Fishing for stocked fish.

On 17 Sep, 19:54, Halfordian Golfer wrote:

This might seem orthogonal to your subject but I suggest that it is
not. Fishing, first and foremost, should be about reaping the bounty
of the earth. To ignore or to eschew what we produce as legitimate
"agriculture" efforts makes no sense to me. We augment what we eat all
the time. Yes, we find wile asparagus in the fence ditch some springs
if we get there first but, if we want asparagus, we normally have to
get it from a farmer. No question the former is usually better, but it
is not always the case.

Your pal,

Halfordian Golfer
It is impossible to catch and release a wild fish.

That is basically an ethical standpoint, and although I agree with
most of it, it is a personal view.

Pressure on the environment is increasing all the time, and anything
which increases that pressure purely in order to produce inferior
creatures mainly as playthings, is not a good idea.

Many anglers consider themselves nature lovers and conservationists.
This is hardly reconcilable with angling for stocked fish. Not many
people go hunting for domesticated animals either.

Quite a few people who are made aware of how stocked trout are
produced cease to fish for them.

Also, the main reason for introducing catch and release on many
stocked trout fisheries, is that people don´t want the fish, they just
want to play with them. There are many instances of people catching
such fish on stocked non catch and release fisheries, and discarding
them afterwards.

One can not do much about these things, merely try to make people
aware of them. What the individual then decides to do, is a matter for
him to decide.

In those cases where catch and release is being used to relieve
pressure on wild fish stocks, it may be justifiable, although
personally I believe that catch and release is an angler management
tool, and has little to do with saving the fish. Catch and release of
stocked sterile fish, is a different matter, and is indeed purely an
angler management tool. More anglers pay more money to catch the same
fish.

The quality of the experience also deteriorates considerably. There
are invariably large concentrations of anglers at such places, and
their behaviour also changes. They often stand in one spot all day
long, guarding it fiercely.

Much of the happy anticipation of a normal river angler, who might
catch a nice fish on a river now and again, is gone. All the fish are
a certain size, much larger than one might catch under normal
conditions, and some are very large indeed. There are also many more
of them. Indeed, in many places there simply are no smaller fish at
all.

I don´t really think there are any solutions to these problems, they
have become normal, and people accept them as such.

The only way to solve many of the current problems, would be to reduce
the population considerably, and educate the rest, and this is not
likely to happen.

TL
MC

Articles like this one, ( extract from this link;
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/foodm...951686,00.html )


QUOTE
Atlantic Salmon

Who farms it? Mainly Norway, followed by Chile and the UK. Worldwide
production exceeds one million tonnes a year.

How? Juveniles are produced from eggs 'stripped' from female
broodstock by hand and artificially inseminated. They are reared in
freshwater tanks (as parr), then 'put to sea' (as smolts) in cages
housing 5,000 to 50,000 fish.

What's in it? The colourings astaxanthin (E161j) and canthaxanthin
(E161g) are used to dye flesh pink, though the permitted concentration
of canthaxanthin was reduced by the EU in 2002 due to links with
retina damage in humans. Fish are treated with antibiotics, some of
which may remain as residues, and routinely injected with vaccines.
The fungicide malachite green (a carcinogen) was banned last year, but
traces have since been found in four samples of Scottish salmon and
two from Norway. Because they are fed on fishmeal and oil extracted
from 'trash fish' living in polluted waters, farmed salmon may contain
cancer-causing PCBs, dioxins and mercury as well as pesticides. They
contain more fat than wild fish.

Are the fish harmed? Though intensive farms are cleaning up their act,
overstocking is still a problem. This contributes to the spread of
diseases such as ISA (infectious salmon anaemia). Fish are starved
before slaughter, then stunned with a blow to the head, followed by
gill cutting to bleed them to death. Some are anaesthetised in CO 2 ,
which irritates the gills, then bled.

What about the planet? Diseased salmon can easily escape from cages
and infect wild stock. Farmed fish that have lost their ability to
migrate can breed with wild salmon, diminishing their urge to spawn.
The chemicals cypermethrin, azamethiphos, teflubenzuron and emamectin
benzoate (used to treat sea lice), together with faecal waste, pollute
the oceans.

