Fishing with Rod Discussion Forum
Fishing in British Columbia => Fishing Reports => Members' Fishing Reports => Topic started by: mastercaster on February 20, 2008, 02:00:56 PM
-
Went on my first guided trip on the Stamp on Saturday with a buddy of mine. Weather conditions were near perfect for winter fishing...the water a little too clear and low but no major complaints. Unfortunately for us there are very few fish in the system right now...our guide had said that three aquaintances of his swam the river a week or so ago and reported only 140 fish in total, a far cry from what it should be. The majority of these fish are above the bucket making it very slim pickings for the boats that need to fish below. We had heard horror stories that between all the guides last week only one fish had been hooked below the bucket.
The boat we were fishing from was capable of getting up into the area of the falls (above the bucket) so we saw fish, as stale as they were. This is a bait retriction in this area which makes it tougher but I did manage to hook two hatcheries, both dark two casts in a row. I kept one for a dissection for my grade five class. My buddy was boned as were all the shore anglers.
It was an interesting day but we were expecting far better results from this great river.
-
Sorry to hear you didn't have a more successful outing...at least the kids will get to learn a bit of fish anatomy.
-
Could you not have bought a Perch or something instead of killing a Steelhead to show grade 5 kids who probably couldnt tell the difference between a Steelhead and an Antelope? ::)
-
Dissections are difficult to perform with a perch in front of a group of young students. Small body, small package (disclaimer: such biological phenomenon does not apply to all living things).
-
Cammer, what master caster did is plain and simply wrong, this isnt a personal decision its actually the law.
Base on the provincial regs:
It is illegal too:
Waste the fish you catch. If your fish is not suitable for eating or if possession is illegal because of
quotas, size limits or closed seasons, return the fish quickly and gently to the water.
In terms of you point regarding hatchery brood, IMO any offspring whether from hatchery or wild parents are better than not having any offspring at all.
I know the game wardens south of the boarder would have strung a guy up for something like this and in fact, I don't think it say much for the guide that he didn't A) himself understand the regs or B) explain them to the fisher.
-
Better yet,buy a whole bag of Perch and let each student disect away. ;)
-
After they dissected it , they ate it. :P
That fish died for a noble cause....lets see....educate kids and talk to them about his experience on the river and how there are not as many fish around these days, and why it is important to protect them, maybe enlighten some kids and create some future conservationists, or, don't take the opportunity and do nothing....or eat the fish. Not to make light of the regs, but come on.....plain and simply wrong? I don't think so.
-
Those who follow rules just because they are rules are sheep. If you wish to be a true individual ask "why?" is a law a law. Try and understand why things are the way they are rather than just blindly accepting that they are.
-
Cool ,
I tried that method of reasoning and got fined. ;D
-
Those who follow rules just because they are rules are sheep. If you wish to be a true individual ask "why?" is a law a law. Try and understand why things are the way they are rather than just blindly accepting that they are.
it was wrong to kill a steelie for the sake of exploitation....and like Gooey pointed out, it is clearly indicated on the regs.
unfortunately i disagree with your sheep analogy, only because people (by nature) don't give a rat's my friend about always doing the right thing. whether its a minor degree of littering like flicking a butt in the river or going over the speed limit. sometimes its better that people follow the guidelines and regs just because they're outlined....rather than have some shmokel over- analyze them, only to misinterperate what is written.
-
Steelhead are poor eating anyway.
-
Those who follow rules just because they are rules are sheep. If you wish to be a true individual ask "why?" is a law a law. Try and understand why things are the way they are rather than just blindly accepting that they are.
it was wrong to kill a steelie for the sake of exploitation....and like Gooey pointed out, it is clearly indicated on the regs.
unfortunately i disagree with your sheep analogy, only because people (by nature) don't give a rat's *** about always doing the right thing. whether its a minor degree of littering like flicking a butt in the river or going over the speed limit. sometimes its better that people follow the guidelines and regs just because they're outlined....rather than have some shmokel over- analyze them, only to misinterperate what is written.
phhh since when is education the same as exploitation? Dion I think you're bang on with the analogy. Morality and legality are two completely different things and if my morals contradict the law, guess which one I'm going with....I mean for f's sakes, if a person's kids was injured badly in the bush and needed immediate attention, you'd expect that person would do the speed limit all the way back to town just because its a law? And I know the counter "you'd just be further endangering yourself and others".....but as a calculated risk its a good one. Use your head, use discretion and common sense. If more people did that things might actually get done in this country rather than tied up in our toothless courts.
-
Bummer, we were heading there to catch some for my friends garden. ;D
-
Good point Dion, ask why its wrong to waste a fish (of any species) ::) What's wrong about removing a spawning adult from the gene pool? :-[
So would anyone have cared if the guy had killed the fish for the roe? I think we would have seen some pretty harsh comments. End result is the same...that fish wont spawn and produce offspring. So is it OK just because someone thinks the cause is noble ie killing a fish for some class's educational benefit vs topping up your bait?
-
End result is anything but the same( save your one contrived instance of the fish not spawning) . Hmm lets see.....kill fish so you can kill more fish vs kill fish so you can do your part to educate kids about conservation in the guise of a "cool" day at school....give me a break.
I'm sorry Gooey that you see education as a waste. I'm not thinking about the kids either.....education benefits the salmon, if you can fathom that.
