Register now on PaFlyFish.com! Login
HOME FORUM BLOG PHOTOS LINKS


Sponsors

Browsing this Thread:   1 Anonymous Users



« 1 ... 11 12 13 (14) 15 16 17 »


Re: Little J No More

Joined:
2006/9/9 17:18
From lancaster county
Posts: 6489
Offline
ya i know im an extremist....ive said it many times!

they seem insensitive because i dont think jack likes me or my thoughts very much.......

Posted on: 2007/5/16 15:29
_________________
http://cvtu.homestead.com/





Re: Little J No More

Joined:
2006/11/7 8:32
From South West FL
Posts: 260
Offline
Okay but extremists rarely are taken seriously and are viewed as nut jobs. Not referring to you sir but the term itself.

Posted on: 2007/5/16 15:32


Re: Little J No More

Joined:
2006/9/9 17:18
From lancaster county
Posts: 6489
Offline
but iam rarely taken seriously and iam a nut job

Posted on: 2007/5/16 15:34
_________________
http://cvtu.homestead.com/





Re: Little J No More

Joined:
2006/11/7 8:32
From South West FL
Posts: 260
Offline
SO then leave the Wild Trout Issue to me. Just kidding, I dont have the answers I can just recognize the POTENTIAL problems.

Posted on: 2007/5/16 15:36


Re: Little J No More

Joined:
2006/9/9 17:18
From lancaster county
Posts: 6489
Offline
fair enough
im just trying to get my photos on photobucket so i can send pics to the photos section on the 4 big rainbows i caught today. hey imagine that they were caught in a c&r section of a stream.
so im done of awhile...

Posted on: 2007/5/16 15:39
_________________
http://cvtu.homestead.com/





Re: Little J No More
Moderator
Joined:
2006/9/9 9:29
From Monessen, PA
Posts: 22472
Offline
Quote:

CaptMatt wrote:

Jack,... I think your points...[are] causing yourself to seem "insensitive" to the "protection of wild trout". your views should cause them to examine thier own though.


I don't mind if I seem insensitive. I am not trying to impress anyone with my sensitivity to wild trout. I am happy to manage them so that everyone can enjoy them; but I do not want to see them managed just so that I can enjoy them or other C&R only anglers. If the fishery can sustain regulations that allow harvest, then, for the most part, harvest should permitted. If it means a few less trout each season for the C&R angler to catch, so be it. If harvest regulations would damage the fishery significantly, then I favor restictive regs. I even favor restrictive regs on some stream sections just for the purpose of enhancing the C&R anglers' experience, but these must be carefully limited and fairly proportioned. When this thread started 10 pages back, I opined that the C & R regulations were "working as planned" in causing the thread author to choose to fish elsewhere so he can occasionally harvest or at least have that option. My opinion in that regard has not changed.

Posted on: 2007/5/16 15:42
_________________
Nietzsche was stupid and abnormal.

-- Leo Tolstoy


Re: Little J No More

Joined:
2006/11/7 8:32
From South West FL
Posts: 260
Offline
Quote:

JackM wrote:
I release trout because I do not like fish as a meal very often, but I like to fish. I also don't want to be troubled to drag around a dying fish for hours, then clean it and cook it. Further, under principles of relative non-violence, I do not wish to cause another living creature to suffer without purpose. Finally, I find that releasing the fish will allow both myself and or others to enjoy the thrill of catching it at least one more time, if not more. Thanks for asking.


That’s Funny. I don’t keep a lot of saltwater for the reason that I don’t want to deal with them when I get home (cleaning cooking etc). And I won’t eat them unless they are fresh. Unless it's a cobia. I NEVER keep snook, which have been put down a rough road or redfish. But any way, I'm with you about dragging them around all day. I don’t worry about putting them through the ordeal of "catching them" that’s a little too "tree huggery". I do enjoy releasing them. Hell they don’t remember a little while after any way.

Posted on: 2007/5/16 15:42


Re: Little J No More

Joined:
2006/11/7 8:32
From South West FL
Posts: 260
Offline
You may have interpreted that post wrong. I was sticking up for you to a point. I dont think that you are insenitive to the issue.

