On track for a 2020 ban on sportsfishing?

JR wrote:

Conan The Librarian wrote:

JR wrote:

But isn't the whole rationale of C&K in this scenario built on the
idea of absolutes? And if it is not, doesn't it come back to some
personal sense of ethics/morality/whatever?

I don't think C&K *needs* a rationale.

But isn't that what this whole discussion is about? :-)

In any event, no, I don't think
any of the rationales, either for C&K or for C&R, are built upon the
idea of absolutes. Yes, it comes back to each person's personal sense
of ethics. I think I've said that. What I'm try to do here is only
explain my sense, not impose that sense on others.

Well if it is dependent on the indivudal's sense of ethics, then you
are making a large leap by trying to paint anyone who releases fish as
just fishing for a "passing lark", which is what you have done elsewhere
in this thread.

If I go fishing with the idea that I may or may not keep a fish
today, what is my intent? If I do release all of the fish I catch, is
it just a lark, while if I had kept one I would automatically become a
"serious" fisherman?

Rather than go through another extensive exercise in interspersed
replies (I don't have much stamina in that regard), I'll just say it
again: I am not against C&R. In this I differ from Tim. I am against
state-mandated C&R-only waters, first because they are almost always
unnecessary from a conservation point of view and also because they tend
to trivialize and impose an unbecoming Disneyfication on the sport and
on that part of nature we inhabit as fishermen.

Fair enough. I have to admit that some of the stories I've heard
about the C&R "petting zoos" make me wonder, but like in most things in
life, I have the choice to go elsewhere.

My own personal ethic is that I try to play fish on appropriate
tackle, use barbless hooks and touch the fish as little as possible. I
revive the fish when called for, and like Bill, I feel happy when I see
the fish swim away under its own power.

I haven't kept a fish in years, but it's not because I think I'm
"more ethical" than someone who does. I simply don't think it's a good
use of the resource unless I plan to cook the fish that same day. And
in some of the waters that I fish, it makes sense to put potential brood
stock back.

Bottom line for me is: I'll take the chance that the fish I release
survive, as the outcome of the alternative is certain. Yes, it's for
entertainment, but I'd have to agree with Wolfgang that everyone in this
group fishes for sport.


Chuck Vance (heck, it's even part of the group's name)

On 8/1/06 7:50 PM, in article , "JR"
wrote:

William Claspy wrote:

(I've snipped liberally for brevity's sake)

Occasionally I can go on a bit. :-)

When we meet eventually, you'll wonder if I'm the same guy. In person I
tend to be, er, on the quiet side. There have probably been clave attendees
who didn't even know I as AT the clave! But wind me up, ask me the right
(wrong?) question and look out! Wolfgang once asked me about how librarians
decide which books to remove from their collections. How long did that
conversation go on, Wolfgang? :-)

I meant to respond to this in detail but have exhausted myself in
replying to others. I fish in part because I've done it since early
childhood, in part to take an active part in the doings of the natural
world, in part for food, in part (I admit it) because it *is* fun. I
release many many more fish than I keep. (See my reply to jeff about
being a hypocrite.) Ah, the humanity..... g

I appreciate your replies to all of the posts. I think we agree on a whole
lot and I like the thought that you've obviously put into your ethos. And
your recognition of hypocrisy. :-) Part of my going on (and on) is because
I'm trying to distill, refine, hone these very arguments, and others,
because of similar discussions on the home front- daughter #1 has serious
ethical reservations about this past-time of ours. So think of yourselves
as a bunch of 12 year old girls.

:-)

Bill

"William Claspy" wrote in message
...
...wind me up, ask me the right
(wrong?) question and look out! Wolfgang once asked me about how
librarians
decide which books to remove from their collections. How long did that
conversation go on, Wolfgang? :-)

Um.....is it over?*

...Part of my going on (and on) is because
I'm trying to distill, refine, hone these very arguments, and others,
because of similar discussions on the home front- daughter #1 has serious
ethical reservations about this past-time of ours. So think of yourselves
as a bunch of 12 year old girls.

Just the image I've had for the past several years!

Wolfgang
*why wasn't i informed?

On 8/1/06 7:14 PM, in article 5fRzg.1525$W01.1199@dukeread08, "jeff"
wrote:

JR wrote:


I argue against mandatory C&R waters (with little more success that I've
had here g), but I reckon I'll actually stop fishing the more
beautiful ones that currently exist around the time I stop coveting my
neighbor's wife.....



i never really understood the big deal about coveting ...it's that
screwing part that really causes the problems. g

No, no, no! You see, there is the whole question of *intent* involved with
the coveting!

:-)

Bill

William Claspy wrote:

So think of yourselves
as a bunch of 12 year old girls.

If that were the case, then the flames and petty ****ing contests would
only occur once a month.

William Claspy typed:
On 8/1/06 7:50 PM, in article , "JR"
wrote:

William Claspy wrote:

(I've snipped liberally for brevity's sake)

Occasionally I can go on a bit. :-)

When we meet eventually, you'll wonder if I'm the same guy. In
person I tend to be, er, on the quiet side.