-
i think wat he did was perfectly fine. he educated students about steelhead thats cool, lighten up.
and to whoever said steelhead are poor eating, you either have no taste buds or are eating spawners as steelhead is one of my favourites
-
Wow, chastizing someone for educating a classroom full of kids, with a fish legally caught, retained within his limit, that he paid for (guided trip)........I must say a tough crowd we have here. By the way Gooey, surely you have seen some of the photos in Salmon, Trout and Steelhead where the fish kept are definately not suitable for eating, yet are retained. I think your assumption about enforcement in the states concerning the retaining of fish may not be as stringent as you would like and I am sure none of us anglers have ever kept a female, white spring (or female chum) for roe and have given the fish away or decided to "smoke" it because it became edible then right?. I think it is safe to say that all fishermen (me most definately included) at one time or another have used poor judgement or have lacked the understanding to make a good decision, only to learn from it. The topic really does not need that much scrutiny and it is definately not a morality/ethical issue. For those of you so concerned about ethics/education and the betterment of our sport do it where it really counts and thats on the river, tight lines WS.
P.S. Kingpin my wife would definately agree, a nice, mild flavour that is not overpowering.
-
if one kid left that classroom with a better understanding of what goes on in are river systems, then that fish has saved many more. These kids are the future conservationists.
I'm disappointed at the narrow minded replies against education.
-
This is kind of like the cutties that were retained on the Chehalis, many people didnt agree with that and some did....oh just wait there is one EXCEPTION...killing a fish that isn't going to be consumed is illegal. Because they were open for retention, the retention of those cutties were a personal/moral issue for that individual fish and each fisher will need to make their own decision with issues like that. But this steelie is a totally different issue.
WS - what makes you think that fish was legal? As soon as he made the conclusion that it wasnt table worthy it should have been released. Based on his comment, I assume that probably was done before he bonked the fish.
I quoted the regs verbatum, they seem pretty straight forward to me. Like I said before, my general position be it the cutties of this steelhead, a
PS - King pin, your totally within your right to think what he did is OK, just be aware that DFO is also within their right to charge him for that action.
Cheers
-
Narrow minded against education...thats a load of crap! Hey if mastercaster wasnt informed on or regs and he made a mistake, that fine I think everyone deserves a bit of leeway as the regs can be hard to read but what I dont agree with is people deciding when the regs apply. I dont know if anyone actually read my first entry...here it is again:
It is illegal too:
Waste the fish you catch. If your fish is not suitable for eating or if possession is illegal because of
quotas, size limits or closed seasons, return the fish quickly and gently to the water.
I didn't make that up, cut and paste right from the regs so do we as individual fishers get to chose when the regs apply to us or which ones we choose to follow?
Dieing to hear your response WS?!? ;)
PS - if education is the goal, I can highly recommend a tour of the seymour hatchery, I am sure much can be learn there with out killing a viable fish.
-
Wow, chastizing someone for educating a classroom full of kids, with a fish legally caught, retained within his limit, that he paid for (guided trip)........I must say a tough crowd we have here.
I'd say a lot of small minded jealous people who look to find fault. ::)
-
Hey Gooey, I am glad you can read, it is obvious that our education system didn't fail you. However, we learned to read in grade 1/2 (or later for some) and then most of us have moved on to bigger and better things, like using judgement, common sense, the ability to interpret and make a decision based on what we determine is right or wrong. I'm sure mastercaster could hire a lawyer to solidify that the fish was not wasted, as it states It is illegal too: waste the fish you catch. The period at the end of the sentence concludes a point and a new one is raised following. If your going to play devil's advocate, do so with more than just "that is exactly what the regs say." Hey Gooey have you knowingly retained fish that were illegally hooked ie flossed/snagged, oh right the regulations don't say no flossing. Come on Gooey, give me something more than that: your talking to somebody who has known you for ten years. Oh and yeah, good one, with take the kids for a tour of the hatchery I'm sure you'll have their attention more so than disecting a big fish.......especially the boys.....the next generation of fishermen, yeah they would hate the guts and stuff. Sorry, Nicole and the fisherwomen out there, I realize I'm not being PC and I apologize, just trying to make a point tightllines, WS.
P.S. Sorry, I didn't mean to bold everything, my mistake.
-
Nobody has mentioned how poor of run this river has received this year other than the original poster .
Like i said in my original post ,these kids dont know the difference between a Steelhead or an Antelope and hiding behind the excuse that it was for education is a lame excuse.
This fish could have spawned and in a year like this ,every fish counts.
Education of grade fives does not warrant killing a Steelhead for in any circumstances.
There are plenty of fish out there that are readily available to purchase and do whatever you want with.
-
WS - the point I was hoping you (any one one else) would comment on is whether a fisher should be deciding what regs they choose to follow or when. And after 10 years, you should know I love to play devils advocate!
Seriously though, based on the regs, it illegal to kill a fish you aren't going to eat....I agree with that 100%, not much room for interpretation in my books.
as you know WS both my parents are teachers so I am somewhat familiar with the scope and nature of schooling in a class of that age. The human circulatory system is studied and in fact my dads school does a pigs heart dissection at that grade level. Pigs are often used based on their similarity to humans. A fish how ever is totally different...no lungs, 2 heart chambers opposed to 4, etc, etc. a Basically a fish is not the best subject to use in support of learning the actual ciriculum. Now I do agree the that a dissection of a fish in class could offer a huge benefit in terms of capturing a students attention, imagination, etc, but I think there are a number of better sources for specimens than a steelhead from a natural river that would spawn otherwise.
