Thanks Thanks:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Page 1 of 11 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 105

Thread: Ethics

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    A' Choingheal
    Posts
    683

    Default Ethics

    After reading a thread on another forum, I was set thinking along a similar line. The more I think about it the more it confuses me...

    Basically, in 21st century salmon fishing, C&R is common practice, and more and more people are going '100% C&R' all the time. Obviously returning a certain amount of one's catch is sensible, and indeed most would agree commendable - however, people do seem to turn up more and more who are a tad 'militant'. When someone kills a fish, more often than not someone begins berating the captor, 'dead fish can't spawn' etc. (especially on internet forums.. doesn't seem to happen so much in person! ) I've even heard more than a few tales of people blubbing or being wracked with guilt when they have to kill a fish that won't go back.

    Considering this attitude towards Salmon fishing, which appears to be on the increase, why is it that on several occasions, both on this forum and in general conversation with other anglers, the view seems to come up that Brown Trout, Pike, and any other competitor species in Salmon river should be chapped?? People say it's to protect parr and smolts, but surely if a species is indigenous to a river system it has as much right to be there as a Salmon, and will have been co existing perfectly well for millenia before we began to damage rivers?

    For me, from a sport which constantly hammers home the merits of C&R, it seems like hypocrisy on a gargantuan scale... personally I just can't fathom it

    I would be interested to know if other forum members have noticed this and what they think about it?

    *link to the thread elsewhere*
    http://www.flyforums.co.uk/general-f...re-ethics.html
    "I almost stabbed me eye out on a pushbike and that REALLY hurt." Martin, G. (2011).

    Hidden Content

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    galway
    Posts
    3,589

    Default

    this is going to be very interesting indeed,well said btw

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    edzell
    Posts
    2,587

    Default

    Like your style, nice one.

    Cheers

    Mows

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    541

    Default

    I don't see what the problem is with keeping a fish or two as long as it's within the regulations irrespective of what species it is.

    C & R is merely a management tool and selective harvesting has as much place as C & R in fisheries management.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    West of Scotland
    Posts
    428

    Default

    All fish should be treated the same as they are all just as important within the environment and have a good reason for being there, I keep a fish as the rules allow me to can't beat a nice bit of salmon or trout much prefer sea trout but they are increasingly on the west coast of Scotland like rocking horse s**t and put them back as the season just passed showed on my local river.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    the river
    Posts
    1,024

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by yorkshirelad15 View Post
    Pike in Salmon river should be chapped??
    Depends on your view point. Dont know where you fish but are pike native to your river system or have they been introduced over a period of time? Sadly they have become well established in many areas and their removal is almost impossible.

  7. #7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by yorkshirelad15 View Post
    After reading a thread on another forum, I was set thinking along a similar line. The more I think about it the more it confuses me...

    Basically, in 21st century salmon fishing, C&R is common practice, and more and more people are going '100% C&R' all the time. Obviously returning a certain amount of one's catch is sensible, and indeed most would agree commendable - however, people do seem to turn up more and more who are a tad 'militant'. When someone kills a fish, more often than not someone begins berating the captor, 'dead fish can't spawn' etc. (especially on internet forums.. doesn't seem to happen so much in person! ) I've even heard more than a few tales of people blubbing or being wracked with guilt when they have to kill a fish that won't go back.

    Considering this attitude towards Salmon fishing, which appears to be on the increase, why is it that on several occasions, both on this forum and in general conversation with other anglers, the view seems to come up that Brown Trout, Pike, and any other competitor species in Salmon river should be chapped?? People say it's to protect parr and smolts, but surely if a species is indigenous to a river system it has as much right to be there as a Salmon, and will have been co existing perfectly well for millenia before we began to damage rivers?

    For me, from a sport which constantly hammers home the merits of C&R, it seems like hypocrisy on a gargantuan scale... personally I just can't fathom it

    I would be interested to know if other forum members have noticed this and what they think about it?