Posted on: 2007/5/16 15:45


Re: Little J No More

Joined:
2006/12/13 9:28
From Other side of the tracks
Posts: 19011
Offline
Quote:

CaptMatt wrote:

With all due respects its not up to me to decide what’s "sustainable" or you, or most people. I'm not a Fisheries biologist I don't know. I cant name a stream that has or ever has been wiped out by over harvest I’m sure it could happen but who am I to say where, when or why? I am trying to make some points without getting caught up on one side or the other. I think deep down we can all agree about this on some level and I think as sportsman we do. If we could have this discussion over a beer instead of online we could probably understand one another better.


With all due respect Matt, you asked a very vague question, and I tried to answer it. Your question absolutely did depend on your definition of sustainability. since you admittedly do not have a definition of sustainability, then that point is not a valid one. Furthermore, I never said it was up to me to decide. Clearly I only gave my opinion (which is all any of us have been doing throughout this thread). I even used the words I guess when I said they are maintaining sustainability of wild trout.

However, there is more to this. I was refering to the sustainability of the trout, while you were asking about the sustainability of the fishery. There is a difference as Jack implied. This muddies the water even more. Each of us has our own idea of what is an ideal fishery, and they often differ. Yours might be one where you and your clients are the only ones who fish there and you always practice C&R. Mine might be where i can experience solitude and maybe catch a few trout. and maybe even eat the occasional trout if I chose to. Others might be looking for sheer numbers of trout so they can fill their freezers. , My point was that the Commission is trying to balance what everyone wants, not just what a select few want.

I absolutely agree with your last part. In fact, I think we agree more than you realize. There are lots of things I would like to see changed in the regulations that would make for a better fishing experience for me. but the Commission is not in business to just please me.

Posted on: 2007/5/16 15:45
_________________
There are certain pursuits which, if not wholly poetic and true, do at least suggest a nobler and finer relation to nature than we know. The keeping of bees, for instance." -Henry David Thoreau--


Re: Little J No More
Moderator
Joined:
2006/9/9 9:29
From Monessen, PA
Posts: 22472
Offline
CaptMatt, it may surprise you and others to know that I often talk gently to the fish as I land and release them. Asking their patience of me while I remove the barbless hook. I have not gone so far as to kiss them-- that would be too Bassmaster-ish-- but I have been known to politely thank them for the pleasure of their acquaintance.

Posted on: 2007/5/16 15:47
_________________
Nietzsche was stupid and abnormal.

-- Leo Tolstoy


Re: Little J No More

Joined:
2006/12/13 9:28
From Other side of the tracks
Posts: 19011
Offline
Quote:

salvelinusfontinalis wrote:
it sure seems jack your pushing to stick up for those guys that harvest trout. shouldnt they be resticted to approved trout water....yet they poach streams over here all the time.
i dont see what your problem is with helping to protect wild trout. it just baffles me.


the same guys poach the regular streams as well. not all catch and eat people are poachers, so you shouldn't punish the many for the actions of a few.

Posted on: 2007/5/16 15:47
_________________
There are certain pursuits which, if not wholly poetic and true, do at least suggest a nobler and finer relation to nature than we know. The keeping of bees, for instance." -Henry David Thoreau--


Re: Little J No More

Joined:
2006/9/9 17:18
From lancaster county
Posts: 6489
Offline
ok that was a little out there. but alot of poaching does go on here.
Quote:
I absolutely agree with your last part. In fact, I think we agree more than you realize. There are lots of things I would like to see changed in the regulations that would make for a better fishing experience for me. but the Commission is not in business to just please me.

no that is true. they are employed to manage the fisheries. and wild trout have NO management. at least for the streams on the natural repro list and class a water. they are occasionally studied. then the natural repro list streams get trout dumped into them .....

Posted on: 2007/5/16 15:52
_________________
http://cvtu.homestead.com/





Re: Little J No More

Joined:
2006/12/13 9:28
From Other side of the tracks
Posts: 19011
Offline
Quote:

CaptMatt wrote:
Jack, I agree with your points but I do not agree that your points are in the best interest of wild trout.... let’s call it management instead of protection.


