any other fish, most especially dioxins
and PCB´s . This is a direct result of feeding fishmeal,

No, it isn't.

and is also
independent and regardless of the drugs and chemicals which are used
in all intensive farming operations.

So, if I were you, I would look for some other information than that
on the lists you have found. Or, you can just believe what it says on
your lists, and continue poisoning yourself. It is no skin off my
nose.

If you wish to believe your lists, then there is little point in you
discussing the matter at all, now is there?

MC

Now go back to ****ing up TVs and cattle fencing, hanging out in train
stations, and writing the FBI...

R

Fishing for stocked fish.
 

On 17 Sep, 05:04, wrote:

Seems you did some research. Makes no difference, the wild protein to
fishmeal conversion ratio is the same, regardless of the percentage of
the fishmeal in the feed, and the various feed percentages are taken
into account when calculating THE AMOUNT OF FISHMEAL required to
achieve a certain poundage of farmed fish, this is regardless of the
rest of the feed involved.

If you had been somewhat more thorough, you would have discovered
that, and also that one can not grow on farmed salmonids without the
fish meal. The lipids in meal or oil additives are essential.

So **** you as well sonny boy.

MC