A Plea for help & a head's up

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

I am a fly fishing guide in NY (part-time). I understand your concern, but
we need to teach others rather than exclude them. As a public school
teacher I see enough exclusion daily.

But, OK. You're empassioned. Try one of these three remedies:

1. Run for public office and push for laws making greed illegal. That will
solve more than the fishing problems in the US, because fishing issues are
metaphoric of eveyday civics.

2. Make sure that everytime you see a bait fisherman, in an area you
prefer,you encroach up him/her and use your fly fishing prowess to cover
more of that water than he/she can. If fly fisherpeople take advatage of
our reach, spin/bait fisherpeople will not have enough room to fish and will
find other areas to plunk.

3. Rotate your query between trout, bass, norther pike, etc., to hone well
rounded angling skills. In the event of a trout armegeddon, you'll still
find gratification in equalling Walton's Piscatore.







"Peter Charles" wrote in message
...
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:

... As a public school
teacher ...

But, OK. You're empassioned. ...

sigh

--
Ken Fortenberry

Yeah.

"armegeddon" s/b armageddon
"norther" s/b northern
"Piscatore" s/b Piscator

So much for an intelligently written rebuttal...

"just al" wrote in message
...
I am a fly fishing guide in NY (part-time). I understand your concern,
but
we need to teach others rather than exclude them. As a public school
teacher I see enough exclusion daily.

But, OK. You're empassioned. Try one of these three remedies:

1. Run for public office and push for laws making greed illegal. That
will
solve more than the fishing problems in the US, because fishing issues are
metaphoric of eveyday civics.

2. Make sure that everytime you see a bait fisherman, in an area you
prefer,you encroach up him/her and use your fly fishing prowess to cover
more of that water than he/she can. If fly fisherpeople take advatage of
our reach, spin/bait fisherpeople will not have enough room to fish and
will
find other areas to plunk.

3. Rotate your query between trout, bass, norther pike, etc., to hone
well
rounded angling skills. In the event of a trout armegeddon, you'll still
find gratification in equalling Walton's Piscatore.







"Peter Charles" wrote in message
...
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 top posted a response to his own post:

Yeah.

"armegeddon" s/b armageddon
"norther" s/b northern
"Piscatore" s/b Piscator

So much for an intelligently written rebuttal...

Pitiable. Clueless, obtuse and pitiable.

--
Ken Fortenberry

On Sat, 21 Feb 2004 19:35:36 GMT, "just al"
wrote:

I am a fly fishing guide in NY (part-time). I understand your concern, but
we need to teach others rather than exclude them. As a public school
teacher I see enough exclusion daily.

But, OK. You're empassioned. Try one of these three remedies:

1. Run for public office and push for laws making greed illegal. That will
solve more than the fishing problems in the US, because fishing issues are
metaphoric of eveyday civics.

2. Make sure that everytime you see a bait fisherman, in an area you
prefer,you encroach up him/her and use your fly fishing prowess to cover
more of that water than he/she can. If fly fisherpeople take advatage of
our reach, spin/bait fisherpeople will not have enough room to fish and will
find other areas to plunk.

3. Rotate your query between trout, bass, norther pike, etc., to hone well
rounded angling skills. In the event of a trout armegeddon, you'll still
find gratification in equalling Walton's Piscatore.



Ya right, it flew right over your head. So let me have one more crack
at it.

I have no problems whatosever with any form of tackle. I have no
problem whatsoever with any bait fisherman who is angling in
accordance with regulations and with some respect for the environment
and the resource. I have no problem with C&K on a sustainable fishery,
I have no problem with put 'n' take on an existing put 'n' take
stream.

I do have a problem with pigs of the two-legged variety who foul our
waterways.

enuf said, the point should be clear by now . . .

if it isn't, Wolfie will be along soon to help out . . . .



Peter

turn mailhot into hotmail to reply

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

Shoot. It didn't go over my head. I thought it did. What I understand is
that rather than requesting petitions to keep the areas clean, you suggest
we keep the laws the way they are in order to keep the "dirty folks" out.

"Peter Charles" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 21 Feb 2004 19:35:36 GMT, "just al"
wrote:

I am a fly fishing guide in NY (part-time). I understand your concern,
but
we need to teach others rather than exclude them. As a public school
teacher I see enough exclusion daily.

But, OK. You're empassioned. Try one of these three remedies:

1. Run for public office and push for laws making greed illegal. That
will
solve more than the fishing problems in the US, because fishing issues
are
metaphoric of eveyday civics.

2. Make sure that everytime you see a bait fisherman, in an area you
prefer,you encroach up him/her and use your fly fishing prowess to cover
more of that water than he/she can. If fly fisherpeople take advatage of
our reach, spin/bait fisherpeople will not have enough room to fish and
will
find other areas to plunk.

3. Rotate your query between trout, bass, norther pike, etc., to hone
well
rounded angling skills. In the event of a trout armegeddon, you'll still
find gratification in equalling Walton's Piscatore.



Ya right, it flew right over your head. So let me have one more crack
at it.

I have no problems whatosever with any form of tackle. I have no
problem whatsoever with any bait fisherman who is angling in
accordance with regulations and with some respect for the environment
and the resource. I have no problem with C&K on a sustainable fishery,
I have no problem with put 'n' take on an existing put 'n' take
stream.

I do have a problem with pigs of the two-legged variety who foul our
waterways.

enuf said, the point should be clear by now . . .

if it isn't, Wolfie will be along soon to help out . . . .



Peter

turn mailhot into hotmail to reply

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