This Drives Me Mental.

[Guest JBear]

http://outdoorsmenforum.ca/showthread.php?t=124251

 

I dont know if posting a link like that is against the rules. But man does it make my blood boil. Not sure if you all can see, but that is not the proper way to hold a bull trout. He assure's they all swam away fine because apparently bull trout are "mouth bleeders" and the fact that many other members are giving him props to the fish is brutal too. What a tool.

 

Just my post of the day.

 

 

[Smitty]

I agree with your sentiment, but the posters who try hardest to make their constructive criticism tactful have a far better chance of being listened to, than those who make it personal and delve into ad hominen attacks and name calling.

 

Make sure the goal is to educate; not much point in tearing a strip off someone and getting angry about it, unless its about making yourself feel better.

 

 

Smitty

[Guest JBear]

I didnt feel the need to post on his thread, because others have and have gotten no where, he's pretty adamant it's proper handling. Its just brutal so many people advocating that kind of handling. I've seen it a few times although this one is by far the worst.

 

There's really no point in trying to educate those guys, its repetitive behavior.

 

Oh well.

 

Edit: He actually called me out on it. Pretty hilarious in my opinion, just another one of those lurkers who checks the fly fishing forum. Hahaha, apparently we're all the river runs through it crowd....

[Jayhad]

Ya I saw that guy gill f*cking those bullies as well, I was going to say something but that forum is a step 40 years in the past and you can't fix stupid

[Guest 420FLYFISHIN]

hope they cooked up well!! so much blood

[Guest JBear]

They're species of concern in Alberta which is what bugs me so much. I could care less if your handling a fish you're going to keep, or walleye or pike like that, fact is bulls are threatened, and don't grow fast. Those fish need to be protected. He's a regular on the lake and he is doing it more harm then good.

 

There is no class in any one of those fools on that forum. Apparently I troll too much according to mr horsetrader. But whatever.

 

I think I hear shotguns firing in the distance, along with the squeal of those bull trout....

[PGK]

.

[Guest JBear]

Well what's to be said about fishing for big female pike early spring.....

[eagleflyfisher]

Well what's to be said about fishing for big female pike early spring.....

Or fishing in the fishbowl at the mouth of the highwood.

 

[reevesr1]

Ah, the closet ethicysts (I just made up that word) are coming out to play. How fun.

[Ricinus]

You keep inventing words and the grammar nazis are going to be all over you.

 

Mike

[PGK]

.

[reevesr1]

I certainly wasn't calling you a closet ethicist (I still prefer it with the y). Be like saying Elton John was in the closet!

 

It it is a profession, I bet they have to take a bunch of fly fishing courses!

[Guest JBear]

Closet? Boy I've been wearing THAT rainbow shirt for a lotta years now! The difference is bulltrout are threatened and pike succumb to capture-induced mortality at far lower rates. I would hazard a guess you could capture a large spawning female pike 10x as often as you could a mature BT before it succumbed. And pike spawning times can vary from march to july depending on water body and temperature. And yeah, there should be RBT & BRT spawning closures as well as Bulltrout ones.

 

Hijack aside, the handling is not great. But it's certainly nothing to go 'mental' over. Arrange an insightful post about handling mortality on BT based on documented sources and post it. if they tell you to FO, monitor their posts and hand in their license plate numbers. In my experience the gill lifters usually like to talk about how bad ass their offroading skills are. Passive offense for the win?

 

And it's ethicist, and yes it's a word and believe it or not, a profession.

 

I have posted something that was not offensive in anyway. Kept it as informative as i could, and left out the name calling. Still got jumped on for it. The handling itself bugs me, the abundant congrats and so few "no-no's" is what makes me "mental" as i said (over exaggeration on my part, but it just makes me angry).

 

And "ethically" there should be no fishing for any species going through reproduction, because other wise you're just playing favourites in your own mind. Im not one to say im perfect, but that comment itself was a complete shot in the dark that came from nowhere.

[PGK]

.

[HeadwatersHunter]

Should we then close all bull trout waters until spawning is complete? Spawning age bull trout typically begin the spawning migration right around the time that most eastslope rivers open. I mean we could argue that it is unethical to fish canyon sections of rivers for bulls due to the presence of natural barriers such as ledges and small waterfalls. The bulls tend stage in these areas until water condtions allow for easier passage (I have watched bulls jump 5 -8 ' waterfalls). Should also close any confluences to fishing in the summer as well since the bull trout will stage in a confluence pool until water temps reach ~ 10 degrees before entering the rearing stream. We should also look at the speculation that in northern regions some adults spawn every other year due to the relatively low productivity of the rivers.

 

Maybe the answer is to have a shortened season such as the Muskeg River in the Grande Cache area. Close the tributaries to angling on August 31 leaving only the main branch waterways {Athabasca, Smoky, (sorry, only familiar with the northern areas)} open until the end of the regular fishing season. Of course all of this would be based on the assumption that we can maintain enforcement on the waterways; and yes I do mean "we", there is a report a poacher hotline.

