Switzerland Bans Catch and Release

I've been waiting nearly a month for someone to post this, since it
was brought to my attention in private.

It's a fascinating turn that has seriously beaten my prediction that
this would happen around 2025.

http://www.chattanoogan.com/articles/article_127519.asp

What's very interesting to me is the fact that "Intent" to catch fish
without any desire to eat them was written as part of the new law.

"The new Swiss law doesn't make use of the term 'Catch and Release',
which is the same as in Germany but I don't see how governments can
enforce legislation which makes 'intent' illegal."

This is avoidable here but it will require careful planning.

Sorry guys, but you've been wrong for nearly two decades.

"Halfordian Golfer" wrote in message
...
I've been waiting nearly a month for someone to post this, since it
was brought to my attention in private.

It's a fascinating turn that has seriously beaten my prediction that
this would happen around 2025.

http://www.chattanoogan.com/articles/article_127519.asp

What's very interesting to me is the fact that "Intent" to catch fish
without any desire to eat them was written as part of the new law.

"The new Swiss law doesn't make use of the term 'Catch and Release',
which is the same as in Germany but I don't see how governments can
enforce legislation which makes 'intent' illegal."

This is avoidable here but it will require careful planning.

Sorry guys, but you've been wrong for nearly two decades.



"EFTTA acting president, Pierangelo Zanetta, said: "EFTTA does not believe
that forcing anglers to kill their catches is either good for nature or for
recreational sport fishing - which makes a significant financial
contribution to the EU economy. "

"Making the killing of fish obligatory will simply reduce fish population
and, at the same time, run the risk of having a negative impact on sport
fishing.

"Anglers and the sport of angling invest time and money to improve water
quality and create larger and healthier fish populations. We believe is it
far better for the fish if the fisherman decides, according to the
situation, whether to keep and eat the fish or to release it."

On Jun 5, 10:05 am, "JT" wrote:
"Halfordian Golfer" wrote in message

...



I've been waiting nearly a month for someone to post this, since it
was brought to my attention in private.

It's a fascinating turn that has seriously beaten my prediction that
this would happen around 2025.

http://www.chattanoogan.com/articles/article_127519.asp

What's very interesting to me is the fact that "Intent" to catch fish
without any desire to eat them was written as part of the new law.

"The new Swiss law doesn't make use of the term 'Catch and Release',
which is the same as in Germany but I don't see how governments can
enforce legislation which makes 'intent' illegal."

This is avoidable here but it will require careful planning.

Sorry guys, but you've been wrong for nearly two decades.

"EFTTA acting president, Pierangelo Zanetta, said: "EFTTA does not believe
that forcing anglers to kill their catches is either good for nature or for
recreational sport fishing - which makes a significant financial
contribution to the EU economy. "

"Making the killing of fish obligatory will simply reduce fish population
and, at the same time, run the risk of having a negative impact on sport
fishing.

"Anglers and the sport of angling invest time and money to improve water
quality and create larger and healthier fish populations. We believe is it
far better for the fish if the fisherman decides, according to the
situation, whether to keep and eat the fish or to release it."

EFTTA - European Fishing Tackle Trade Association

TBone

On Thu, 5 Jun 2008 16:01:49 -0700 (PDT), Halfordian Golfer
wrote:

On Jun 5, 10:05 am, "JT" wrote:
"Halfordian Golfer" wrote in message

...



I've been waiting nearly a month for someone to post this, since it
was brought to my attention in private.

It's a fascinating turn that has seriously beaten my prediction that
this would happen around 2025.

http://www.chattanoogan.com/articles/article_127519.asp

What's very interesting to me is the fact that "Intent" to catch fish
without any desire to eat them was written as part of the new law.

"The new Swiss law doesn't make use of the term 'Catch and Release',
which is the same as in Germany but I don't see how governments can
enforce legislation which makes 'intent' illegal."

This is avoidable here but it will require careful planning.

Sorry guys, but you've been wrong for nearly two decades.

"EFTTA acting president, Pierangelo Zanetta, said: "EFTTA does not believe
that forcing anglers to kill their catches is either good for nature or for
recreational sport fishing - which makes a significant financial
contribution to the EU economy. "

"Making the killing of fish obligatory will simply reduce fish population
and, at the same time, run the risk of having a negative impact on sport
fishing.

"Anglers and the sport of angling invest time and money to improve water
quality and create larger and healthier fish populations. We believe is it
far better for the fish if the fisherman decides, according to the
situation, whether to keep and eat the fish or to release it."

EFTTA - European Fishing Tackle Trade Association

TBone

And?

Makes one ponder - once again - that your agenda actually is to eliminate
fishing in any form...

/daytripper (been to many PETA meetings lately, Timbo?)

daytripper wrote:
On Thu, 5 Jun 2008 16:01:49 -0700 (PDT), Halfordian Golfer
wrote:

On Jun 5, 10:05 am, "JT" wrote:
"Halfordian Golfer" wrote in message

...



I've been waiting nearly a month for someone to post this, since it
was brought to my attention in private.
It's a fascinating turn that has seriously beaten my prediction that
this would happen around 2025.
http://www.chattanoogan.com/articles/article_127519.asp
What's very interesting to me is the fact that "Intent" to catch fish
without any desire to eat them was written as part of the new law.
"The new Swiss law doesn't make use of the term 'Catch and Release',
which is the same as in Germany but I don't see how governments can
enforce legislation which makes 'intent' illegal."
This is avoidable here but it will require careful planning.
Sorry guys, but you've been wrong for nearly two decades.
"EFTTA acting president, Pierangelo Zanetta, said: "EFTTA does not believe
that forcing anglers to kill their catches is either good for nature or for
recreational sport fishing - which makes a significant financial
contribution to the EU economy. "

"Making the killing of fish obligatory will simply reduce fish population
and, at the same time, run the risk of having a negative impact on sport
fishing.