-
Based on cammer's comment, if the river has a strong run of them, keeping a single hatchery fish for the benifit and future of the kids and fish does much more good than bad IMO.
Michael
-
Gooey, I did comment on it...... the whole thing about reading and moving on past that level of thought process (making decisions, interpretation, common sense, determining wright from wrong etc)........ perhaps I spoke to soon about your education ;D Also, why argue about what would make a great disection choice, it was about what he used the fish for and the legalities of it. I simply do not feel the fish went to waste and thank you for the biology lesson/lecture ;D. Firstlight, you are absolutely right about the poor return on the Stamp and yes, his specimen of choice could have been better (bass ;D had he hooked one), but he was not hiding behind that fact, nor should he. If we are so concerned about the returns on a hatchery system or any for that matter and things truly are bad than shut it down, close it completely for a full cycle....I would be in full support of that, but please save me the well that one hatchery clipped fish will make a difference bit when you could make that argument for the impact that one fish could have on the future generation of anglers. I can't guarantee you that his lesson had a profound impact on those kids, nor could you tell me if that fish would absolutely spawn had he released it, but if mastercaster is passionate about the sport and the fish that make it worth getting up at firstlight for (I couldn't resist), I can asure you that more good was done than bad in that classroom and it is a shame that some can not see that, tightlines WS.
P.S. Sam Salmon agreed!
-
I think more people on here need to get out of the house, have a life, and maybe even fish.
ahaha nice
-
Ghost fish, what time are you coming to pick me up at and how much money can you donate for my wife to go shopping with as that will determine how long I can go for ;D! You are absolutely right, unfortunately I got sucked into the topic given I am a teacher as well, shouldn't this be about fishing reports, perhaps one of the moderators will move it to the discussion forum, tightlines WS.
-
justify it all you want, sugar coat it, or even misdirect the facts i guess it doesn't matter. what it really comes down to is self entitlement.
you paid for your guides, your license and tags. you figure you have the right to retain your catch.....just like the guy who caught the cuttie at chehalis..... but don't talk education when really its nothing more than show and tell. at least the guy who retained the cuttie did so for table fare.
small minded. Maybe. ethics vs. moral obligation to the law. you decide....just remember, when come the topic of bbing on the fraser, don't get the two confused.....especially those of you who work on a double standard.
-
I didn't report on my Stamp trip but it had been slow fishing for others also. Rolli still came through for us as winter steel and I got the only fish that day. I got into 4 and kept two, Ws kept one.
-
Could you not have bought a Perch or something instead of killing a Steelhead to show grade 5 kids who probably couldnt tell the difference between a Steelhead and an Antelope? ::)
When you teach a unit on salmonid it's obviously a no brainer that you need to use a salmon for the dissection....it's not like any of the fish goes to waste...just finished eating it last night. In other years we'll brine the fish and smoke it outside my classroom door.
On another note I would safely bet that 80% or more of my students can distinguish the difference between all 7 salmonid...at least that's what their test scores show.
-
Well why didn't you say that in first place? ???
The idea behind fish retention is to eat your catch and thats what the guy did !!
-
WS - it disappoints me that you feel sucked in...like this debate isn't a worth while use of anyones time. Debates like this, flossing, the cutties, etc are all critical to the evolution of sports fishing in BC. each and every fisher has their own view as to the value of a fish, this shapes their ethics etc. This in turn affects how they participate in the sport.
If you don't think that these debates can't help one of the 2340 members of FWR to change, improve, or develop the way that they view a fish or the resource, then how can you justify killing a steelhead for the benefit of a single class room?
Now back to your last post...making decisions, common sense...I don't think the regs should be left up to "interpretation" or "common sense". That leads to the mess we have with flossing. Back to the roe example, if a fish is killed for roe, then has it been wasted...what if someone wants to skin it to make a belt and throws the rest away...was it wasted? As you can see everyone can determine what their own personal definition of waste is...so whats the point in having regs if we all just make up our own rules?!?
The regs state that "if a fish is not suitable for eating...return it to the water". My interpretation of that is that the ONLY reason a fish should be retained is if it is going to be eaten (anything else is a bonues...ie roe, a discetion,etc). Something tells me that a good portion of the membership here has probably never read that reg word for word nor thought about it this much...if this debate makes a single users here more educated, if it makes someone realize that killing a chum or a spring just for the eggs is wrong (and they don't do it again), then this debate has had an equal impact compared to the class room demonstration that sparked this thread!
-
WS - what makes you think that fish was legal? As soon as he made the conclusion that it wasnt table worthy it should have been released. Based on his comment, I assume that probably was done before he bonked the fish.
Where in my post did I say the fish wasn't table worthy. I didn't say the fish was a boot or a spawned out kelt....I simply said it was dark which meant it wasn't chrome....it was still in prime condition without a mark on it. It put up a great fight!
In the 16 years I've been teaching the salmonid program in the schools I've never retained a fish for the sole sake of a dissection. The fish was always eaten! And often by all the students in the class right after we smoked it (as part of our first Nations Food Fishery unit...another section of the salmonid curriculum)) Most of the time I take it home and eat it.