Rainbow Trout

Who farms it? France, Italy, Denmark and the UK. Britain produces
16,000 tonnes a year, or 35 million fish.

How? Young female brood stock are fed or injected with testosterone,
turning them into functional males; sperm from these 'males' contains
only X chromosomes, so resulting progeny are female (females mature
later than males, retaining better flesh quality). Equally common is
triploidy, where eggs are manipulated using heat or pressure to
produce sterile offspring; these grow more efficiently and cannot
breed with wild stock if they escape. Raised in freshwater tanks and
weaned on to fishmeal pellets, fry are transferred to earth ponds
('stews') or gravel raceways fed by rivers.

What's in it? The same E colourings are used for trout as for salmon.
Antibiotics and vaccines are routinely given for diseases such as PKD
(proliferative kidney disease) and ERM (enteric redmouth). Many trout
contain geosmin, a chemical produced by a soil bacterium which gives
the flesh a muddy taint, the result of poor water quality.

Are the fish harmed? Trout are kept at even higher stocking densities
than salmon, some equivalent to 27 portion-sized fish sharing a
bathtub of water. On muggy days, they gasp for breath. Fin damage and
injuries are common. Further stress is caused by grading, where trout
are pumped from the pond and filtered through grids to sort them by
size. Slaughter is by suffocation on ice (to increase shelf life),
though some favour CO +2baths or electrocution.

What about the planet? Trout may escape and breed with wild stock, or
spread disease.

UNQUOTE

Are increasing public awareness slowly. Other organisations are doing
their best to point out the problems and dangers, but as in many
things, money still rules.

There are very many people who simply refuse to believe what is
published on the matter anyway.

TL
MC

On Sep 18, 3:04 am, Mike wrote:
Articles like this one, ( extract from this link;http://observer.guardian.co.uk/foodm...951686,00.html)

QUOTE
Atlantic Salmon

Who farms it? Mainly Norway, followed by Chile and the UK. Worldwide
production exceeds one million tonnes a year.

How? Juveniles are produced from eggs 'stripped' from female
broodstock by hand and artificially inseminated. They are reared in
freshwater tanks (as parr), then 'put to sea' (as smolts) in cages
housing 5,000 to 50,000 fish.

What's in it? The colourings astaxanthin (E161j) and canthaxanthin
(E161g) are used to dye flesh pink, though the permitted concentration
of canthaxanthin was reduced by the EU in 2002 due to links with
retina damage in humans. Fish are treated with antibiotics, some of
which may remain as residues, and routinely injected with vaccines.
The fungicide malachite green (a carcinogen) was banned last year, but
traces have since been found in four samples of Scottish salmon and
two from Norway. Because they are fed on fishmeal and oil extracted
from 'trash fish' living in polluted waters, farmed salmon may contain
cancer-causing PCBs, dioxins and mercury as well as pesticides. They
contain more fat than wild fish.

Are the fish harmed? Though intensive farms are cleaning up their act,
overstocking is still a problem. This contributes to the spread of
diseases such as ISA (infectious salmon anaemia). Fish are starved
before slaughter, then stunned with a blow to the head, followed by
gill cutting to bleed them to death. Some are anaesthetised in CO 2 ,
which irritates the gills, then bled.

What about the planet? Diseased salmon can easily escape from cages
and infect wild stock. Farmed fish that have lost their ability to
migrate can breed with wild salmon, diminishing their urge to spawn.
The chemicals cypermethrin, azamethiphos, teflubenzuron and emamectin
benzoate (used to treat sea lice), together with faecal waste, pollute
the oceans.

Rainbow Trout

Who farms it? France, Italy, Denmark and the UK. Britain produces
16,000 tonnes a year, or 35 million fish.

How? Young female brood stock are fed or injected with testosterone,
turning them into functional males; sperm from these 'males' contains
only X chromosomes, so resulting progeny are female (females mature
later than males, retaining better flesh quality). Equally common is
triploidy, where eggs are manipulated using heat or pressure to
produce sterile offspring; these grow more efficiently and cannot
breed with wild stock if they escape. Raised in freshwater tanks and
weaned on to fishmeal pellets, fry are transferred to earth ponds
('stews') or gravel raceways fed by rivers.

