On Mar 12, 4:04 pm, Dave LaCourse wrote:
On Wed, 12 Mar 2008 11:53:16 -0700 (PDT), Halfordian Golfer

wrote:
One thing you really must accept JT is that C&R is incredibly rare.
I'd suggest less than .5% of all waters are mandated C&R. So, the
restrictive regulations and limited harvest must work. Correct?

It is not the state mandating or using C&R, but the individual
fishermen. WE know C&R is a valuable tool in preserving a water.
Kill the fish and you end up with stockers. It is not difficult to
understand that, yet you seem to have this great hang-up about it.
Mortality is *final*. There is nothing left after you kill a
beautiful fish. No one else can catch it and marvel at its beauty and
strength.

You should not fish in a river that has wild fish, Tim. You should
stick to put and take fisheries.

Dave

People en masse do a lot of stupid things. People en masse put a shrub
in the whitehouse. People en masse have lobbies and special
interests.

I'll listen to the fisheries managers thank you very much. As Forrest
said, C&R on the Rapid is a Social invention, not a biological one. If
you want to argue that, than you take the time to write him.

Have a great trip. I thought you'd already left?


Your pal,

Halfordian Golfer