"Anglers and the sport of angling invest time and money to improve water
quality and create larger and healthier fish populations. We believe is it
far better for the fish if the fisherman decides, according to the
situation, whether to keep and eat the fish or to release it."
EFTTA - European Fishing Tackle Trade Association

TBone

And?

Makes one ponder - once again - that your agenda actually is to eliminate
fishing in any form...

/daytripper (been to many PETA meetings lately, Timbo?)

If Tim were to advocate the elimination of all fishing in
any form I could respect his C&R rants. I wouldn't agree
with him but at least his position would be honest and
consistent. As it is Tim is just a dishonest crackpot.

--
Ken Fortenberry

On Jun 5, 6:32 pm, daytripper wrote:
On Thu, 5 Jun 2008 16:01:49 -0700 (PDT), Halfordian Golfer



wrote:
On Jun 5, 10:05 am, "JT" wrote:
"Halfordian Golfer" wrote in message

...

I've been waiting nearly a month for someone to post this, since it
was brought to my attention in private.

It's a fascinating turn that has seriously beaten my prediction that
this would happen around 2025.

http://www.chattanoogan.com/articles/article_127519.asp

What's very interesting to me is the fact that "Intent" to catch fish
without any desire to eat them was written as part of the new law.

"The new Swiss law doesn't make use of the term 'Catch and Release',
which is the same as in Germany but I don't see how governments can
enforce legislation which makes 'intent' illegal."

This is avoidable here but it will require careful planning.

Sorry guys, but you've been wrong for nearly two decades.

"EFTTA acting president, Pierangelo Zanetta, said: "EFTTA does not believe
that forcing anglers to kill their catches is either good for nature or for
recreational sport fishing - which makes a significant financial
contribution to the EU economy. "

"Making the killing of fish obligatory will simply reduce fish population
and, at the same time, run the risk of having a negative impact on sport
fishing.

"Anglers and the sport of angling invest time and money to improve water
quality and create larger and healthier fish populations. We believe is it
far better for the fish if the fisherman decides, according to the
situation, whether to keep and eat the fish or to release it."

EFTTA - European Fishing Tackle Trade Association

TBone

And?

Makes one ponder - once again - that your agenda actually is to eliminate
fishing in any form...

/daytripper (been to many PETA meetings lately, Timbo?)

And, a cash flow runs through it. Doesn't matter a wit. Consider the
salmon ban off California or the new regulations around Florida.
Livelihoods of a few be damned, there are much bigger groups than the
tackle salesmen, though they have some sway now.

Eliminate fishing? Just the opposite. I want to preserve our heritage
of fishing and hunting as natural as life itself. This is threatened
and could go down in a ball of flames if we continue to market a
living animal as a Wet Titleist II, instead of as a vital component of
subsistence.

FWIW - Ken's shallow and continual libel towards me has lost every
ounce of it's "ooomph" at this point (not that it ever really had
much) as precisely what I have been saying all along, for 20 years for
over a decade, is coming to crisp fruition as an emergent and
definitive pattern that began with careful analysis by the Norwegians,
a group of people with fish blood in their veins. Again, the thing
people seem to forget is that you're not arguing with me, a single
crack-pot, if you will. You are, indeed, battling a group of people
outnumbering pure 'trophy fishermen' 100 to one, like it or not. It's
so simple and obvious to me. When the question is on the ballot: Is it
OK to hook a wild animal in the head, purely for fun? Yes or No? Asked
of the loft and urban dwellers, how do you really think it will go? If
your only defense is to call the voters nut-jobs and saying you like
to maim and kill purely for the hell of it, you will lose. Period.
This has been demonstrated now, again, clearly by the swiss
legislation that I support 100%. Fish exist on the food chain? Yes.
Fish exist to be harassed for the good of the sporting good chains?
You tell me.

Your pal,

TBone

Halfordian Golfer wrote:
...
Eliminate fishing? Just the opposite. I want to preserve our heritage
of fishing and hunting as natural as life itself. This is threatened
and could go down in a ball of flames if we continue to market a
living animal as a Wet Titleist II, instead of as a vital component of
subsistence.

I know it hurts your sensibilities to the point of near insanity
but trout truly are more like golf balls than vital subsistence.
Get over it already or quit fishing for trout.

FWIW - Ken's shallow and continual libel towards me has lost every
ounce of it's "ooomph" at this point (not that it ever really had
much) as precisely what I have been saying all along, for 20 years for
over a decade, is coming to crisp fruition as an emergent and
definitive pattern that began with careful analysis by the Norwegians,
a group of people with fish blood in their veins. ...

Libel ? LOL !! You make a good point, and it's something everyone
who fishes for trout should consider. For bringing that bit of
awareness to a fly fishing newsgroup you should be given due props.
But enough already. Find a way around it, like every other sport
fisherman on the planet, or give up fly fishing entirely. Your
lame attempts at half-assed PETA, half-assed Dan'l Boone are as
pathetic as they are dishonest. And that's not libel Tim, that's
the truth.

--
Ken Fortenberry

Partial post from someone here that said:

"trout truly are more like golf balls than vital subsistence"

I rest my case.

--
Halfordian Golfer

Halfordian Golfer wrote:
Partial post from someone here that said:

"trout truly are more like golf balls than vital subsistence"

I rest my case.

Somehow I doubt you'll rest your case. But in any case my
statement is true, your analogy comparing trout to golf balls
is far more apposite than your ridiculous assertions that
modern sport fishing should be all about "vital subsistence".

But if you want to rest your case that'd suit hell out of me.

--
Ken Fortenberry