Fishing - Barbaric or Sport?
22 May 2002, 03:13 PM
#91
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 1998
Location: London
Posts: 4,891
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't understand what your point is here, jjones.
Of course they're nasty instruments - this is a tool which is specifically designed for despatching a fish. Were you expecting it to be padded?
Some guns fire bullets, too, you know!
[Edited by MarkO - 5/22/2002 3:14:40 PM]
Of course they're nasty instruments - this is a tool which is specifically designed for despatching a fish. Were you expecting it to be padded?
Some guns fire bullets, too, you know!
[Edited by MarkO - 5/22/2002 3:14:40 PM]
22 May 2002, 03:19 PM
#93
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Warwickshire, UK
Posts: 1,185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Side note: FYI The Ramblers Association researched trail errosion and found that size 10 walking boots did more damage the a couple of inches of rubber i.e. 2xtyres.
Sorry, just wanted to drop that into the melting pot - not thread hijack!
Sorry, just wanted to drop that into the melting pot - not thread hijack!
22 May 2002, 04:30 PM
#96
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 1998
Location: Scoobysport, Basildon, UK
Posts: 4,300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr Jones, there are a couple of things that you need to understand...
1) There are two types of freshwater fishing... course and game. Course fishing is for fish such as carp, tench, roach, bream, chub, etc. Game fishing is for salmon and trout.
2) Game fishing is a hunt for food, using a lure (such as a fly) and the fish are killed after being caught, so that they can be eaten or sold for food. The quickest way of doing this is to bash them over the head with a priest.
3) Course anglers that I know are all conservationists, taking great care to ensure that the waters, fish stocks, surrounding habitat and the wild animals that live in that habitat are protected from polution and harm.
4) The only thing I know of that harms fish senselessly is the Cormorant. Cormorants eat approx 10% of the fish that they kill. They kill fish by diving and spearing them, may fish are not killed by the spearing and either survive, deformed, or die slowly. I have seen a lake where the stench from rotting fish killed, but not eaten, by resident Cormorants was unbearable. Cormorants feeding patterns are to move from water to water, relocating once they have stripped a lake of its stock. Cormorants are a protected species and may not be culled. This protected status is vigorously defended by the RSPB.
I have enjoyed fishing, although frequently caught nothing. But for me, the catch is a bonus. Being out on a lake or river bank, watching the dragonflies, kingfishers, jays and basking carp is pure heaven. For me it is nature's valium.
I class myself as an animal lover. I have 2 cats, a rabbit, a ginea pig and a tortoise, all of which I love. If I felt fishing were barbaric or harmed the fish themselves, I would not do it.
Like others, I use barbless hooks and un hooking mats. I don't use keepnets.
Without anglers, water companies would be poluting our rivers, unchecked. Make a choice, which do you prefer?
1) There are two types of freshwater fishing... course and game. Course fishing is for fish such as carp, tench, roach, bream, chub, etc. Game fishing is for salmon and trout.
2) Game fishing is a hunt for food, using a lure (such as a fly) and the fish are killed after being caught, so that they can be eaten or sold for food. The quickest way of doing this is to bash them over the head with a priest.
3) Course anglers that I know are all conservationists, taking great care to ensure that the waters, fish stocks, surrounding habitat and the wild animals that live in that habitat are protected from polution and harm.
4) The only thing I know of that harms fish senselessly is the Cormorant. Cormorants eat approx 10% of the fish that they kill. They kill fish by diving and spearing them, may fish are not killed by the spearing and either survive, deformed, or die slowly. I have seen a lake where the stench from rotting fish killed, but not eaten, by resident Cormorants was unbearable. Cormorants feeding patterns are to move from water to water, relocating once they have stripped a lake of its stock. Cormorants are a protected species and may not be culled. This protected status is vigorously defended by the RSPB.
I have enjoyed fishing, although frequently caught nothing. But for me, the catch is a bonus. Being out on a lake or river bank, watching the dragonflies, kingfishers, jays and basking carp is pure heaven. For me it is nature's valium.
I class myself as an animal lover. I have 2 cats, a rabbit, a ginea pig and a tortoise, all of which I love. If I felt fishing were barbaric or harmed the fish themselves, I would not do it.
Like others, I use barbless hooks and un hooking mats. I don't use keepnets.
Without anglers, water companies would be poluting our rivers, unchecked. Make a choice, which do you prefer?
22 May 2002, 07:38 PM
#97
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 1,028
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pete
great reply.
