fishing fly in eye

Opie wrote:

Most poachers do.
Op --yep, them fishin' regs only apply to those ignorant enough to follow
them--

Does this mean you think it's important to return a dying fish to the
water?

The Montana bag limit is (usually) 5 fish per day.
I kill about 5 per year. They're mostly fish that didn't look
like they were going to make it. Returning those fish to the
water is, in my book, a crime, even if the current water happens
to be catch and release.

If that makes me a poacher, so be it.

wrote:

Does this mean you think it's important to return a dying fish to the
water?

The Montana bag limit is (usually) 5 fish per day.
I kill about 5 per year. They're mostly fish that didn't look
like they were going to make it. Returning those fish to the
water is, in my book, a crime, even if the current water happens
to be catch and release.

If that makes me a poacher, so be it.

It certainly does make you a poacher and it's sheer
nonsense to consider returning a dead fish to the water
a "crime". You're not the only link in the food chain
you know, that dead fish will be a fine meal even if
you don't take it home for yourself.

--
Ken Fortenberry

Ken Fortenberry wrote:
wrote:

Does this mean you think it's important to return a dying fish to the
water?

The Montana bag limit is (usually) 5 fish per day.
I kill about 5 per year. They're mostly fish that didn't look
like they were going to make it. Returning those fish to the
water is, in my book, a crime, even if the current water happens
to be catch and release.

If that makes me a poacher, so be it.

It certainly does make you a poacher and it's sheer
nonsense to consider returning a dead fish to the water
a "crime". You're not the only link in the food chain
you know, that dead fish will be a fine meal even if
you don't take it home for yourself.

Honest question: Isn't this a vector for whirling disease?

Your pal,

TBone
Guilt replaced the creel.

wrote:
Ken Fortenberry wrote:
wrote:
Does this mean you think it's important to return a dying fish to the
water?

The Montana bag limit is (usually) 5 fish per day.
I kill about 5 per year. They're mostly fish that didn't look
like they were going to make it. Returning those fish to the
water is, in my book, a crime, even if the current water happens
to be catch and release.

If that makes me a poacher, so be it.
It certainly does make you a poacher and it's sheer
nonsense to consider returning a dead fish to the water
a "crime". You're not the only link in the food chain
you know, that dead fish will be a fine meal even if
you don't take it home for yourself.

Honest question: Isn't this a vector for whirling disease?

Only if you put the dead fish in a different stream. If you
return it where you caught it, then no it isn't.

--
Ken Fortenberry

wrote:


Honest question: Isn't this a vector for whirling disease?

Your pal,

TBone
Guilt replaced the creel.


No, the hatcheries were the chief vector.

Willi

Willi wrote:
wrote:


Honest question: Isn't this a vector for whirling disease?

Your pal,

TBone
Guilt replaced the creel.


No, the hatcheries were the chief vector.

Willi

Hi Willi,

Understood, but that was not my question. Fact is, WD, affecting
Rainbow trout, which are descendent from stockings of rainbow
trout...kind of a zero sum and, somehow, perfect in the 'naturalness'
of it, when you think about it. The Rainbow trout is the biggest threat
to the indiginous species of Colorado (lack of genetic diversity
through hybridization). It's amazing that nature was able to suss out
this invader so quickly.

Thanks man,

TBone
Guilt replaced the creel.

wrote in message
ps.com...

Willi wrote:
wrote:


Honest question: Isn't this a vector for whirling disease?

Your pal,

TBone
Guilt replaced the creel.


No, the hatcheries were the chief vector.

Willi

Hi Willi,

Understood, but that was not my question. Fact is, WD, affecting
Rainbow trout, which are descendent from stockings of rainbow
trout...kind of a zero sum and, somehow, perfect in the 'naturalness'
of it, when you think about it. The Rainbow trout is the biggest threat
to the indiginous species of Colorado (lack of genetic diversity
through hybridization).

It just keeps on getting funnier and funnier. So far, you are the only
person here who has demonstrated that he didn't understand your question.


It's amazing that nature was able to suss out
this invader so quickly.

Nature is fickle and unreliable. The careful observer never ceases to be
amazed at what ill-equipped sports manage to survive in direct contravention
of reasonable expectations.

Thanks man,

TBone
Guilt replaced the creel.

Dumbass.

Wolfgang

wrote:
Willi wrote:

wrote:


Honest question: Isn't this a vector for whirling disease?

Your pal,

TBone
Guilt replaced the creel.


No, the hatcheries were the chief vector.

Willi


Hi Willi,

Understood, but that was not my question. Fact is, WD, affecting
Rainbow trout, which are descendent from stockings of rainbow
trout...kind of a zero sum and, somehow, perfect in the 'naturalness'
of it, when you think about it. The Rainbow trout is the biggest threat
to the indiginous species of Colorado (lack of genetic diversity
through hybridization). It's amazing that nature was able to suss out
this invader so quickly.

Thanks man,

TBone
Guilt replaced the creel.



The problem with your assessment is that the Cutts are also susceptible
to WD.

Willi

It certainly does make you a poacher and it's sheer
nonsense to consider returning a dead fish to the water
a "crime".

This part of this thread was a mistake on my part.
I do that every now and then, due to chronic foot in mouth
disease. You've probably noticed that.

I was expressing a sentiment more than a way of actually doing
things. The last time I actually killed a fish I wasn' supposed to
was a large fish, that was at the edge of a slot limit anyway,
that was so badly gill hooked he was essentially dead before I
got him out of the net. There was blood all over hte place.
That was 4-5 years ago.

I was camping on the river that night. So I didn't throw a dead fish
back into the water. I put him tin foil
and baked him with garlic and oyster mushrooms.
And I felt thankful for nature's bounty, what little is left of it.

wrote:

... The last time I actually killed a fish I wasn' supposed to
was a large fish, that was at the edge of a slot limit anyway,
that was so badly gill hooked he was essentially dead before I
got him out of the net. There was blood all over hte place.
That was 4-5 years ago.

I was camping on the river that night. So I didn't throw a dead fish
back into the water. I put him tin foil
and baked him with garlic and oyster mushrooms.
And I felt thankful for nature's bounty, what little is left of it.

I killed a large cutt on Slough Creek when my wife and I were
camping up there near where Elk Tongue Creek comes in. A sow
grizzly and her cub had been spotted in the area and I thought
about the bears before I put that trout back in the water. I
wouldn't hold it against someone who ate the trout under those
circumstances but I kinda doubt the Yellowstone Rangers would
feel the same way about it.

--
Ken Fortenberry