In conclusion, how many anglers can say a retained fish served as many uses as this fish did? Afterall., most retained fish usually only get to the table.
-
What the regs say is
It is illegal too:
Waste the fish you catch. If your fish is not suitable for eating or if possession is illegal because of
quotas, size limits or closed seasons, return the fish quickly and gently to the water.
It says if the fish is not suitable. No where does it say "if the fish is not to be eaten/consumed it must be quickly returned to the water. As you gooey have said you interpret the regs one way someone else could in turn read it another way. Neither is right or wrong. The original poster retained a fish that was suitable for eating, he then dissected it and then ate it end of story. So what if he didn't post his whole timeline of what was going to happen to the fish.
Does he deserve to have the quoted regs shoved down his throat? No. Does he deserve the benefit of the doubt,you bet.
You blindly waving the regs in his face saying" it says this so your wrong based on how I interpret it" is just as wrong
Good on you mastercaster for bring some knowledge to your students. I for one hope that when my kids enter the school system there are teachers like you who use there resources to better educate them.
-
Could you not have bought a Perch or something instead of killing a Steelhead to show grade 5 kids who probably couldnt tell the difference between a Steelhead and an Antelope? ::)
When you teach a unit on salmonid it's obviously a no brainer that you need to use a salmon for the dissection....it's not like any of the fish goes to waste...just finished eating it last night. In other years we'll brine the fish and smoke it outside my classroom door.
On another note I would safely bet that 80% or more of my students can distinguish the difference between all 7 salmonid...at least that's what their test scores show.
Thats what I figured you did with the fish Mastercaster. I can still remember the day we did the exact same thing way back when I was in grade 4. We got to dissect a sport caught chinook and much to the shagrin of my parents we were all permitted to bring back an organ of choice. Later we all got to have a sample of the fish after it was cooked up.
Believe it or not, that day in classes, along with our field trip out to Weaver Creek/Chehalis River hatchery helped to spark my interest in salmon fishing. In fact, the very next weekend I begged my Dad to drive me back out to the Chehalis to try and catch a salmon.
It's too bad the same people always come on here to slag others.
-
Where in my post did I say the fish wasn't table worthy. I didn't say the fish was a boot or a spawned out kelt....I simply said it was dark which meant it wasn't chrome....it was still in prime condition without a mark on it. It put up a great fight!
In the 16 years I've been teaching the salmonid program in the schools I've never retained a fish for the sole sake of a dissection. The fish was always eaten! And often by all the students in the class right after we smoked it (as part of our first Nations Food Fishery unit...another section of the salmonid curriculum)) Most of the time I take it home and eat it.
MC, is this the "Salmonids in the Classroom" program funded by DFO? Do the kids also have the juveniles raised in a tank prior to releasing in the classroom?
-
The reason I didn't do a play by play on what I did with the fish is because it was simply a fishing report. In my reports I rarely tell the readers on this site how the fish was prepared, how it tasted, etc. Those things are for other sections in the forum. Just because I didn't say that I ate it in the original post doesn't mean it was not my intention to do so. People just jumped to conclusions without even getting the facts.
FWI, DFO kills hundreds of salmon each year for the purpose of classroom dissections when teaching the salmonid program. They don't get anywhere near a dinner table. I choose to use one I catch myself. It has absolutely nothing to do with trying to look like a hero.....it has everything about using a fresh fish whose organs aren't pickled by phormaldihyde (sp.?). If any of you can recall your old science days in high school that stuff reeks to high heaven and tatolly turns off 10 year old kids and me, as well.
-
Where in my post did I say the fish wasn't table worthy. I didn't say the fish was a boot or a spawned out kelt....I simply said it was dark which meant it wasn't chrome....it was still in prime condition without a mark on it. It put up a great fight!
In the 16 years I've been teaching the salmonid program in the schools I've never retained a fish for the sole sake of a dissection. The fish was always eaten! And often by all the students in the class right after we smoked it (as part of our first Nations Food Fishery unit...another section of the salmonid curriculum)) Most of the time I take it home and eat it.
MC, is this the "Salmonids in the Classroom" program funded by DFO? Do the kids also have the juveniles raised in a tank prior to releasing in the classroom?
Yes, at the moment we have 52 coho alevin in our classroom incubator which will be released into the little Cambell R. in early April. They give us 50 eyed eggs, used to be a 100. In the last 16 years I figure my classes have put back well over a 1000 fish back into the system.
-
Yes, at the moment we have 52 coho alevin in our classroom incubator which will be released into the little Cambell R. in early April. They give us 50 eyed eggs, used to be a 100. In the last 16 years I figure my classes have put back well over a 1000 fish back into the system.
Exciting. :) Has the support (funding-wise) of this program from DFO gone down in the last few years? You guys also should also consider booking a field trip to the Fraser Valley Trout Hatchery for a hatchery tour and look at steelhead/rainbow trout spawning. There is also a visitor centre with aquariums, lab etc for classroom activities, plus two trout ponds for fishing (not sure if teachers are permitted to wet a line too ;) ). If you want more information feel free to email me and I'll give you the direct contact info.
-
Thanks for the post Mastercaster, I appreciate the report, I am heading to the Stamp this weekend for my 3rd guided trip this season. My expectations are not that high but then again we seem to always get into something.