What these anti fishing people fail to realise that the fishermen conserve the enviroment.Without fishermen many waterways would be a total mess with pollution,chemical spillages,litter.I agree there will always be fishermen that leave litter and line laying about,but any normal fisherman would pick this up and take it home.Why pollute the area where you fish?
Everyone has views,but when people have no idea what goes on in the fishing world(Apart from quoting PETTA or Anti Fishing websites!).These people need to go out fishing and see what goes on in the real world and not the internet world.
I think a nice sunny day,sat by a huge lake waiting for the buzzers to go and being with nature may change their minds.
Then again they are too narrow minded to try this,they would probably be more at home surfing the web,looking for Anti fishing sites to quote
SN
great reply.
What these anti fishing people fail to realise that the fishermen conserve the enviroment.Without fishermen many waterways would be a total mess with pollution,chemical spillages,litter.I agree there will always be fishermen that leave litter and line laying about,but any normal fisherman would pick this up and take it home.Why pollute the area where you fish?
Everyone has views,but when people have no idea what goes on in the fishing world(Apart from quoting PETTA or Anti Fishing websites!).These people need to go out fishing and see what goes on in the real world and not the internet world.
I think a nice sunny day,sat by a huge lake waiting for the buzzers to go and being with nature may change their minds.
Then again they are too narrow minded to try this,they would probably be more at home surfing the web,looking for Anti fishing sites to quote
SN
22 May 2002, 08:01 PM
#98
i have seen people fishing.
thats where i witnessed the pike / rod rest episode.
i have also seen a pair of fish lips on a hook - something you anglers will be familiar with - but the twist to this was that the rest of the fish was missing.
Fish can feel pain, see the site i quoted.
I don't see that harming/hurting these animals for your "sport" has any place in the 21st century.
[Edited by jjones - 5/22/2002 8:05:17 PM]
thats where i witnessed the pike / rod rest episode.
i have also seen a pair of fish lips on a hook - something you anglers will be familiar with - but the twist to this was that the rest of the fish was missing.
Fish can feel pain, see the site i quoted.
I don't see that harming/hurting these animals for your "sport" has any place in the 21st century.
[Edited by jjones - 5/22/2002 8:05:17 PM]
22 May 2002, 09:04 PM
#99
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Some country and western
Posts: 13,488
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fish is damn tasty though innit?
Salmon with a garlick butter, mmmmmmmmmmmmm!
What about shell fish, can I catch them?
oh what about crabs, they are nice with a salad.
Salmon with a garlick butter, mmmmmmmmmmmmm!
What about shell fish, can I catch them?
oh what about crabs, they are nice with a salad.
)
22 May 2002, 09:36 PM
#102
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Potters Bar
Posts: 2,924
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think you could easilly find research that proves don't feel pain as well as that that does. I've never seen a pair of lips on a hook and I've been fishing for over 20 years, I can't dispute what you saw but thats not normal.
I have seen some unthoughtful things such as little dropping from anglers I'll admit that but I see far worse from much of the public. The lake I managed had loads of canada geese which peole used to feed. The empty bread packets litteres the lake surounds. So much bread went into the lake that there were algal blooms. and many of the fish died.
If seen daft things from boater bikers and anglers alike. It seems no matter your passtime there are always some morons who behave poorly and give your passtime a bad name.
I'd be well up for a Scoobynet fishing day and would welcome any open minded non anglers who want to learn about what we do.
AllanB
I have seen some unthoughtful things such as little dropping from anglers I'll admit that but I see far worse from much of the public. The lake I managed had loads of canada geese which peole used to feed. The empty bread packets litteres the lake surounds. So much bread went into the lake that there were algal blooms. and many of the fish died.
If seen daft things from boater bikers and anglers alike. It seems no matter your passtime there are always some morons who behave poorly and give your passtime a bad name.
I'd be well up for a Scoobynet fishing day and would welcome any open minded non anglers who want to learn about what we do.
AllanB
22 May 2002, 10:57 PM
#106
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i find the best bit about fishing isn't the strike.
it's twating the little ferkers on the back of the head.
don't even like to eat them. i have to throw them in the bin after or give them to some old bid to eat.
it's twating the little ferkers on the back of the head.
don't even like to eat them. i have to throw them in the bin after or give them to some old bid to eat.
23 May 2002, 10:12 AM
#108
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 1998
Location: London
Posts: 4,891
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
jjones, that's just a dumb and facetious comment to make. If you want to inflict your vegan lifestyle on others, you're going to put yourself into the same evangelistic group as the Jehova's witnesses.
My wife has been a strict veggie since she was 7, but manages to maintain her point-of-view without trying to convert me. I suggest you might like to do the same.
