fishing fly in eye

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

Ken Fortenberry wrote in news:cPqxg.72668
:

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.



I think the Rangers understand the situation just fine, but making
exceptions to C&R for dying fish makes C&R regs unenforcible. The regs
need to be black and white.

For example, on our Ontario tribs, if the CO picks up your terminal tackle,
and your lead hangs lower than your lowest hook, you're going to be cited,
regardless of how honorable or dishonorable your intentions were.


--
Scott
Reverse name to reply

wrote:

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 agree with you concerning more crowded conditions but that "bounty"
isn't threatened. Trout populations as a whole are higher and healthier
today than they were 20 - 30 - 40........ years ago.

Willi

"Willi" wrote

Trout populations as a whole are higher and healthier
today than they were 20 - 30 - 40........ years ago.

wow, you could have busted my ass on a bet about that, at least as
applied to the north carolina mountain waters... got any numbers on the
smokies, f'rinstance?
thanks.

yfitons
wayno

Wayne Harrison wrote:
"Willi" wrote

Trout populations as a whole are higher and healthier
today than they were 20 - 30 - 40........ years ago.

wow, you could have busted my ass on a bet about that, at least as
applied to the north carolina mountain waters... got any numbers on the
smokies, f'rinstance?
thanks.

yfitons
wayno

Yeah, I'd like to see that statistic myself. Still the quality of the
experience is not based on the number of fish alone. By this line of
reasoning the best fishing would be had in a hatchery raceway. All that
said, the fishing was damned good in Colorado and Wyoming in the 1960's
and, thanks to intelligent stocking by the CDOW and, mostly, the
Boulder Fish and Game Club, the overwhelmingly sterile high mountain
lakes now have fish. Of course, if 'conservation' were *really* a goal,
we'd kill every non-indiginous trout on site, would we not?

Your pal,

TBone