A related thread is going on re the 2-fish rule in Switzerland. I wanted to say this here too:
The discussion of C&R on this board is a good thing. Thinking about how we treat Nature is a good thing. However, the radical PETAs et al intend to do away w/ fishing in the name of concern for Nature. Like one of the above just pointed out, nobody is going to spend $$$$ and time on their hobby if all they get to do is catch 2 fish and go home. The Swiss rule will end fishing there, and all the conservation that results from it and the same could happen here. Like it or not, those agendas are out there, and one needs to be familiar w/ the arguments and to have thought about it so that if (when?) we have to face the same we can be ready w/ rational argument.
Jamming a hook in an animal's mouth and letting it run around on a string is cruel (that is the "catch" part of C&R) whether it be a fish or a bunny. How do we justify that? Think about it. Figure it it out. Be ready.
The tailwaters are still too high to wade fish down here in Ark. So my buddy and I went out on Sat and were cruel to about 40 smallmouth/spotted/largemouth bass plus countless "goggleye" and rock bass. C&R'd many of them and had some (a lot) for supper. It was wonderful. It would have been a fine day regardless of the catch, but the big catch made it better. And catching is cruel (releasing is not - but you can't release unless you catch). But in my heart of hearts, I believe there was no speck of evil or wrong in what we did - my conscience is clear (about that anyways). However, I do not know how to articulate that to someone who is of like mind only on the "cruel" part of it. Sigh.
Reply With Quote