Arguing about unnecessary harm being inflicted on fish when they are being caught and re-released is one thing. It's a complicated debate about whether or not cruelty is involved or not, whether the fish suffers, and so on.
But when game fishing (i.e., catching fish to kill for food) it's a different matter entirely. To slag somebody for eating fish is just downright facism - humans are omnivores and as such evolved to eat meat, fish, vegetables and pretty much everything else.
If you don't think people should eat fish, that's your opinion and you're entitled to it. But arguing over how the fish are despatched is just pointless. I'm certain that a short sharp knock to the head is far more humane (if humanity is an issue) than net fishing. You should be commending the anglers for not causing any potential and undue suffering in the fish.
I will eat fish. Period. My views will not be affected by you or anyone else. So to start making 'brain size' insults over somebody is just childish, and goes a long way to explaining why many people disregard vegetarians' opinions as irrelevant and ill-thought-out.
Oh, and if your comment was directed at the clearly inflammatory post by fatnutsac, then more fool you for taking the bait (pun definitely intended).
[Edited by MarkO - 5/23/2002 10:14:24 AM]
My wife has been a strict veggie since she was 7, but manages to maintain her point-of-view without trying to convert me. I suggest you might like to do the same.
Arguing about unnecessary harm being inflicted on fish when they are being caught and re-released is one thing. It's a complicated debate about whether or not cruelty is involved or not, whether the fish suffers, and so on.
But when game fishing (i.e., catching fish to kill for food) it's a different matter entirely. To slag somebody for eating fish is just downright facism - humans are omnivores and as such evolved to eat meat, fish, vegetables and pretty much everything else.
If you don't think people should eat fish, that's your opinion and you're entitled to it. But arguing over how the fish are despatched is just pointless. I'm certain that a short sharp knock to the head is far more humane (if humanity is an issue) than net fishing. You should be commending the anglers for not causing any potential and undue suffering in the fish.
I will eat fish. Period. My views will not be affected by you or anyone else. So to start making 'brain size' insults over somebody is just childish, and goes a long way to explaining why many people disregard vegetarians' opinions as irrelevant and ill-thought-out.
Oh, and if your comment was directed at the clearly inflammatory post by fatnutsac, then more fool you for taking the bait (pun definitely intended).
[Edited by MarkO - 5/23/2002 10:14:24 AM]
23 May 2002, 10:27 AM
#109
marko,
have you read any of my posts??
i have not said it is wrong to eat fish - in fact if you reread this thread i have posted that "I HAVE NOTHING AGAINST THE SLAUGHTER OF ANIMALS FOR FOOD". Now, i don't think that statement is ambiguous? I have made no attempt to enforce my vegan diet upon anyone - ever.
my comment above was aimed at the guy who basically said he knocked fishes on the head and then threw them in the bin. Do you agree that that behaviour is barbaric. There were no emoticons to suggest that he was being anything other than serious.
my arguement is that it is cruel to fish for pleasure when there is research that proves that fish can feel pain.
have you read any of my posts??
i have not said it is wrong to eat fish - in fact if you reread this thread i have posted that "I HAVE NOTHING AGAINST THE SLAUGHTER OF ANIMALS FOR FOOD". Now, i don't think that statement is ambiguous? I have made no attempt to enforce my vegan diet upon anyone - ever.
my comment above was aimed at the guy who basically said he knocked fishes on the head and then threw them in the bin. Do you agree that that behaviour is barbaric. There were no emoticons to suggest that he was being anything other than serious.
my arguement is that it is cruel to fish for pleasure when there is research that proves that fish can feel pain.
23 May 2002, 10:28 AM
#110
"i find the best bit about fishing isn't the strike.
it's twating the little ferkers on the back of the head.
don't even like to eat them. i have to throw them in the bin after or give them to some old bid to eat. "
that's what i was responding to - mindless and nothing short of barbaric in MY OPINION.
it's twating the little ferkers on the back of the head.
don't even like to eat them. i have to throw them in the bin after or give them to some old bid to eat. "
that's what i was responding to - mindless and nothing short of barbaric in MY OPINION.
23 May 2002, 12:42 PM
#116
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote jjones "I have nothig against the slaughter of animals for food"
OK, so what is better:-
1) A trawler going out for cod, smashing up the seabed to capture x amount of fish, 40% of which is cod, 60% is unwanted species which are thrown back dead.
2) Johhny angler who goes out in his boat, or down the pier and catches x amount of fish. 40% are cod, the rest are put back alive, and no damage to the environment.
Or:-
1) gillnetter goes out, sets his nets, storm comes along and the nets get lost. Nets continue to snare fish & dolphins for up to 3 years.
