Dizzy wrote:stevenmajor wrote:I suggest the catch and release fishing crowd are no better than the hunters you mention. They are stressing out, maiming, often killing for some type of gratification. Not really sure why...maybe it's the thrill of out smarting another creature who has a brain the size of a pea? If there are other good reasons, someone please post them.
This is an absurd and "silly" statement and takes away from the legitimacy of our "desired end" of Trophy Hunting ! Considering that over 75% (probably more this day and time) of "catch and release" fishing is done for hatchery raised fish, your statement is invalid. The majority of America's streams have suffered from pollution at one time or another, i.e. acid rain and other man-made tragedies, thus the majority of fish stocks have had to be supplemented and even totally replaced. Today with stream monitoring from groups like Trout Unlimited and many others, Rivers, Lakes, Streams and even out coastal estuaries are being replenished on a regular basis! Even streams classified as "Wild" populations have seen help. Most catch and release fishing is done with "barb-less" hooks and ethical anglers cause only minimal stress. There are many streams "off-limits" to any fishing whatsoever throughout of land!
I would like to see the following"
You can't control what other countries allow but you can control what your citizens do.
It should be totally illegal for the hunting and taking of any endangered or threatened species in any country on this planet by our citizens. Transportation of any trophy should be stopped at US customs and returned to that country and the US citizen recipient should be federally charged with "smuggling" and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
I am not an "anti-hunter" even though I do not hunt myself. As long as you consume what you hunt, it's OK with me, excluding any endangered animals.Deer overpopulation in this country is "rampant" and there is nothing more cruel than watching a deer starve to death due to the lack of food sources caused by the habitat loss due to development "caused by the human race!!!"
I thought Steve's point was that to do any harm to any animal at any level simply for the sake of pleasure and ego was beyond his own rational thinking to justify.
I'm not sure i get the correlation between catch and release and fish stocking. Are you saying that because rivers are stocked we can then hurt those fish more readily and justifiably than say wild native fishes??
You dismiss rather casually the harm to a fish as nothing to be concerned about. They do have a brain and as intense of a survival instinct as we do, in fact everything does, and with a central nervous system they feel pain. So how could anyone think that a fish fighting for it's life while being pulled against it's will is not going to cause that fish to be totally freaked out? Doesn't a fisherman rely on this fact so he/she can get that big fight from the fishes struggle for life?? Let's see, the fish is fighting for it's life, and the fisherman is so happy about it, and then he/she is exonerated because he/she lets the fish go...what's wrong with that picture? Ethical angler?? May be a definition of what ethical is would be a good starting point. Because to most, torturing animals, even fish, for selfish fun is not ethical, or moral.
If your claim that the fish is only minimally stressed is true, then how can anyone know that?? No fish has ever spoke up and said to his captor "hey that was a blast let's do it again". I think it's the old tactic of committing the lessor of two evil's and then pronouncing the lessor one as right. "It's ethical cause we let it go". How does anyone know how much they stressed out that fish they reeled in?? How can anyone know what happens to the fish next? See the fish has a very small brain and also can't speak so we make assumptions to what it thinks. Unfortunately many, as in sport hunting and trophy hunting put their own biased spin on what they want to believe that fish, or animal, is feeling and it's level of stress and pain. Even if the number of fish or animals who get away either by being released or they escape is small it's makes the whole endeavor still stink as many are too injured to survive. No matter what measures are employed to minimize the harm, there still are no guarantees the creature will survive and will probably suffer a long terrible death.
One thing is absolutely certain if a person leaves that fish or animal alone then that person 100% will not be hurting that said fish or animal-no chance at all guaranteed.
We all need to examine the indoctrinated level of our own anthropocentric natures as that's what we mostly have been conditioned to believe.
And why should it be illegal to hurt and transport only the endangered and threatened animals as you pointed out in bold type and underlined?? Are they the only ones that count? Does it have to get to the point that it has to be an endangered or threatened species before we act with a consciousness? More anthropocentric thinking there on that one...
I'm sitting here contemplating what it would be like if a giant hook on a rope descended from the sky and gaffed me through the side of my mouth and then dragged me about ten or so miles through the streets all the while not having any idea what the heck was going on....
Would I be just fine if I got released afterwards??
Paul