A Plea for help & a head's up

Willi wrote in message news:

I'm not as familiar with eastern waters as I am with those in the
Rockies, but it seems to me that there are numerous waters back east
that are being stocked that could be better managed with less stocking
and possibly more restrictive limits. Montana did a series of studies on
the effects of stocking in waters that have good natural reproduction
and found that the stocking of catchables actually reduces the number
and size of the fish in those waters.

Willi


Well sure, rub in that expansive trout paradise!! Why did they start
stocking in Montanta anywho?? Must have been those Easterners moving
West.

Mike

"Ken Fortenberry" wrote


In the minority AND fly fishermen, and I for one don't have a problem
with designating certain waters off-limits to Bubba and his bait can.


.... in the minority.... for sure

but, while tackle USED ( years ago) to be a good indicator of ethical
maturity, I no longer believe it is. The last few years I've seen as
high an incidence of truly poor conduct in fly fishermen as in bait guys

MY belief is that this is becoming more the case because Fly Fishing USED to
be a far more difficult to get into, and to actually do. It was also seen
as a bit dorky and "odd," the opposite of "in."

Thus, the vast majority of FFers were outdoorsmen that had already matured
through the "greed years" that seem to afflict most of us fishermen and
hunters early in our development. And, had matured past the need to "fit
in" with their peers.

Like the duck hunter that starts doing anything remotely legal to "get a
limit" and gradually evolves into a guy that insists on only shooting at
perfectly decoying drake birds and sets restrictions on his tools and
methods FAR more stringent than the law, the FF used to be an outdoorsman
that had matured past greed.

They had matured past it and were looking for ways to find a more intimate
relationship with their prey and all of Nature. They started FFing for
that reason, because of the new maturity they found in themselves ... it was
a self imposed restriction born of that maturity ( NEVER to be confused with
just old ... there are lots of very immature old people :-).

In this modern FF age, many, many, people are going directly into FFing,
....without maturing, as outdoorsmen, beforehand. FFing is now very "in"
and thus appeals to those that desire to impress. and to follow the crowd,
( neither are good signs when looking for ethics) and it's now extremely
easy to get into... there is a fly shop on every other corner and 15 videos
at the library.

IME, these new mode FFers are bringing that "me, me, me, more, more, all
mine, all MINE " greed that I USED to associate with PowerBait and corn to
the FFonly waters in great numbers.

They may be religious about C&R but they have NOT really matured past the
PBandC attitudes of greed.

It's not that they are intrinsically less ethical than the beginning
fishermen of years past, they simply are bringing "beginner level"
outdoorsman ethics to a sport, Fly Fishing, that traditionally was NOT a
place beginners hung out, in numbers.

FWIW, I too consider myself an elitist asshole, picky about my outdoors
companions, BUT, I find I have to actually observe individual character and
actions to choose those I care to be associated with ... tackle is no
longer much of a clue
.......... something I find rather sad.

"Larry L" wrote in message
...

but, while tackle USED ( years ago) [snip]
FFing is now very "in"

Perhaps you have a copy of Arnold Gringrich's "the Joys of Trout" laying
around somewhere, re-read the preface.

FWIW, I too consider myself an elitist asshole, picky about my outdoors
companions, BUT, I find I have to actually observe individual character
and
actions to choose those I care to be associated with ... tackle is no
longer much of a clue
......... something I find rather sad.


what i find rather sad is that you would even try and use the appearance of
one's tackle a clue as to your desire to be associated with someone. Some of
use learned a long time of the adage not to judge a book by it's cover.

"Wayne Knight" wrote

what i find rather sad is that you would even try and use the appearance
of
one's tackle a clue as to your desire to be associated with someone. Some
of
use learned a long time of the adage not to judge a book by it's cover.



Agreed. As I often do, I failed to see all the possible ways to read my own
words .

Ken's "In the minority AND fly fishermen," seemed to me to imply that ONLY
the fly fishermen "respect the resource and other people."

