"W. D. Grey" wrote in message
...
In article 36, Cliff
writes
We are helping entire species exist and flourish, so I see the price of
some of their species being caught and released as biologically very
cheap.

Furthermore, it is no more painful than being eaten alive by an Otter, or
swallowed whole by a bigger fish or bird and being dissolved alive in
their
digestive tract!




What pathetic unrelated evidential statements to present. What gives you
the right to decide what is biologically cheap anyway?


Anglers are conservationists, the money we pay for season tickets, rod
licences, day tickets etc pays for the maintainence of thousands of waters
up and down the country, as a direct result of this complete eco systems are
formed maintaining all forms of wildlife, without fee paying anglers most of
what you now see in the countryside would not or could not exist, so I think
it is biologically cheap seeing as we paid for it.


In the first case - catch and release fishing is for the fun and
"enjoyment" of the angler who could well find his fun elsewhere

Which does no harm whatsoever.



The second case i the survival of the other creatures who hunt fish for
food and some of those creatures may well by hunted themselves to feed a
higher order species.


Thats where we come in, you cant beat a fried brownie with all the
trimmings, yum yum