|
|
Posts: 392
Location: lake x...where the hell is it? | what about harvesting it just to bring down sprays fish to end the 60 years of @#$$$%? sprays is fake and most know it but hayward greed will never let it happen! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 12
Location: Saint Charles, IL | Just for the record, I absolutely agree that a 'New World Record" must be and should be killed to be accepted as such. C&R records are all smoke and mirrors.
As far as replica vs. skin mounts, I don't care what you guys do. I just like to have all the info on the table for an angler to make an intelligent and informed decision.
I have always supported and practiced the concept of C&R, though I'm more of a "selective harvest" guy. I also support the right to choose when applicable. I support education and not indoctrination in the discussion of C&R.
C&R is not a "no kill" practice. There are guys on here that will and do kill more fish by accident in one year than I will kill on purpose.
I'm sorry if some of you feel threatened by those thoughts.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 221
Location: Detroint Lakes, MN |
You are absolutely right Doug. Prolific fishermen who handle fish pooryly will kill a good amount a fish in a season.
How many we will never know.
But there are a lot of fishermen catching many fish or a few that in all probability have 100% successful releases in a season. Delayed mortality % numbers are an average, it doesn't mean that every angler will have a certain % die.
So it really isn't fair to compare all anglers that practice 100% C&R to the angler that doesn't as an apples to apples comparison.
Stange's comments that you like to use were meant to potray that. C&R is only as effective as the angler practicing it.
So at the end of the day an angler can choose to kill a fish, handle them poorly and let them go or handle them as best they can.
Only one of those choices is the least damaging to a fishery other than not fishing at all.
JS |
|
| |