I may have misread his intent, but as I read it, my experience shows it to
be way off base, and getting more so.

I think we are largely saying the same thing, judge the individual by his
actions, not the type or price of his equipment.

FFing has been my only fishing since '71, but it has been a fourth tier
hobby on my list, behind dogs and hunting and other things. The last few
years have moved it up a tier or two and have changed the impression I have
of the "average" fly fisherman. I DO believe that I'm running into a far
higher percentage of people waving fly rods that do not fair well under
individual judgement. That increase is what I find sad, i.e. the fact that
fewer FFers seem to "respect the resource and other people" than in years
past.

Peter Charles wrote:


While I agree with the sentiment, there's a world of a difference
between a UK carp angler or a Canadian float fisher, on the one hand,
and Bubba Beer-belly (or the Canuck hoser variant) who thinks it's his
God-given right to trash the bankside, spread his garbabge about,
vacuum up all the fish, and let his shrieking wife, horde of brats,
and defecating dogs wreak havoc for anybody else who might be trying
to fish the same waters.

I don't give a **** what people use for tackle provided they respect
the resource and other people. Tackle restrictions in Canada and the
US have been put in place precisely because those that have respect,
seem to be in the minority.


Maybe I'm misreading what your saying, but I don't think that special
regulations are put into place to control those who: "thinks it's his
God-given right to trash the bankside, spread his garbabge about,
vacuum up all the fish, and let his shrieking wife, horde of brats,
and defecating dogs wreak havoc for anybody else who might be trying
to fish the same waters."


IMO, special regulations, or regulations of any sort for that matter,
should be used as management techniques to protect self sustaining fish
populations, not for social engineering.

Willi

On Sat, 21 Feb 2004 08:32:30 -0700, Willi wrote:



Peter Charles wrote:


While I agree with the sentiment, there's a world of a difference
between a UK carp angler or a Canadian float fisher, on the one hand,
and Bubba Beer-belly (or the Canuck hoser variant) who thinks it's his
God-given right to trash the bankside, spread his garbabge about,
vacuum up all the fish, and let his shrieking wife, horde of brats,
and defecating dogs wreak havoc for anybody else who might be trying
to fish the same waters.

I don't give a **** what people use for tackle provided they respect
the resource and other people. Tackle restrictions in Canada and the
US have been put in place precisely because those that have respect,
seem to be in the minority.


Maybe I'm misreading what your saying, but I don't think that special
regulations are put into place to control those who: "thinks it's his
God-given right to trash the bankside, spread his garbabge about,
vacuum up all the fish, and let his shrieking wife, horde of brats,
and defecating dogs wreak havoc for anybody else who might be trying
to fish the same waters."


IMO, special regulations, or regulations of any sort for that matter,
should be used as management techniques to protect self sustaining fish
populations, not for social engineering.

Willi


You are missing what I'm saying . . . Bubba Beer-belly is the type who
is also most likely to take every fish he can lay his fat, grubby,
nicotine stained fingers on. The rest of his activities simply
reflect his distain for the rest of hummanity. Regulations are in
place precisely because we have far too many people who think it's
their God-given right to take everything they can get and **** the
next guy. This isn't a class issue as the blue suit crowd is just as
culpable as the blue collars.

Peter

turn mailhot into hotmail to reply

Visit The Streamer Page at http://www.mountaincable.net/~pcharl...ers/index.html

Is it possible that no matter how we fight "put and take" philosphies, there
are just too many folks who enjoy fishing to make a difference on the east
coast?

Move west young man. The attitude is different out there...somewhat.

Perhaps looking for the more remote rather than "easy access" streams are
the future of angling hobbyists?


"Peter Charles" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 21 Feb 2004 08:32:30 -0700, Willi wrote:



Peter Charles wrote:


While I agree with the sentiment, there's a world of a difference
between a UK carp angler or a Canadian float fisher, on the one hand,
and Bubba Beer-belly (or the Canuck hoser variant) who thinks it's his
God-given right to trash the bankside, spread his garbabge about,
vacuum up all the fish, and let his shrieking wife, horde of brats,
and defecating dogs wreak havoc for anybody else who might be trying
to fish the same waters.