Exactly!!!!

The Commission is in business to manage a fishery. If it were about "protecting" trout, we wouldn't even be allowed to fish. Awhile back, there was a thread about the difference between protection and conservation. Here it is biting us again.

Posted on: 2007/5/16 15:55
_________________
There are certain pursuits which, if not wholly poetic and true, do at least suggest a nobler and finer relation to nature than we know. The keeping of bees, for instance." -Henry David Thoreau--


Re: Little J No More

Joined:
2006/11/7 8:32
From South West FL
Posts: 260
Offline
Quote:

FarmerDave wrote:
Quote:

CaptMatt wrote:

With all due respects its not up to me to decide what’s "sustainable" or you, or most people. I'm not a Fisheries biologist I don't know. I cant name a stream that has or ever has been wiped out by over harvest I’m sure it could happen but who am I to say where, when or why? I am trying to make some points without getting caught up on one side or the other. I think deep down we can all agree about this on some level and I think as sportsman we do. If we could have this discussion over a beer instead of online we could probably understand one another better.


With all due respect Matt, you asked a very vague question, and I tried to answer it. Your question absolutely did depend on your definition of sustainability. since you admittedly do not have a definition of sustainability, then that point is not a valid one. Furthermore, I never said it was up to me to decide. Clearly I only gave my opinion (which is all any of us have been doing throughout this thread). I even used the words I guess when I said they are maintaining sustainability of wild trout.

However, there is more to this. I was refering to the sustainability of the trout, while you were asking about the sustainability of the fishery. There is a difference as Jack implied. This muddies the water even more. Each of us has our own idea of what is an ideal fishery, and they often differ. Yours might be one where you and your clients are the only ones who fish there and you always practice C&R. Mine might be where i can experience solitude and maybe catch a few trout. and maybe even eat the occasional trout if I chose to. Others might be looking for sheer numbers of trout so they can fill their freezers. , My point was that the Commission is trying to balance what everyone wants, not just what a select few want.

I absolutely agree with your last part. In fact, I think we agree more than you realize. There are lots of things I would like to see changed in the regulations that would make for a better fishing experience for me. but the Commission is not in business to just please me.


I think we agree as well. My point was that the best interest of the environment would be to manage the fishery by how much pressure or harvest it can handle and not what any particular group wants. There is nothing vague about that when i word it that way. (I dont study that so I dont know but Im sure someone does). Thats a fact but not a reality in PA where hunting and fishing is a way of life. Don’t confuse what Im trying to say. As you said I think we agree more than we think.

Posted on: 2007/5/16 15:56


Re: Little J No More

Joined:
2006/9/9 17:18
From lancaster county
Posts: 6489
Offline
maybe someday they will manage to protect brook trout
im curious to see what happens when the EBTJV goes into full swing. they bring up the point of non-native species in the program. heaven forbid if any streams that are stocked get on this plan. what will they do then?

Posted on: 2007/5/16 15:58
_________________
http://cvtu.homestead.com/






« 1 ... 11 12 13 (14) 15 16 17 »



You can view topic.
You cannot start a new topic.
You cannot reply to posts.
You cannot edit your posts.
You cannot delete your posts.
You cannot add new polls.
You cannot vote in polls.
You cannot attach files to posts.
You cannot post without approval.

[Advanced Search]





Site Content
Login
Username:

Password:

Remember me



Lost Password?

Register now!
Stay Connected

twitterfeed.com facebook instagram RSS Feed

Sponsors
Polls
Goal during a day on the water....
Catching a single fish makes me happy 19% (18)
I want to catch every fish in the stream 4% (4)
50 dinks is a dream day 2% (2)
Only want to catch big fish 9% (9)
Catching the toughest fish in the steam is my goal 4% (4)
Beautiful place, hit the hatch and whatever happens, happens 29% (28)
Who cares? It beats work. 30% (29)
_PL_TOTALVOTES
The poll closed at 2014/11/27 22:13
Comments?





Copyright 2014 by PaFlyFish.com | Privacy Policy| Provided by Kile Media Group | Design by 7dana.com