Well, yeah, when you're not ****ing people off by shouting things like "fish
on!"

There have probably been
clave attendees who didn't even know I as AT the clave! But wind me
up, ask me the right (wrong?) question and look out! Wolfgang once
asked me about how librarians decide which books to remove from their
collections. How long did that conversation go on, Wolfgang? :-)

I meant to respond to this in detail but have exhausted myself in
replying to others. I fish in part because I've done it since early
childhood, in part to take an active part in the doings of the
natural world, in part for food, in part (I admit it) because it
*is* fun. I release many many more fish than I keep. (See my reply
to jeff about being a hypocrite.) Ah, the humanity..... g

I appreciate your replies to all of the posts. I think we agree on a
whole lot and I like the thought that you've obviously put into your
ethos. And your recognition of hypocrisy. :-) Part of my going on
(and on) is because I'm trying to distill, refine, hone these very
arguments, and others, because of similar discussions on the home
front- daughter #1 has serious ethical reservations about this
past-time of ours. So think of yourselves as a bunch of 12 year old
girls.

BTW, I look *damn* good in a skirt.
--
TL,
Tim
who looks damn good in all attire.
-------------------------
http://css.sbcma.com/timj

precisely! the "Norway paper" was penned by a small committee and ignored by
Sport Fishery Managers in that country. When Tim 1st brought that paper
forward here on ROFF 6 or so years ago we had a member from Norway who laid
that all out.

--
Some of my angling snaps:

http://gallery.fishbc.com/gallery/vi...bumName=RalphH
"Charlie Choc" wrote in message
...
On 30 Jul 2006 07:28:48 -0700, wrote:


Charlie Choc wrote:
On 29 Jul 2006 08:34:46 -0700, wrote:

I
point to the Norwegian document, as tired as it is, often, because, I
believe it is the most defensable stance and a good, fair, one most
folks would probably agree with.

Just out of curiosity, what changes in fishing can you point to that are
a
direct result of the Norwegian document?
--
Charlie...
http://www.chocphoto.com

None and that's the point. Traditional fishing has been going on
feeding the animals and people of this unbelievable planet for the 10's
of thousands of years. It has been redfined in a few places in the past
40.The Norwegians clearly understand fishing and fisheries management.

Norway does not prohibit catch and release fishing.
--
Charlie...
http://www.chocphoto.com

--
Some of my angling snaps:

http://gallery.fishbc.com/gallery/vi...bumName=RalphH
"jeff" wrote in message
news:HhQzg.1513$W01.146@dukeread08...
JR wrote:

Hunting does not trivialize the prey. Mandatory C&R reduces them to
playthings.

hmmm...ever seen the harp (?) seal hunts where the hunters bludgeon those
kewpie-doll eyed, angel-innocent, unsuspecting white-skin seals into a
blood red death?


has been banned for many years.

William Claspy wrote to jr:

When we meet eventually, you'll wonder if I'm the same guy. In person I
tend to be, er, on the quiet side. There have probably been clave attendees
who didn't even know I as AT the clave! But wind me up, ask me the right
(wrong?) question and look out! Wolfgang once asked me about how librarians
decide which books to remove from their collections. How long did that
conversation go on, Wolfgang? :-)


I appreciate your replies to all of the posts. I think we agree on a whole
lot and I like the thought that you've obviously put into your ethos. And
your recognition of hypocrisy. :-) Part of my going on (and on) is because
I'm trying to distill, refine, hone these very arguments, and others,
because of similar discussions on the home front- daughter #1 has serious
ethical reservations about this past-time of ours. So think of yourselves
as a bunch of 12 year old girls.

:-)

Bill


hell...was that you on big snowbird last year? damn... g

while i have observed jr's toying with fish, i have also determined from
observation and personal interaction that he is certainly among the
higher order of the thoughtful, considerate, and rational humans i have
been privileged to meet (even though he didn't recite poetry...though i
feel certain he's a poet). anyone who transports fine beer from
washington state (or oregon?...yeah, yeah, i know...but it was good beer
from one of those left coast breweries) to cameron, montana solely at
the request of the ne'er-do-wells hereabout is simply too ... well, he's
easily the too-est...damn, the proper word eludes my inadequate
vocabulary, but i'm sure the all the "less-than-too" of y'all know what
i'm shooting for.

jeff (looking forward to some more sharing of the ethos...and beer)

William Claspy wrote:

On 8/1/06 7:14 PM, in article 5fRzg.1525$W01.1199@dukeread08, "jeff"
wrote:


JR wrote:



I argue against mandatory C&R waters (with little more success that I've
had here g), but I reckon I'll actually stop fishing the more
beautiful ones that currently exist around the time I stop coveting my
neighbor's wife.....



i never really understood the big deal about coveting ...it's that
screwing part that really causes the problems. g


No, no, no! You see, there is the whole question of *intent* involved with
the coveting!

:-)

Bill


i was going to add a comment about "intent" and "outcome", but in
context it seemed too prurient for this crowd. g

jeff