![]() |
|
Quuick question
Hi All,
If the regulations wherever you lived were changed such that you had to kill fish within a slot, but quit fishing when you had a limit, how would this affect your fishing? Would you continue to fish and would you support a regulation like this? Do you think the quality of fishing, interms of quality fish caught as well as quality of the experience (people astream) would go up or down? Thanks, TBone It is impossible to catch and release a wild trout. |
Quuick question
wrote in message ups.com... Hi All, If the regulations wherever you lived were changed such that you had to kill fish within a slot, but quit fishing when you had a limit, how would this affect your fishing? Really not worth considerin', unless folks like yourself are able to infiltrate North Carolina's Wildlife Commission. Would you continue to fish and would you support a regulation like this? I follow whatever the regulations of my state are--or the state I happen to be fishin' in at the moment--but I certainly wouldn't support such a hair-brained scheme. Do you think the quality of fishing, interms of quality fish caught as well as quality of the experience (people astream) would go up or down? It's a ridiculous question, but for the sake of argument, DOWN! Op Thanks, TBone It is impossible to catch and release a wild trout. |
Quuick question
Mr. Opus McDopus wrote: wrote in message ups.com... Hi All, If the regulations wherever you lived were changed such that you had to kill fish within a slot, but quit fishing when you had a limit, how would this affect your fishing? Really not worth considerin', unless folks like yourself are able to infiltrate North Carolina's Wildlife Commission. Would you continue to fish and would you support a regulation like this? I follow whatever the regulations of my state are--or the state I happen to be fishin' in at the moment--but I certainly wouldn't support such a hair-brained scheme. Do you think the quality of fishing, interms of quality fish caught as well as quality of the experience (people astream) would go up or down? It's a ridiculous question, but for the sake of argument, DOWN! So you would agree with these regulations (as opposed to completely unlimited catch and release)? Thanks, Halfordian Golfer |
Quuick question
wrote in message oups.com... Mr. Opus McDopus wrote: wrote in message ups.com... Hi All, If the regulations wherever you lived were changed such that you had to kill fish within a slot, but quit fishing when you had a limit, how would this affect your fishing? Really not worth considerin', unless folks like yourself are able to infiltrate North Carolina's Wildlife Commission. Would you continue to fish and would you support a regulation like this? I follow whatever the regulations of my state are--or the state I happen to be fishin' in at the moment--but I certainly wouldn't support such a hair-brained scheme. Do you think the quality of fishing, interms of quality fish caught as well as quality of the experience (people astream) would go up or down? It's a ridiculous question, but for the sake of argument, DOWN! So you would agree with these regulations (as opposed to completely unlimited catch and release)? What part of "I certainly wouldn't support such a hair-brained scheme," don't you understand? Tim, you remind me of a Christian religious zealot (the only ones I'm familiar with) who can't be satisfied livin' his own life. No, he has to try to convert everyone he meets, to his brand of religious zealotry. Not content to live his sad life. He must try to drag everyone he meets down to the depths of despair into with he has descended. Op |
Quuick question
Mr. Opus McDopus wrote: wrote in message oups.com... Mr. Opus McDopus wrote: wrote in message ups.com... Hi All, If the regulations wherever you lived were changed such that you had to kill fish within a slot, but quit fishing when you had a limit, how would this affect your fishing? Really not worth considerin', unless folks like yourself are able to infiltrate North Carolina's Wildlife Commission. Would you continue to fish and would you support a regulation like this? I follow whatever the regulations of my state are--or the state I happen to be fishin' in at the moment--but I certainly wouldn't support such a hair-brained scheme. Do you think the quality of fishing, interms of quality fish caught as well as quality of the experience (people astream) would go up or down? It's a ridiculous question, but for the sake of argument, DOWN! So you would agree with these regulations (as opposed to completely unlimited catch and release)? What part of "I certainly wouldn't support such a hair-brained scheme," don't you understand? Tim, you remind me of a Christian religious zealot (the only ones I'm familiar with) who can't be satisfied livin' his own life. No, he has to try to convert everyone he meets, to his brand of religious zealotry. Not content to live his sad life. He must try to drag everyone he meets down to the depths of despair into with he has descended. Op Op, Serious question: Specifically, why is a regulation that, at the minimum: 1) shows respect for a wild animal 2) improves the quality of fishng and the health of the fishery 3) creates a defensible position for the future of angling A "hair-brained" scheme? Also, I am NOT the one ramming this down anyones's throats. In the 2006 Colorado fishing pamphlet there are more and more rivers under ridiculous regulations and 'Catch and Release Recommended" signs erected by trout unlimited mavens along the stream. This is an absolute attack on me as an angler. I do NOT support the current 'trend' in flyfishing regulations where the 'conservation leaders' have the BALLS to espouse angling 'competitions' on the public, moving waters of Colorado and then lie that it is 'for conservation'. No way should we use a wild animal like this and no way will I buy the spooge these people are selling. But, please, do NOT say that I am forcing anything down anyone's throats, just the opposite, I am protecting my right to fish to catch, kill and eat fish. Thanks, TBone |
