Catch and Release Hurts our Quality of Life

I was just reading about the elevated levels of mercury in the fish
caught in some of the most pristine waters in North America.

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/...tml?source=rss

I was thinking the average Catch and Release fisherman isn't doing
anything to stop this because they simply do not care about eating
fish, though the claims of conservation and love of things wild are
rampant. I anglers were forced to eat the fish they caught there'd be
a lot less apathy, IMO.

Sad thing when you can not eat the fish in the last wilderness in this
country.

Bone

On 27-Feb-2008, Halfordian Golfer wrote:

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/...tml?source=rss

Too many humans on this planet
We need to send some people to another solar system

Fred

On Wed, 27 Feb 2008 11:38:09 -0800 (PST), Halfordian Golfer
wrote:

I was just reading about the elevated levels of mercury in the fish
caught in some of the most pristine waters in North America.

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/...tml?source=rss

I was thinking the average Catch and Release fisherman isn't doing
anything to stop this because they simply do not care about eating
fish, though the claims of conservation and love of things wild are
rampant. I anglers were forced to eat the fish they caught there'd be
a lot less apathy, IMO.

Sad thing when you can not eat the fish in the last wilderness in this
country.

Bone

How long have you been supporting this catch and kill logic? I've
known you for 12 years or so and it hasn't changed. If we started to
eat the trout and salmon on my home waters, there would be NO fish
except stocked trout to fish for. Catch and release works, Tim. I've
seen it with my own eyes - a river came back from almost being empty
of brook trout because of meat gatherers, to a place where 5 lb brook
trout are caught every week. If you catch them and eat them, there
will be nothing but stocked trout.

Catch and release does not cause poluted waters - umcaring man does.
The reservoir system for Boston has warnings about not eating a
certain amount of the fish. THAT water is catch and kill, so your
logic has some flaws.

Dave

On Feb 27, 8:22 pm, Dave LaCourse wrote:
If you catch them and eat them, there
will be nothing but stocked trout.
Dave

....yes, if you catch a lot and eat a lot.
I throw most back. But I sure do like to eat a few too--usually
12-15" panfish, maybe one fish every other trip.
I do throw the big ones back.

So mercury does **** me off. There are too many damn
people alive. We've had a growing overpopulation problem
for a looooong time.

If we could press a button and intantly vaporize all the crusty
old right-wing curmudgeons, think how much better off we'd be.
World population would be back to something reasonable again.
Don't you think, Dave?
:-)

On Feb 28, 11:53 am, salmobytes wrote:

fwiworth:
.....you're supposed to laugh, Dave.
Not fly off the handle (just in case).
:-)))

I used to kill a brook trout or 2 8-12" on the Rapid River where Dave fishes
For breakfast w olive oil or butter, onions& Montreal Spice
Carrots and potatoes or even eggs
grilled in tin foil or pan seared or fried lightly

YUM!

Not vvery often

I killed the sockeye salmon in AK
Withourt really wanting to - the guide asked me to

Otherwise I release all

Fred

On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 15:40:53 -0800 (PST), salmobytes
wrote:

wiworth:
....you're supposed to laugh, Dave.
Not fly off the handle (just in case).
:-)))

Bseg

Hmmmm. Thought I answered your first post, Sandy, but I don't see it.
In any case, I did laugh.

I am a curmudgeon 'cause of all the liberals in Taxachusetts. d;o(
They have yet to see a tax or fee that they do not like.

Timbo and I have gone round and round on this subject for years.
Catch and kill almost killed one of the most beautiful native brookie
waters in the country. Meat gatherers (if that ain't a word, it is
now!) devastated the river by taking all the large fish as
meals/trophies. I can remember a Sunday 15 or so years ago with 17
anglers in a spot that can handle 6 or 7, AND there was another six or
so waiting for a spot to fish. They were all after meat. A 16 incher
in those days was a very big brook trout..

The State of Maine protected the brookies in this river by finally
making it illegal to kill one, and put a season on killing only one
land locked salmon. It did not take long for the native brookies to
recover. I have taken many in the 3 to 5 pound range, and a friend
took a 7 pounder on a #10 Royal Wulff (go figure). The landlocks have
also come back - I landed/released a 25 incher last June.

Conclusion: Catch and release works. Imagine a five pound brook
trout rising up and taking a #16 Goddard Caddis. You set the hook and
five minutes later you have fought and successfully released a fish
that is now wiser. You are stuck with the puzzle of how to fool him
again. What to use........ he'll still be haunting that little riffle
at the head of that pool, but he's wiser now. You have to be wiser
too or else he'll win. Your paths *will* cross again.

Imagine that same brook trout rising to take another dry fly in catch
and kill waters....... it will be his last rise, his last "meal".

There are no polutants in this river. C & R does not cause polution.
However, the drinking water for the City of Boston is contained in a
resevoir about 40 miles west of the city. It is C & K water, yet
there are signs present about not eating too much of the fish because
they contain heavy metals and PCPs. Should I make the conclusion that
catch and kill has caused the heavy metals in this water? Same logic
that Timbo is using.

Ya wanna eat trout, kill the cement pond mutant crap they stock the
rivers with. Or, eat some Purina Puppy Cow - tastes about the same I
imagine.

Dave (Curmudgeoniz Supremious)
d;o)

"Dave LaCourse" wrote in message
...

They have yet to see a tax or fee that they do not like.