2) Anglers go out in their boat and catch a few fish (for sport) which are taken home and eaten, or sold and eaten.
Discuss.
OK, so what is better:-
1) A trawler going out for cod, smashing up the seabed to capture x amount of fish, 40% of which is cod, 60% is unwanted species which are thrown back dead.
2) Johhny angler who goes out in his boat, or down the pier and catches x amount of fish. 40% are cod, the rest are put back alive, and no damage to the environment.
Or:-
1) gillnetter goes out, sets his nets, storm comes along and the nets get lost. Nets continue to snare fish & dolphins for up to 3 years.
2) Anglers go out in their boat and catch a few fish (for sport) which are taken home and eaten, or sold and eaten.
Discuss.
23 May 2002, 01:21 PM
#117
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
how many brain cells do fish have?
this could be a close call actually.
i just asked me dad to count mine. but he's cross eyed. and he can't count anyway.
and neither can i.
i shot a frog once. right thro the head. didn't eat that either.
this could be a close call actually.
i just asked me dad to count mine. but he's cross eyed. and he can't count anyway.
and neither can i.
i shot a frog once. right thro the head. didn't eat that either.
23 May 2002, 08:19 PM
#118
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 745
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just adding to Toerag's well reasoned reply:-
Take the Salmon for instance. How much does the netted Salmon bring in for the local economy, £2 per lb maybe. Ditto the farmed fish which IMHO is genetic engineering by another name and virtually poisonous with all the crap that is put into their food etc.
Then there is the wild salmon. The elusive "Silver King" of the river. How much money is spent in trying to catch this fantastic fish by rod and line? A small fortune in fact. Tackle shops, transport, hotels, gillies etc etc. The list goes on.
The concientious fisherman will despatch only that which he intends to eat and the best sauce in the world is the act of having caught the quarry yourself which applies to hunting too. The same individual will be involved in preserving the fish/game by supporting conservation, new hatcheries, maintaining waterways/spawning beds etc. A wholly natural cycle that has been around longer than we have!
Fox Hunting is gone. How many more country pursuits and traditions passed down to us by our Fathers are to be banned as unnatural and barbaric? Who wants to live in a sanitised world where we are only permitted politically correct passtimes? Is the world gone mad?
Now where's my rod?
Jerome
Take the Salmon for instance. How much does the netted Salmon bring in for the local economy, £2 per lb maybe. Ditto the farmed fish which IMHO is genetic engineering by another name and virtually poisonous with all the crap that is put into their food etc.
Then there is the wild salmon. The elusive "Silver King" of the river. How much money is spent in trying to catch this fantastic fish by rod and line? A small fortune in fact. Tackle shops, transport, hotels, gillies etc etc. The list goes on.
The concientious fisherman will despatch only that which he intends to eat and the best sauce in the world is the act of having caught the quarry yourself which applies to hunting too. The same individual will be involved in preserving the fish/game by supporting conservation, new hatcheries, maintaining waterways/spawning beds etc. A wholly natural cycle that has been around longer than we have!
Fox Hunting is gone. How many more country pursuits and traditions passed down to us by our Fathers are to be banned as unnatural and barbaric? Who wants to live in a sanitised world where we are only permitted politically correct passtimes? Is the world gone mad?
Now where's my rod?
Jerome
23 May 2002, 11:18 PM
#119
trawlers dont fish for pleasure - they fish to create food (which i then sold making them a living enabling them to survive)
anglers - fish for the sheer pleasure for themselves (few "anglers" fish for food).
both inflict pain and suffering to fish.
one is necessary (look i maybe vegan but i understand that people want to eat meat and fish and that homo sapien is an omnivore), the other is there for self gratification.
fish can feel pain.
would you continue to fish if the they had vocal cords and could scream in agony?????
please discuss.
anglers - fish for the sheer pleasure for themselves (few "anglers" fish for food).
both inflict pain and suffering to fish.
one is necessary (look i maybe vegan but i understand that people want to eat meat and fish and that homo sapien is an omnivore), the other is there for self gratification.
fish can feel pain.
would you continue to fish if the they had vocal cords and could scream in agony?????
please discuss.
23 May 2002, 11:21 PM
#120
"Fox Hunting is gone. How many more country pursuits and traditions passed down to us by our Fathers are to be banned as unnatural and barbaric? Who wants to live in a sanitised world where we are only permitted politically correct passtimes? Is the world gone mad?"
yeh we should never have banned badger baiting, **** fighting, dog fighting etc etc etc.
yeh we should never have banned badger baiting, **** fighting, dog fighting etc etc etc.