What's in it? The same E colourings are used for trout as for salmon.
Antibiotics and vaccines are routinely given for diseases such as PKD
(proliferative kidney disease) and ERM (enteric redmouth). Many trout
contain geosmin, a chemical produced by a soil bacterium which gives
the flesh a muddy taint, the result of poor water quality.

Are the fish harmed? Trout are kept at even higher stocking densities
than salmon, some equivalent to 27 portion-sized fish sharing a
bathtub of water. On muggy days, they gasp for breath. Fin damage and
injuries are common. Further stress is caused by grading, where trout
are pumped from the pond and filtered through grids to sort them by
size. Slaughter is by suffocation on ice (to increase shelf life),
though some favour CO +2baths or electrocution.

What about the planet? Trout may escape and breed with wild stock, or
spread disease.

UNQUOTE

Are increasing public awareness slowly. Other organisations are doing
their best to point out the problems and dangers, but as in many
things, money still rules.

There are very many people who simply refuse to believe what is
published on the matter anyway.

TL
MC

"There are very many people who simply refuse to believe what is
published on the matter anyway"

And why shouldn't they. The observer is a classic tabloid that relies
on tits on the front page and yellow press sensationalism in the
articals. There must be a lot of paranoid people in the UK. Andrew
Purvis could never write an article on the subject of how good
something is., it wouldn't sell papers. Selling papers requires
articals about the sky falling and the evils of fish farmers, chicken
producers, broccoli grown over leach fields and the mistreatment of
peasants by multinational corporations.
I am sure all the ills of modern society can be traced to the fact
that we don't keep pig sties in the back yard, grow our own corn etc.
etc.
A good nuclear war would fix the problem. Those that are left could
catch wild fish, keep pigs and chicken in the yard, grow their own
vegetable etc. Oh for the healthy good old days.

On 18 Sep, 18:14, BJ Conner wrote:

Andrew
Purvis could never write an article on the subject of how good
something is., it wouldn't sell papers.

You on the other hand, with your impeccable spelling and grammar,
healthy views on politics, or indeed anything at all of which you seem
to be almost totally ignorant, are very good at writing how bad
something is, and even better at writing something badly, as we are
all most painfully aware.

MC

On Sep 18, 9:38 am, Mike wrote:
On 18 Sep, 18:14, BJ Conner wrote:

Andrew

Purvis could never write an article on the subject of how good
something is., it wouldn't sell papers.

You on the other hand, with your impeccable spelling and grammar,
healthy views on politics, or indeed anything at all of which you seem
to be almost totally ignorant, are very good at writing how bad
something is, and even better at writing something badly, as we are
all most painfully aware.

MC

Nothing misspelled.
You have never had an original thought in your life.

On 18 Sep, 18:45, BJ Conner wrote:


Nothing misspelled.
You have never had an original thought in your life.

"articals about the sky falling "

"Good" nuclear wars are very rare.

You would not recognise an original thought even if it somehow managed
to stray into your obviously clouded brain. As you never have
anything interesting or positive to say, I will go back to ignoring
you.

Have you noticed that quite a few others seem to be ignoring you too?

Fortenberry trashes people in order to boost his ego, and I suppose
you do it for much the same reason, unfortunately, you are a very
great deal more stupid than he is, and the results are simply
pathetic. You would be well advised to stop even trying.

MC

"Mike" wrote in message
ps.com...
On 18 Sep, 18:45, BJ Conner wrote:

Have you noticed that quite a few others seem to be ignoring you too?

Fortenberry trashes people in order to boost his ego, and I suppose
you do it for much the same reason, unfortunately, you are a very
great deal more stupid than he is, and the results are simply
pathetic. You would be well advised to stop even trying.

MC


The only one I have seen Fortenberry trash is you, and with good cause. Now
if you where to take into consideration the sarcasm that Mr. Conner wrote
the comment about a good nuclear war would fix things, you would actually
have a clue. BUT wait, you have no clue you mindless waste of Oxygen.



Rick

"Mike" wrote in message
ups.com...
On 17 Sep, 19:54, Halfordian Golfer wrote:

This might seem orthogonal to your subject
Halfordian Golfer
It is impossible to catch and release a wild fish.

That is basically an ethical standpoint, and although I agree with
most of it, it is a personal view.

.... this is a case of not knowing your moral ass from your ethical elbow.