Timbo and I have gone round and round on this subject for years.
Catch and kill almost killed one of the most beautiful native brookie
waters in the country. Meat gatherers (if that ain't a word, it is
now!) devastated the river by taking all the large fish as
meals/trophies. I can remember a Sunday 15 or so years ago with 17
anglers in a spot that can handle 6 or 7, AND there was another six or
so waiting for a spot to fish. They were all after meat. A 16 incher
in those days was a very big brook trout..

The State of Maine protected the brookies in this river by finally
making it illegal to kill one, and put a season on killing only one
land locked salmon. It did not take long for the native brookies to
recover. I have taken many in the 3 to 5 pound range, and a friend
took a 7 pounder on a #10 Royal Wulff (go figure). The landlocks have
also come back - I landed/released a 25 incher last June.

Conclusion: Catch and release works. Imagine a five pound brook
trout rising up and taking a #16 Goddard Caddis. You set the hook and
five minutes later you have fought and successfully released a fish
that is now wiser. You are stuck with the puzzle of how to fool him
again. What to use........ he'll still be haunting that little riffle
at the head of that pool, but he's wiser now. You have to be wiser
too or else he'll win. Your paths *will* cross again.

Amen Brotha!

I like the idea that my children might have the opportunity to catch the
same fish or offspring from that fish. If Tim eats it, that could never
happen!

Have a great weekend David,
JT

On Feb 28, 5:34 pm, Dave LaCourse wrote:
On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 15:40:53 -0800 (PST), salmobytes

wrote:
wiworth:
....you're supposed to laugh, Dave.
Not fly off the handle (just in case).
:-)))

Bseg

Hmmmm. Thought I answered your first post, Sandy, but I don't see it.
In any case, I did laugh.

I am a curmudgeon 'cause of all the liberals in Taxachusetts. d;o(
They have yet to see a tax or fee that they do not like.

Timbo and I have gone round and round on this subject for years.
Catch and kill almost killed one of the most beautiful native brookie
waters in the country. Meat gatherers (if that ain't a word, it is
now!) devastated the river by taking all the large fish as
meals/trophies. I can remember a Sunday 15 or so years ago with 17
anglers in a spot that can handle 6 or 7, AND there was another six or
so waiting for a spot to fish. They were all after meat. A 16 incher
in those days was a very big brook trout..

The State of Maine protected the brookies in this river by finally
making it illegal to kill one, and put a season on killing only one
land locked salmon. It did not take long for the native brookies to
recover. I have taken many in the 3 to 5 pound range, and a friend
took a 7 pounder on a #10 Royal Wulff (go figure). The landlocks have
also come back - I landed/released a 25 incher last June.

Conclusion: Catch and release works. Imagine a five pound brook
trout rising up and taking a #16 Goddard Caddis. You set the hook and
five minutes later you have fought and successfully released a fish
that is now wiser. You are stuck with the puzzle of how to fool him
again. What to use........ he'll still be haunting that little riffle
at the head of that pool, but he's wiser now. You have to be wiser
too or else he'll win. Your paths *will* cross again.

Imagine that same brook trout rising to take another dry fly in catch
and kill waters....... it will be his last rise, his last "meal".

There are no polutants in this river. C & R does not cause polution.
However, the drinking water for the City of Boston is contained in a
resevoir about 40 miles west of the city. It is C & K water, yet
there are signs present about not eating too much of the fish because
they contain heavy metals and PCPs. Should I make the conclusion that
catch and kill has caused the heavy metals in this water? Same logic
that Timbo is using.

Ya wanna eat trout, kill the cement pond mutant crap they stock the
rivers with. Or, eat some Purina Puppy Cow - tastes about the same I
imagine.

Dave (Curmudgeoniz Supremious)
d;o)

Culling works too Dave. Has for a really long, long time.

Your pal,

TBone

On Feb 29, 8:47 am, "JT" wrote:
"Dave LaCourse" wrote in message

...



They have yet to see a tax or fee that they do not like.

Timbo and I have gone round and round on this subject for years.
Catch and kill almost killed one of the most beautiful native brookie
waters in the country. Meat gatherers (if that ain't a word, it is
now!) devastated the river by taking all the large fish as
meals/trophies. I can remember a Sunday 15 or so years ago with 17
anglers in a spot that can handle 6 or 7, AND there was another six or
so waiting for a spot to fish. They were all after meat. A 16 incher
in those days was a very big brook trout..

The State of Maine protected the brookies in this river by finally
making it illegal to kill one, and put a season on killing only one
land locked salmon. It did not take long for the native brookies to
recover. I have taken many in the 3 to 5 pound range, and a friend
took a 7 pounder on a #10 Royal Wulff (go figure). The landlocks have
also come back - I landed/released a 25 incher last June.

Conclusion: Catch and release works. Imagine a five pound brook
trout rising up and taking a #16 Goddard Caddis. You set the hook and
five minutes later you have fought and successfully released a fish
that is now wiser. You are stuck with the puzzle of how to fool him
again. What to use........ he'll still be haunting that little riffle
at the head of that pool, but he's wiser now. You have to be wiser
too or else he'll win. Your paths *will* cross again.

Amen Brotha!

I like the idea that my children might have the opportunity to catch the
same fish or offspring from that fish. If Tim eats it, that could never
happen!

Have a great weekend David,
JT

On the other hand, a large 18" brown that has become piscavorious will
consume an awful lot of little, uh, 'potential opportunity' for your
children. With slot limits and mandatory catch/kill/quit your children
might see fishing like you never thought possible, and not for some
old scarred, lipless, one eyed fungus-sided re-catch either.

Your pal,

TBone