Quuick question
wrote in message oups.com... Serious question: Specifically, why is a regulation that, at the minimum: 1) shows respect for a wild animal No, I doubt very seriously that regs are in place to show respect for fish. 2) improves the quality of fishng and the health of the fishery Yes, I would hope so. 3) creates a defensible position for the future of angling Yes, again. A "hair-brained" scheme? Yes! Also, I am NOT the one ramming this down anyones's throats. Yes you are. You yourself call trout fishing a sport. If you believe that from it's inception that fly or any other form of fishing has been solely about sustenance, you would be wrong. "Sport" of all kind has been with us since man recognised his passion for competition, regardless of who or what he competed against. In the 2006 Colorado fishing pamphlet there are more and more rivers under ridiculous regulations and 'Catch and Release Recommended" signs erected by trout unlimited mavens along the stream. This is an absolute attack on me as an angler. How? "Catch and Release Recommended" is not a pohibition on catch and kill! I do NOT support the current 'trend' in flyfishing regulations where the 'conservation leaders' have the BALLS to espouse angling 'competitions' on the public, moving waters of Colorado and then lie that it is 'for conservation'. Who said that you had to? I've had all sorts of things "recommended" to me that I was not inclined to follow. No way should we use a wild animal like this and no way will I buy the spooge these people are selling. Are you a donating PETA member? If you are not donating to their cause, you surely should be. But, please, do NOT say that I am forcing anything down anyone's throats, just the opposite, I am protecting my right to fish to catch, kill and eat fish. Come to NC. There are many *wild* trout stream in our national forests that are catch and kill friendly. Op Thanks, TBone |
Quuick question
Mr. Opus McDopus wrote: wrote in message oups.com... Serious question: Specifically, why is a regulation that, at the minimum: 1) shows respect for a wild animal No, I doubt very seriously that regs are in place to show respect for fish. 2) improves the quality of fishng and the health of the fishery Yes, I would hope so. 3) creates a defensible position for the future of angling Yes, again. A "hair-brained" scheme? Yes! Also, I am NOT the one ramming this down anyones's throats. Yes you are. You yourself call trout fishing a sport. If you believe that from it's inception that fly or any other form of fishing has been solely about sustenance, you would be wrong. "Sport" of all kind has been with us since man recognised his passion for competition, regardless of who or what he competed against. In the 2006 Colorado fishing pamphlet there are more and more rivers under ridiculous regulations and 'Catch and Release Recommended" signs erected by trout unlimited mavens along the stream. This is an absolute attack on me as an angler. How? "Catch and Release Recommended" is not a pohibition on catch and kill! I do NOT support the current 'trend' in flyfishing regulations where the 'conservation leaders' have the BALLS to espouse angling 'competitions' on the public, moving waters of Colorado and then lie that it is 'for conservation'. Who said that you had to? I've had all sorts of things "recommended" to me that I was not inclined to follow. No way should we use a wild animal like this and no way will I buy the spooge these people are selling. Are you a donating PETA member? If you are not donating to their cause, you surely should be. But, please, do NOT say that I am forcing anything down anyone's throats, just the opposite, I am protecting my right to fish to catch, kill and eat fish. Come to NC. There are many *wild* trout stream in our national forests that are catch and kill friendly. Op Thanks, TBone You seriously underestimate me Op. Trust me on one thing, I use my terms carefully. That I fully understand the difference between a sport and a pastime should be clear. As Thomas McIntyre suggests, a pastime is playing frisbee on the beach or 3 putting the 9th, while true sport as Ortega y Gasset, the Spanish philospher says, involves homage, dedication and the death of a wild animal. That it is serious business, and I quote: "One does not hunt in order to kill; on the contrary, one kills in order to have hunted...If one were to present the sportsman with the death of the animal as a gift he would refuse it. What he is after is having to win it, to conquer the surly brute through his own effort and skill with all the extras that this carries with it: the immersion in the countryside, the healthfulness of the exercise, the distraction from his job. Jose Ortega y Gasset, Meditations on Hunting. Your pal, TBone Guilt repolaced the creel |
Quuick question
I had hoped this group would be a departure from the idiot conversations
and stupid Ideas sometimes expressed at Roff but I see its just another rubber room for the lunitic fringe. I will not bother with it again. good day. wrote in message oups.com... Mr. Opus McDopus wrote: wrote in message oups.com... Serious question: Specifically, why is a regulation that, at the minimum: 1) shows respect for a wild animal No, I doubt very seriously that regs are in place to show respect for fish. 2) improves the quality of fishng and the health of the fishery Yes, I would hope so. 3) creates a defensible position for the future of angling Yes, again. A "hair-brained" scheme? Yes! Also, I am NOT the one ramming this down anyones's throats. Yes you are. You yourself call trout fishing a sport. If you believe that from it's inception that fly or any other form of fishing has been solely about sustenance, you would be wrong. "Sport" of all kind has been with us since man recognised his passion for competition, regardless of who or what he competed against. In the 2006 Colorado fishing pamphlet there are more and more rivers under ridiculous regulations and 'Catch and Release Recommended" signs erected by trout unlimited