BTW - good on you - my mom was a teacher in the BC system for just under 25 yrs so I have a great appreciation for people like yourself who go that extra mile.
Don't let the few posts by the self-appointed Internet DFO officers on this forum bother you too much. When I posted on my 1st guided trip of the year on the Stamp my simple fishing report (which did not give a "play by play") got hijacked with people getting on soap boxes and waving regs in my face.
Was Ken your guide?
-
Unfreekingbelievable >:(
The reaction to Mastercaster's original post is one prime reason why I rarely post a report here anymore. There was no where in his post that said that he threw the fish away uneaten after the dissection. If you truly go by the letter of the law, then any fish you retain must be eaten, even those that you thought were edible but turned out mushy. For those critics, you better not let me catch you throwing out any fish that turned out bad or I will report you to DFO ! Firstlight, sorry but its rather insulting that you feel the kids couldn't tell a perch from a salmon. You should give them more credit than that. My daughter's school has the "Salmon in the Classroom" program as well and ironically I was talking to one of the teachers about donating a fish next year for dissection. We bitch and complain when we hear of kids who throw rocks at spawning salmon with no respect for them or their habitat and yet when someone does something positive to educate these kids (our future leaders) they jump all over them and accuse them of breaking the law without getting their facts straight.
-
I really don't know what you guys expect...when you post something in a public forum EXPECT people will share their comments, thoughts, and feelings!
Lets recall the guy who had his fingers in the gills of a wild steelhead he released, as I recall he later commented about netting the fish as well...yes he took a lot of critism for that, some people said "leave him alone", "I'll never post here again", wah wah wah. Lots of people quickly jumped in on both sides of the fence...some dircreatly and other "balls out" bottom line is that by the end of that thread the fisher agree he wont be using a net on fish to be released and I think he thank everyone for the "feedback". So positive change has and will continue to come for discussions like this.
By definition, a fish that isnt to be eaten should be released so will I apologize for my position. Not a chance...I still believe that wasting a fish is wrong. Will I apologize for my comment, specifically that what MC did was wrong, sure, in light of the fact that the fish was consumed, the regs weren't broken...like I mentioned earlier though, if you put something online, be prepared for people to comment. Master casters original post talked about seeing stale fish, hooking 2 dark fish, and finally, keeping one for a dissection so I guess be careful what you say in a public forum...you never know how it may be interpreted!
-
That is exactly the way i interpreted it as well.
Sure didnt sound like something i would want to eat by the discription that was posted.
I still stand by the fact that if you are going to kill a fish for a class lesson it might be wise to choose something a little more available such as Chum or Pink.
Besides they are Salmon.
-
the pinks in my freezer are not going to waste.
they will be consumed by my pet piranhas, and the crabs in my crabtrap.
so I'm safe right?
btw: I have a pink in the freezer with guts still in, if anymore teachers need a fish for class.
oh you better bring back whats left so the piranhas can eat it, to keep it legit.
-
justify it all you want, sugar coat it, or even misdirect the facts i guess it doesn't matter. what it really comes down to is self entitlement.
you paid for your guides, your license and tags. you figure you have the right to retain your catch.....just like the guy who caught the cuttie at chehalis..... but don't talk education when really its nothing more than show and tell. at least the guy who retained the cuttie did so for table fare.
small minded. Maybe. ethics vs. moral obligation to the law. you decide....just remember, when come the topic of bbing on the fraser, don't get the two confused.....especially those of you who work on a double standard.
Nothing more than Show and Tell, blaydRnr?? I beg to differ! You need to give these students a little more credit....it's quite possible they know stuff about salmon that you don't know about. I'd liked to hear one of them explain the function of the pyloric caeca to you ( I wonder if you could even pronounce it because most can't...they can. It was one of their spelling words, as well. Or how about the imprinting or smoltification process, or how and why you take A.T.U.'s, or how to read a scale sample and see if any of it goes over your head.
How long they retain this info differs individually, but like Biffchan I have a big number of past students who started fishing because of this program, not to mention that the majority now have an appreciation for conservation.
That is exactly the way i interpreted it as well.
Sure didnt sound like something i would want to eat by the discription that was posted.
I still stand by the fact that if you are going to kill a fish for a class lesson it might be wise to choose something a little more available such as Chum or Pink.
Besides they are Salmon.
If my students read this reply they'd be quick to point out that so are steelhead and have been since they were reclassified several years back as salmon!
In past years I often retain a salmon in the fall, freeze it whole, and use it for my classroom dissection. BTW, these all got eaten as well. I didn't retain any pinks this year, was going to keep a chum from the Squish but we all know what happen there, so I kept a coho from the Vedder. We ate it at Xmas with guests from Europe who don't often get wild salmon so I had no problem deciding to keep a steelie, knowing that it wasn't going to be wasted.
-
I really don't know what you guys expect...when you post something in a public forum EXPECT people will share their comments, thoughts, and feelings!
Lets recall the guy who had his fingers in the gills of a wild steelhead he released, as I recall he later commented about netting the fish as well...yes he took a lot of critism for that, some people said "leave him alone", "I'll never post here again", wah wah wah. Lots of people quickly jumped in on both sides of the fence...some dircreatly and other "balls out" bottom line is that by the end of that thread the fisher agree he wont be using a net on fish to be released and I think he thank everyone for the "feedback". So positive change has and will continue to come for discussions like this.
