I have been reading the article in T&S by Stan Headley.
When i started to read i was all set to dissagree quite vehemently
:
However as i progressed through i found i had to agree with what he was saying.
Catch and release when wild fish are involved should be actively encouraged, but when it comes to stocked fish then what do we agree with?
Is catch and release really neccessary for fish stocks when the trout are introduced, or is a a way for fishery owners to make money. I know that due to the cost of trout if C&R was not allowed then the ticket prices for everyone else would have to go up to support the constant replacement of fish.But there is substance in the fact that C&R means fish are being bred purely for sport, I am a little uncomfortable with this as an angler. I like to return fish because i'm loathe to kill beautiful creatures, however do i feel the same way about a creature bred for the purpose of angling.
In theory this fish is helping to protect the wild trout that i love so dearly, so is it right to accept it as a sacrifice for that cause?
:
Perhaps it is , if you take the fish and eat it.
I find myself thinking that if i pay for a 2 fish ticket and then return them all because i don't feel like taking any of them home, satisfies my guilt over the preceding issue.But that means paying more for my fishing, no-one likes to spend more than neccessary, So i resolve that C&R is not so evil, i don't intend to keep any fish, but i dont regard the fish as a commodity, i still see them as beautiful creatures that i wouldn't want to kill.Conscience clear?
Today i picked up a copy of FlyFisherman magazine from the states.
In it i found a small article that re-stimulated the doubts i thought i had
Apparently the university of missouri have done a year long study into trout fed with a supplement of Creatine. (Creatine is a naturally occurring amino acid). The tests found that the fish showed a 5 fold increase in stamina. the quote that completed the piece was as follows "Researchers are not aware of any hatcheries currently using creatine as part of a trout feeding programme, but they haven't ruled out the possibility that it might one day be used to improve performance of fish raised for sport fishing."
Suddenly the whole issue took on a different possibility. This idea of breeding the fish to perform better for the sport, is fundamentally wrong.
If we can say that breeding fish for sport is justified on the grounds that it helps remove pressure from natural stocks, then enhancing the fish to improve the sport surely must be wrong?
Then i thought about Triploids
:
:
Sandy