 

Anyways, maybe PGK has some insight or thoughts regarding bull trout protection in particular. The guy may push a few buttons but, he still has an education in fisheries biology to back it up.

[reevesr1]

My issue with these topics is always the same. I find it troubling when we criticize someone for fishing within the regulations. I am not a giant fan of the hands in the gills to say the least, and I think it is ok to say something about it as long as it is done with some form of tact (which I fully admit all of us lack from time to time). But these discussion always degenerate into discussions of whatever else the posters find offensive, be it fishing for bulls in September, or Rainbows at the Highwood, or whatever Steelhead methodology is not in favor at the time.

 

While I don't think it is an issue to call attention to "ethical" practices the poster may want changed, and advocating regulations to bring about those changes, it is an issue to attack people who are fishing within current regulations, whether you like the way they do it or not. Remember, there is ALWAYS someone more "ethical" than you are that would like nothing better than to shut down fishing everywhere for all time. Discourse in no issue. Trying to change regulations is no issue either, as long as they are done with the health of the fishery in mind, not to satisfy someones view of what is "ethical" for the fish. In the end, the most ethical thing for the fish is no fishing.

[PGK]

.

[reevesr1]

Just because regulations exist doesn't mean they are right. You can't accept regulations as cold hard fact without at least a passing thought as to their intent. Many fishing regulations are in place simply because they always have been and many are lacking simply because resource managers don't have the balls to implement them. Based on what science tells us as 21st century fish managers, it shouldn't be legal to angle for spawning salmonids. That's plain and simple logic. Just because it hasn't been implemented doesn't mean we (as sport anglers) can persecute fish on spawning redds with no thought to whether or not it's 'right'. It's not right, and some self awareness needs to be factored into the equation.

 

Apologize for my hijack, but I was just trying to add some perspective to the situation. There's a lot worse things being done out there.

 

I'm not arguing with the sentiment or the science, I'm arguing with the methodology. And I am not singling anyone out here by the way. I have no issue with people arguing their position, doing everything they can to change others behaviour, and proposing changes in regulations where appropriate. But attacking people for doing what is legal is not the way to go about it, in my probably could be humbler opinion. I just feel when we do that, we are on a slippery slope.

 

I will say that to say 1/2 the people on this board are yanking bulls off their redds is maybe just a skosh of hyperbole. I have fished with lots of people on this board, and been on rivers where bulls were obviously paired up and on redds. I've never seen anyone fish for them. We have watched them though.

 

 

[kentan]

lol I just read that thread, what a bunch of hillbillys lol! IMO

[FraserN]

I am on this forum, and I used to fish for the Bull trout in late August on some of our Southern Alberta rivers. I no longer do this anymore, and have not for several years. Maybe a closure during the spawning season for the Bulls would be a beneficial thing, but as was pointed out, where does it end?

[Weedy1]

If the following regulation was enforced I would suspect the vast majority of fisherman from both forums would be have been looking at some fines one time or another.

 

From the regs:

 

Releasing Prohibited Fish

 

You must immediately release every fish that cannot be legally kept because of species, catch limit, size limit or other regulation, without exception, even if the fish is injured or dead. When the fish is alive, you must release it in a manner that causes the least harm to the fish.

 

Examples of prohibited fish are:

 

a species for which the limit is 0.

a fish smaller than the minimum-size limit.

a fish larger than the maximum-size limit.

a fish the size of which is protected by a slot-size limit.

a fish that has been snagged.

a fish caught after you have already kept your limit.

 

 

***Taking pictures does not equate to immediate release.***

[ÜberFly]

Weedy I triple dog dare you to post that on the redneck board!!!

 

 

P

 

 

If the following regulation was enforced I would suspect the vast majority of fisherman from both forums would be have been looking at some fines one time or another.

 

From the regs:

 

Releasing Prohibited Fish

 

You must immediately release every fish that cannot be legally kept because of species, catch limit, size limit or other regulation, without exception, even if the fish is injured or dead. When the fish is alive, you must release it in a manner that causes the least harm to the fish.

 

Examples of prohibited fish are:

 

a species for which the limit is 0.

a fish smaller than the minimum-size limit.

a fish larger than the maximum-size limit.

a fish the size of which is protected by a slot-size limit.

a fish that has been snagged.

a fish caught after you have already kept your limit.

 

 

***Taking pictures does not equate to immediate release.***

[SanJuanWorm]

[sarcasm]Hopefully we can start a cross board war?[/sarcasm]

[ggp]

I have no problem with taking a quick picture and then releasing a fish, however I don't like to see them held by the gill plate or laying on ice, and that applies to any fish. Unfortunately we see it all the time on many fishing shows, where the entire body is being supported by a hand through the gill plate, or both the gill plate and then supporting the rest of the fish between the anal and tail fins. But no matter what an individuals opinions may be it is a blood sport and we are all guilty of causing stress and possible mortality to any fish we hook. I will always try to influence by my actions rather than dumping on someone's handling of a fish that I don't agree with. In the long run it is still my opinion and not everyone will share it.