|04-25-2014 09:19 AM|
Catch and Release
I am a big proponent of doing everything in moderation. I love eating fresh fish but i`m not feeding a village. If I catch seven fishes and i`m allowed to keep, i`ll keep one and set free the rest.
|04-13-2014 09:04 PM|
Hello all. New here.
I caught and released this fine German Brown today...right into my sink. We have many neo-fly fishermen who visit this area from all points of the country and pay $450.00 per day to have their fat azzes catered to by an outfitter with a drift boat. So many of these people believe that since they pay enormous sums to fish, they believe they have some monopoly on the waterway. I am a local here, and have been yelled at while taking my raft down the river, sightseeing with my wife, by some rollypolly a hundred feet behind me because he wanted to fish the area we were floating over. He said that we should move our boat to a different area. F all these guys. They give real fishermen a bad name. While they fight hundreds of trout to exhaustion in warm waters during one day, which results in around a 20% mortality rate, they mock bait fishermen who take one or two fish for table fare, maybe just a few times a month. Who's the "bad guy" here. The egocentric fat azzes need to stay home and beat their wives. BTW, don't insult them by calling their little "strike indicators"..."bobbers". No self-respecting fly fisherman uses bobbers! What a farce. These idiots are hard to differentiate from also, while they wear the same trout "costumes" which are chic at the moment. Trout fishing weebles having a lunch and wine under a pink umbrella. It is quite the sight. Please don't be one of "Those Guys".
Rant over. Time to gut my fish and eat the hell out of it.
|04-05-2007 03:18 AM|
Last summer I fished the West Ranga in Iceland.
They encourage taking fish there.
All the males are killed and the females are kept for their eggs. For each female caught you are given a side of smoked salmon.
The reason for this is that all the fish in the river are hatchery fish and apparently because of volcanic activity several years ago there are no real spawning grounds for salmon.
My wife thought it was great that I came home from a fishing trip with some fish.
I am normally an exponent of catch and release but I do not have qualms about taking fish on occasions.
|04-02-2007 10:37 AM|
(See my post below on the San Juan.) That's a river that would hugely benefit from some catch and keep fishing, and is a prime example of C&R taken to a surreal farce.
I am now convinced that acces control, and not mandatory C&R, is the best way to get and peserve a quality flyfishng experience.
|04-01-2007 09:33 PM|
|jero||thanks, very interesting info. I forgot to say that the trout I was speaking of were rainbow.|
|03-31-2007 11:06 PM|
I think a lot depends on the trout species and the conditions in which they live. In the Sierras, there are many cirque lakes that were stocked decades ago with Eastern Brook trout. In most cases, especially at high elevations, the fish in the lakes are starved, stunted, and overcrowded. More catch and kill fishing on these lakes would probably result in better conditioned and better fed survivors.
Again, at high elevations, there are similar cirque lakes with healthy specimens of Golden trout, and catch and release of these beauties is most likely called for.
Rainbows in the cirque lakes also seem to do better than the Brookies, maybe because of cannibalism. Taking a couple for dinner in most circumstances would do little harm.
Cutthroats also seem prone to over-crowding and stunting, although they are such willing biters that it's easy to fish out an entire population (witness the wonderful cutthroat C&R fishery on the Middle Fork of the Salmon -- before C&R came into effect, cutthroat fishing on the Middle Fork was generally lousy).
From these few examples, I'm trying to argue that species, species origin, and local conditions probably determine the benefits of C&R over catch and kill.
|03-30-2007 01:40 PM|
catch and release vs. controlled fishing?
the waters I fish in are mainly populated by hatchery trout, although some spawning does ocurr. The trout here donīt have any enemies (such as ospreys) except for "cannibalism", and food sources are very limited (high mountain streams in very arid evironment) . Anyways, thereīs a debate going on between those who deffend absolute catch and release, who say it garantees the population of trout, and those who say overpopulation is decreasing the average size of trout (because food sources remain the same) and the "genetic" quality, affecting the trouts fight. Therefore they claim that total C. and R. is counter productive for the sport.
I tend to agree with the former for ecological reasons, but the latterīs argument does have some logic to it...
I guess it depends for each particular region, and there is probably no general rule about it, but does anybody know if there is any studies or real experiencies that support either of this views?