I don't give a **** what people use for tackle provided they respect
the resource and other people. Tackle restrictions in Canada and the
US have been put in place precisely because those that have respect,
seem to be in the minority.


Maybe I'm misreading what your saying, but I don't think that special
regulations are put into place to control those who: "thinks it's his
God-given right to trash the bankside, spread his garbabge about,
vacuum up all the fish, and let his shrieking wife, horde of brats,
and defecating dogs wreak havoc for anybody else who might be trying
to fish the same waters."


IMO, special regulations, or regulations of any sort for that matter,
should be used as management techniques to protect self sustaining fish
populations, not for social engineering.

Willi


You are missing what I'm saying . . . Bubba Beer-belly is the type who
is also most likely to take every fish he can lay his fat, grubby,
nicotine stained fingers on. The rest of his activities simply
reflect his distain for the rest of hummanity. Regulations are in
place precisely because we have far too many people who think it's
their God-given right to take everything they can get and **** the
next guy. This isn't a class issue as the blue suit crowd is just as
culpable as the blue collars.

Peter

turn mailhot into hotmail to reply

Visit The Streamer Page at
http://www.mountaincable.net/~pcharl...ers/index.html

On Sat, 21 Feb 2004 18:35:37 GMT, "just al"
wrote:

Is it possible that no matter how we fight "put and take" philosphies, there
are just too many folks who enjoy fishing to make a difference on the east
coast?

Move west young man. The attitude is different out there...somewhat.

Perhaps looking for the more remote rather than "easy access" streams are
the future of angling hobbyists?


Don't really have a problem with put 'n' take provided they don't
ruining a stream with streamborn fish but stuffing a bunch of stockers
in it. If the stream is already put 'n' take, well have at it boys,
but don't make any more.

Some say that a stream full of streamborn fish that were once
stockers, is fair game but I disagree. If the stream was once stocked
decades ago and the current population is made up of their naturally
reproducing descedents, then stream has become, genetically, a wild
trout stream. All the crappy genetics of the stockers will have been
bred out after a decade or two. Only the hardiest stockers will
survive to produce healthy offspring. It doesn't take long for a
population based on stocked fish, to produce a unique genetic strain
that is adapted to take advantage of that particular stream. All
around the Great Lakes, any tributary that received steelhead stockers
decades ago, but has been left alone since, has adapted to its
particular natal river and produced a genetically identifiable strain
of healthy fish.

Anybody who fishes for steelhead and salmon on the Great Lakes can't
get too snooty about stockers for every damned salmonid swimming the
Great Lakes (Superior coasters excepted) is descended from stockers
(the native Atlantics were wiped out by damming, over-fishing, and
agriculture). But, once a stream has a healthy, sustainable, naturally
reproducing strain of fish, it's damn near criminal to mess that up
with a fresh influx of stockers.

I like the GRCA approach for the Grand River here. The natural
reproduction isn't high enough to maintain the population, even with
C&R, but the GRCA and the MNR, only stock the river using broodstock
taken from the same watershed. In the process, they don't **** up the
genetics too badly, though it would be better to have a fishing
moratorium for ten years and let the naturally reproducing population
establish itself. That ain't gonna happen so the they've chosen the
next best alternative.

Peter

turn mailhot into hotmail to reply

Visit The Streamer Page at http://www.mountaincable.net/~pcharl...ers/index.html

"just al" wrote

Move west young man. The attitude is different out there...somewhat.

Perhaps looking for the more remote rather than "easy access" streams are
the future of angling hobbyists?



Yeah move West everyone, that's the ticket...

"Peter Charles" wrote in message
...

. . . Bubba Beer-belly is the type who
is also most likely to take every fish he can lay his fat, grubby,
nicotine stained fingers on....

Yeah, them ****in' smokers should all be shot!

Wolfgang