    *link to the thread elsewhere*
    http://www.flyforums.co.uk/general-f...re-ethics.html
    I see where your coming from but I don't think this attitude is as prevalent as you suggest. I think the majority of salmon fishing conversationalists who practise high percentage C&R recognise that all species can live together in relative harmony in a balanced river system.

    The days of Gillies constantly fishing for (during their spare time) and chapping brownies is long gone and it was usually the same gillies/guys who also chapped the salmon!

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Nordic Noir
    Posts
    4,459

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by yorkshirelad15 View Post
    After reading a thread on another forum, I was set thinking along a similar line. The more I think about it the more it confuses me...

    Basically, in 21st century salmon fishing, C&R is common practice, and more and more people are going '100% C&R' all the time. Obviously returning a certain amount of one's catch is sensible, and indeed most would agree commendable - however, people do seem to turn up more and more who are a tad 'militant'. When someone kills a fish, more often than not someone begins berating the captor, 'dead fish can't spawn' etc. (especially on internet forums.. doesn't seem to happen so much in person! ) I've even heard more than a few tales of people blubbing or being wracked with guilt when they have to kill a fish that won't go back.

    Considering this attitude towards Salmon fishing, which appears to be on the increase, why is it that on several occasions, both on this forum and in general conversation with other anglers, the view seems to come up that Brown Trout, Pike, and any other competitor species in Salmon river should be chapped?? People say it's to protect parr and smolts, but surely if a species is indigenous to a river system it has as much right to be there as a Salmon, and will have been co existing perfectly well for millenia before we began to damage rivers?

    For me, from a sport which constantly hammers home the merits of C&R, it seems like hypocrisy on a gargantuan scale... personally I just can't fathom it

    I would be interested to know if other forum members have noticed this and what they think about it?

    *link to the thread elsewhere*
    http://www.flyforums.co.uk/general-f...re-ethics.html
    Personally I wouldn't pay the remotest interest to what that bunch on slyforums think. Right that's out of the way.

    I think problems occur when people catch a big fish and post pictures. This has now changed things from a personal triumph and kill, to a piece of self-publicity.

    At this point, (like with the Falkus issue) people have then de facto been invited to participate, which some then do by comment.

    If the picture is of a gravid, kype jawed cock, some are going to be critical, possibly rightly so.

    I am sure you are aware that there is a growing spider web like cult of the wild trout, which is all seeing, all knowing. I was aghast to see a splinter group loosely related with familiar names writing up about winter grayling and showing pictures of brown trout that were caught. The fish were on the bank and had been photographed.

    I also recall a record brown caught on a reservoir posed with and photographed out of season.

    To me, an out of season fish must be returned, preferably without removal from the water, is not a legitimate capture, and is of no interest to anyone.

    I had two nine pound browns, one out of season, one hooked outside in the cheek, neither claimed or counted.

    There aren't half some puddings wandering our river banks.

  9. #9

    Default

    I let all my fish go if I can but I'm not in favour of rivers becoming 100% C&R. I do feel regret if I have to kill a fish but I will not moan or criticise anyone for keeping a fish, so long as they are not greedy!

    As for militant releasers, I don't think it helps when someone posts a picture of the fish and the first or second response to it is, "wait till the catch and release police see this one". This is always going to trigger a response and any good is then taken from the forum member and his catch.

    People keep fish and say it was in the rules of the club to do so. May it not also be in the clubs rules that all trout, pike etc. are removed from the river? I know on my local river there is a rule that says that any rainbow trout caught are not to be released? Is it hypocrisy to stick to the rules of the river you are fishing?

    Please don't get me started on ethics or hypocricy in fishing or I'll miss the fishing season altogether, I'll be typing so long!
    Last edited by Jockiescott; 11-01-2011 at 11:07 AM.
    One of the best skills that an angler can ever develop is knowing the difference between passing the time and wasting it!

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Near Kelso, Roxburghshire
    Posts
    1,791

    Default

    Can only agree with post 8 above - in it's entirety!
    Last edited by castor; 11-01-2011 at 12:40 PM.

Page 1 of 11 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •