"rw" wrote in message
m...
Tim has a point of view about C&R. It's a pretty extreme point of view,
and not one I share wholeheartedly by any means, but it has a logical
consistency,

Tim has been saying the same thing here for 10+ years so he has certainly
been consistent. To describe that consistency as logical is very generous.
Tim has been at his best in his critique (dare I say satire?) of the modern
catch and release ethos, pointed, challenging stuff anyone should think
about. But when he goes beyond just telling us what's wrong with impaling
dozens of fish with hooks every day, there are some problems.

Examples:

slot limits
minimum size limits
PETA and similar group accepting harvest only angling
just the plain ordinary messy world

.... just what do fisheries managers do with the limited tools available and
what the angling public will accept?

Here's a recent example. Tim etc have argued for years that if the number of
fish in a fishery cannot accept some harvest it should be closed and catch
and release should not be used as a conservation method.

We've had that conundrum here in British Columbia with some steelhead
streams. Used to be that about 200 fish per year was considered adequate to
allow a c&r fishery but many have dropped to 50 to 100 for several years.
They were closed management arguing we no fish could be spared to c&r
mortality. Trouble is this didn't stop the poachers and poaching increased!
Unable to fish at all some people fished illegally and killed what they
caught - no other honest anglers were around to complain. Many more fish
died than would have to c&r mortality. So now they are reopening streams
just to have a presence of honest anglers that will discourage poaching

cheers.

--

Some of my angling snaps:

http://gallery.fishbc.com/gallery/vi...bumName=RalphH