By definition, a fish that isnt to be eaten should be released so will I apologize for my position. Not a chance...I still believe that wasting a fish is wrong. Will I apologize for my comment, specifically that what MC did was wrong, sure, in light of the fact that the fish was consumed, the regs weren't broken...like I mentioned earlier though, if you put something online, be prepared for people to comment. Master casters original post talked about seeing stale fish, hooking 2 dark fish, and finally, keeping one for a dissection so I guess be careful what you say in a public forum...you never know how it may be interpreted!
So you are saying that we should be careful about what we say in a public forum? Shouldn't the same care be taken when responding or commenting on a post? Rather than spew out comments based on assumptions and iinsinuations rather than facts?
-
MC you being a teacher should have known better. this is a public forum where unless you specify your actions precisely, words can easily be misconstrued. you can't blame anyone for taking your thread out of context. a simple...."i then took the steelhead and had a great dinner"..... would have prevented this whole fiasco.
it's great you're teaching your kids about marine biology and yes, they can probably make me look like an idiot and you may even think that i am an idiot, because i can't pronounce pyloric caeca or maybe because the imprinting or smoltification process, or how or why you take A.T.U.'s or how to read a scale sample may go over my head..... fair enough ....but with that said...THEN HOW? (you being a professional educator with all those years of teaching experience)...did you manage to OVERLOOK the use, of the BASIC FUNDAMENTAL of sentence structure and precise use of the ENGLISH language within context to help the rest of us idiots understand where the h*ll you were coming from....even after the first time gooey posted his concerns??? why did you wait to give the facts? what were you trying to prove?
by the way...sorry for contributing to the hijacking of this thread.
-
I really don't know what you guys expect...when you post something in a public forum EXPECT people will share their comments, thoughts, and feelings!
Lets recall the guy who had his fingers in the gills of a wild steelhead he released, as I recall he later commented about netting the fish as well...yes he took a lot of critism for that, some people said "leave him alone", "I'll never post here again", wah wah wah. Lots of people quickly jumped in on both sides of the fence...some dircreatly and other "balls out" bottom line is that by the end of that thread the fisher agree he wont be using a net on fish to be released and I think he thank everyone for the "feedback". So positive change has and will continue to come for discussions like this.
By definition, a fish that isnt to be eaten should be released so will I apologize for my position. Not a chance...I still believe that wasting a fish is wrong. Will I apologize for my comment, specifically that what MC did was wrong, sure, in light of the fact that the fish was consumed, the regs weren't broken...like I mentioned earlier though, if you put something online, be prepared for people to comment. Master casters original post talked about seeing stale fish, hooking 2 dark fish, and finally, keeping one for a dissection so I guess be careful what you say in a public forum...you never know how it may be interpreted!
So you are saying that we should be careful about what we say in a public forum? Shouldn't the same care be taken when responding or commenting on a post? Rather than spew out comments based on assumptions and iinsinuations rather than facts?
assumptions and insinuations are always on hand when facts aren't given....that's the nature of the beast. if one chooses to try to follow the letter of the law without prejudice or without applying ethics or grey areas, is that so bad?...then why so in turn criticize those who are only trying follow what is written?... to me, if anything deserves criticism and shame...its that.
-
I was in Gr 5 not too long ago and boy would of it been cool to see a steelhead disection (you don't get much better learning than hands on)...I'm sure many others would agree.
MT
-
So what happens when you have the catch of a lifetime, like say my 60 lb spring on the Cap, and you have it stuffed for a trophy! Is it Illegal? I don't think so otherwise we wouldn't see them in all the fishing shops.
I know that when you do this that you cannot eat the fish that you intend to have stuffed. The meat is a total write off because of the chemical treatment that is needed to preserve the skin of the salmon.
If there is one thing that drives me nuts about internet fishing sites is all the righteous people jumping all over guys who post reports. I know for the most part this type of behavior is not acceptable on BCFR and the mods make sure of it. This is so that none of this BS will go on.
Hotrod
-
Hotrod, skin mounts are a thing of the past, fiberglass replicas can be made from measurements and a picture...they last much longer and look better. But lets assume some guy for some reason wanted to make a skin mount...I would be very disappointed to see a trophy fish removed from the gene pool for nothing more than a mount. Its the same aspect that most people despise in trophy hunting (but thats another debate).
What surprises me, and I must say I am a little shocked, is the lack of support for the regs here. What would the average guy here think if someone posted a comment like caught this old boot spring full of roe, its gunna make great bait, too bad I had to huck the fish in the river cause it was so rotten....you get the idea. Would that bug anyone here? Just because the cause seems more noble (ie education), doesnt make it right (not factoring in the late admission that the fish was eaten). As I pointed out to winter steel, I don't think the regs should be open for interpretation etc...that would leave the ultimate decision up to each individual fisher and we know what that would mean for the resource.
The regs state that if you arent going to eat a fish, it should be released...so why all the moaning when I remind everyone of this? Its is the regs right? We agree that fishers need to follow the regs right? Or is the concencous here that we all can just follow the regs that make sense to each individual in a specific situation and they are open to an individuals interpretation?