mavens along the stream. This is an absolute attack on me as an angler. How? "Catch and Release Recommended" is not a pohibition on catch and kill! I do NOT support the current 'trend' in flyfishing regulations where the 'conservation leaders' have the BALLS to espouse angling 'competitions' on the public, moving waters of Colorado and then lie that it is 'for conservation'. Who said that you had to? I've had all sorts of things "recommended" to me that I was not inclined to follow. No way should we use a wild animal like this and no way will I buy the spooge these people are selling. Are you a donating PETA member? If you are not donating to their cause, you surely should be. But, please, do NOT say that I am forcing anything down anyone's throats, just the opposite, I am protecting my right to fish to catch, kill and eat fish. Come to NC. There are many *wild* trout stream in our national forests that are catch and kill friendly. Op Thanks, TBone You seriously underestimate me Op. Trust me on one thing, I use my terms carefully. That I fully understand the difference between a sport and a pastime should be clear. As Thomas McIntyre suggests, a pastime is playing frisbee on the beach or 3 putting the 9th, while true sport as Ortega y Gasset, the Spanish philospher says, involves homage, dedication and the death of a wild animal. That it is serious business, and I quote: "One does not hunt in order to kill; on the contrary, one kills in order to have hunted...If one were to present the sportsman with the death of the animal as a gift he would refuse it. What he is after is having to win it, to conquer the surly brute through his own effort and skill with all the extras that this carries with it: the immersion in the countryside, the healthfulness of the exercise, the distraction from his job. Jose Ortega y Gasset, Meditations on Hunting. Your pal, TBone Guilt repolaced the creel |
Quuick question
cheeses of nazareth typed:
I had hoped this group would be a departure from the idiot conversations and stupid Ideas sometimes expressed at Roff but I see its just another rubber room for the lunitic fringe. I will not bother with it again. good day. You will be missed, and don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out. -- TL, Tim ------------------------- http://css.sbcma.com/timj |
Quuick question
cheesesofnazareth wrote: I had hoped this group would be a departure from the idiot conversations and stupid Ideas sometimes expressed at Roff but I see its just another rubber room for the lunitic fringe. I will not bother with it again. good day. wrote in message oups.com... Mr. Opus McDopus wrote: wrote in message oups.com... Serious question: Specifically, why is a regulation that, at the minimum: 1) shows respect for a wild animal No, I doubt very seriously that regs are in place to show respect for fish. 2) improves the quality of fishng and the health of the fishery Yes, I would hope so. 3) creates a defensible position for the future of angling Yes, again. A "hair-brained" scheme? Yes! Also, I am NOT the one ramming this down anyones's throats. Yes you are. You yourself call trout fishing a sport. If you believe that from it's inception that fly or any other form of fishing has been solely about sustenance, you would be wrong. "Sport" of all kind has been with us since man recognised his passion for competition, regardless of who or what he competed against. In the 2006 Colorado fishing pamphlet there are more and more rivers under ridiculous regulations and 'Catch and Release Recommended" signs erected by trout unlimited mavens along the stream. This is an absolute attack on me as an angler. How? "Catch and Release Recommended" is not a pohibition on catch and kill! I do NOT support the current 'trend' in flyfishing regulations where the 'conservation leaders' have the BALLS to espouse angling 'competitions' on the public, moving waters of Colorado and then lie that it is 'for conservation'. Who said that you had to? I've had all sorts of things "recommended" to me that I was not inclined to follow. No way should we use a wild animal like this and no way will I buy the spooge these people are selling. Are you a donating PETA member? If you are not donating to their cause, you surely should be. But, please, do NOT say that I am forcing anything down anyone's throats, just the opposite, I am protecting my right to fish to catch, kill and eat fish. Come to NC. There are many *wild* trout stream in our national forests that are catch and kill friendly. Op Thanks, TBone You seriously underestimate me Op. Trust me on one thing, I use my terms carefully. That I fully understand the difference between a sport and a pastime should be clear. As Thomas McIntyre suggests, a pastime is playing frisbee on the beach or 3 putting the 9th, while true sport as Ortega y Gasset, the Spanish philospher says, involves homage, dedication and the death of a wild animal. That it is serious business, and I quote: "One does not hunt in order to kill; on the contrary, one kills in order to have hunted...If one were to present the sportsman with the death of the animal as a gift he would refuse it. What he is after is having to win it, to conquer the surly brute through his own effort and skill with all the extras that this carries with it: the immersion in the countryside, the healthfulness of the exercise, the distraction from his job. Jose Ortega y Gasset, Meditations on Hunting. Your pal, TBone Guilt repolaced the creel Hi Cheeses, This group will only be as good as the contributors. There are several great articles to reply to here already, or you could post some original content! OBAF: When fishing tiny midges in or under the film, try a very, very small piece of foam strike-on indicator about 18" up from the fly. This will help you keep an eye on where your fly is, will buoy it and will serve to help detect the sip. Your pal, Halfordian Golfer Guilt replaced the creel |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:54 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2006 FishingBanter