-
MC you being a teacher should have known better. this is a public forum where unless you specify your actions precisely, words can easily be misconstrued. you can't blame anyone for taking your thread out of context. a simple...."i then took the steelhead and had a great dinner"..... would have prevented this whole fiasco.
it's great you're teaching your kids about marine biology and yes, they can probably make me look like an idiot and you may even think that i am an idiot, because i can't pronounce pyloric caeca or maybe because the imprinting or smoltification process, or how or why you take A.T.U.'s or how to read a scale sample may go over my head..... fair enough ....but with that said...THEN HOW? (you being a professional educator with all those years of teaching experience)...did you manage to OVERLOOK the use, of the BASIC FUNDAMENTAL of sentence structure and precise use of the ENGLISH language within context to help the rest of us idiots understand where the h*ll you were coming from....even after the first time gooey posted his concerns??? why did you wait to give the facts? what were you trying to prove?
by the way...sorry for contributing to the hijacking of this thread.
My intent when posting a thread about how fishing is on a given piece of water is simply to pass on info about water conditions, what I caught the fish on, and whether the numbers of fish in the area warrant someone wanting to go there. It just might save someone the time, the effort, and the money before heading out to the same spot. I'm not in the habit of passing on info on how I prepared the catch and how much I enjoyed it in this section of the forum, not that it's a secret or anything. If an error of ommission gets a few guys going off on a rant about the regs that unfortunate but I guarantee it has nothing to do with someone's sentence structure.
You are right that it's too bad I didn't get back on the computer sooner to rectify the situation but our home computer is out of commission (getting a Mac Mini this coming week). The only computer I had access to last week was at school and frankly I have very little time while I'm there to visit the site as much as I would like to. If my wife hadn't brought her lap top home I wouldn't have had the opportunity until next week to post this.
-
I have fished with MC and as far as I am concerned he is probably the most ethical and knowledgeable angler I have fished with and as far as I see his only foul here is that he didn't fully explain to the full outcome of what happened after the dissection.
Hope to fish with you again soon MC.
EZ
-
If anything I'm happy that another hatchery fish was removed from the river. We definitely don't want them trying to spawn with our wild fish.
-
Actually you can have a fish mounted and they can keep the meat from the fish for you.
At least at Eric Ganders you could have this done.
I do agree the fiberglass mounts are a much better looking product though and you have the option to release the fish as well.
Had i known Mastercaster had also kept the fish to eat i would never have posted my original comment but it was very unclear the way it was posted.
-
The unfortunate thing here is how people jumped all over this except of course those that actually know of mastercaster and the ethics that he follows. I have only met him a couple of times but searun knows him better then I and from what searun has told me mastercaster in definatly a top notch guy and a great rod. I just hope that my son gets the opportunity to have a teacher like this when he goes threw school.
-
It looks like mastercaster opened a can of worms on his report on the Stamp. I put off the trip there for some "garden steelies" till next week hopefully their biting better. I wouldn't think of anything but skin mounted on my wall. I have a nice Pink mounted in the Den that I use as an insense holder sometimes. Fiberglass is like flossing blah blah blah... :)
-
As I pointed out to winter steel, I don't think the regs should be open for interpretation etc...that would leave the ultimate decision up to each individual fisher and we know what that would mean for the resource.
The regs state that if you arent going to eat a fish, it should be released...so why all the moaning when I remind everyone of this? Its is the regs right? We agree that fishers need to follow the regs right? Or is the concencous here that we all can just follow the regs that make sense to each individual in a specific situation and they are open to an individuals interpretation?
From reply #37
The regs state that "if a fish is not suitable for eating...return it to the water". My interpretation of that is that the ONLY reason a fish should be retained is if it is going to be eaten (anything else is a bonues...ie roe, a discetion,etc).
Which way do you wants us to go?????? Flip flop like a fish out of water LOL
-
From reply #37
The regs state that "if a fish is not suitable for eating...return it to the water". My interpretation of that is that the ONLY reason a fish should be retained is if it is going to be eaten (anything else is a bonues...ie roe, a discetion,etc).
That's the main reason I didn't mention it...I thinks it's a no brainer....a bonked fish gets eaten. Period. If I thought there was going to be a huge controversy because some people have nothing better to do and thought otherwise I would have spelled it out for them but in the end it does make for some entertaining reading.
To put it another way...If I see someone walking out of the store with a bagful of fruit no one has to tell me it's going to be eaten even if the person had plans to throw it in a bowl first so that he can sketch or paint it.
-
Sure you never said how or if you were going to eat this fish but your description of the fish and the disection of the fish by your class sure didnt make me think you would be eating it either.
-
From reply #37
The regs state that "if a fish is not suitable for eating...return it to the water". My interpretation of that is that the ONLY reason a fish should be retained is if it is going to be eaten (anything else is a bonues...ie roe, a discetion,etc).
That's the main reason I didn't mention it...I thinks it's a no brainer....a bonked fish gets eaten. Period.
a no brainer eh? is that why sometimes when i'm walking the river bank, i'll find dead salmon with their belly slit or see people bonking wild or spawning fish with roe streaming out of them?....or see someone fishing with barbed hooks? i would love to give people the benefit of the doubt, but unfortunately you can never really know what someone's intentions are.
you should go back to your original post and re-read it, then maybe you can understand where we were coming from. i personally, don't own a crystal ball.
-
The regs state that you must release all fish that you do not intend to eat
There is nothing in the regs that says that you can't dissect a fish and eat it later.
There is nothing in Mastercaster's post that stated that he did not eat the fish or that he threw the fish away uneaten.
Mastercaster is under no obligation to provide any details to anyone about what he did with the fish after it was dissected as his post was not meant to be testimony in a trial. IT IS ONLY A FISHING REPORT.
Freedom of speech on the internet only goes so far. You have no right to accuse anyone on a public forum of breaking the law unless you have factual evidence that the person did so.
Mastercaster deserves an apology.
Simple enough for you guys?
-
"Simple enough for you guys?"
If I was a gambler I'd bet on NO :)
-
If you want to all get technical then all you scholars re read the reg no where does it say that the fish has to be eaten. It says that you must release fish that are not suitable for eating. No where does it say if you are not going to eat it then release it or the fish must be consumed.Take it to the legal level an it could be taken both ways Yes I am reaching but so are all you holy dudes. If you want to get technical then get technical. If you want to as gooey said interpret it the way you see then all must be able to do the same. If you want to take it as what it says verbatim and not WHAT IS IMPLIED then the regs state that the fish must be suitable for eating but it does not say it must be eaten.
Mastercaster I hope you still post I myself am rarely on here but it is pathetic to watch people bash you for what you did. Hmmmm, I wonder if these people take craps that smell like roses too cuz it sure sounds like theirs don't stink!!!!!!!!!
-
Getting back to the original intent of the post!!.... For there to be so few fish in the Stamp at this time of year is shockingly amazing. I use to fish lots with David Murphy and Kenny Meyers and can remember more than a few 20 fish to the boat days. I haven't been over for a few years now but I hope that what was one of the best Steelhead rivers in the province, (for retention) isn't fading into a "you should of fished it 10 years ago" river.
-
If you want to all get technical then all you scholars re read the reg no where does it say that the fish has to be eaten. It says that you must release fish that are not suitable for eating. No where does it say if you are not going to eat it then release it or the fish must be consumed.Take it to the legal level an it could be taken both ways Yes I am reaching but so are all you holy dudes. If you want to get technical then get technical. If you want to as gooey said interpret it the way you see then all must be able to do the same. If you want to take it as what it says verbatim and not WHAT IS IMPLIED then the regs state that the fish must be suitable for eating but it does not say it must be eaten.
Mastercaster I hope you still post I myself am rarely on here but it is pathetic to watch people bash you for what you did. Hmmmm, I wonder if these people take craps that smell like roses too cuz it sure sounds like theirs don't stink!!!!!!!!!
:D ;D :D ;D :D that's a good one.
so if a sign says 'water is not suitable for drinking' i guess you'd drink it.
big difference between semantics and plain stupidity.
-
Sorry,no appologies here.
I responded the same i would again if i were to read something that was worded the way it was.
I also explained that if i had known this fish was also killed to be eaten then i wouldnt have responded the way i did.
Im sure Mastercaster is a stand up person and fishermen but his intentions on his post were as clear as mud.
-
Gee.... i thought this site was gonna turn it around one day...... maybe the dumbasses would find something better to do than sit on thier freakin high horses doting out "shame on you's" evrytime someone posts something contrary to your small minded little views...... and does this site have mods for preventing thread hijacks????
This site is so full of arm chair wanna be fish cops.... it's unreal...... you guys all need to go back and learn english.... there's free esl classes out there ya know...... then..... go re read your fricken regs ::)
mastercaster, your reputation as an ethical angler is well known to me, even though we may not know each other personally.....
Dion... your analogy is BANG ON BROTHER
This is my last post on this site and while i respect many members here..... there are too many morons posting drivel these days..... like how bout the moron that said steelhead don't taste good...... How do you know Carl? you ever evn caught one??
So long kiddies ....
-
The regs state that you must release all fish that you do not intend to eat
There is nothing in the regs that says that you can't dissect a fish and eat it later.
There is nothing in Mastercaster's post that stated that he did not eat the fish or that he threw the fish away uneaten.
Mastercaster is under no obligation to provide any details to anyone about what he did with the fish after it was dissected as his post was not meant to be testimony in a trial. IT IS ONLY A FISHING REPORT.
Freedom of speech on the internet only goes so far. You have no right to accuse anyone on a public forum of breaking the law unless you have factual evidence that the person did so.
Mastercaster deserves an apology.
Simple enough for you guys?
so if i were to post "i retained a nice wild doe....this is my first steelhead of the season"... how long do you think it would take for me to receive 20 angry posts?.... would you defend me based on what you just said?...i think not. you would probably be the first to justify all the negative reactions and lecture me because of my lack of explanation. i think its time some of you got off the 'good guy' wagon and give it a rest.
-
::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::)
WOW...... more drivel.
okay... this time i'm done for good and will no longer be associated with this site.
-
Gee.... i thought this site was gonna turn it around one day...... maybe the dumbasses would find something better to do than sit on thier freakin high horses doting out "shame on you's" evrytime someone posts something contrary to your small minded little views...... and does this site have mods for preventing thread hijacks????
This site is so full of arm chair wanna be fish cops.... it's unreal...... you guys all need to go back and learn english.... there's free esl classes out there ya know...... then..... go re read your fricken regs ::)
mastercaster, your reputation as an ethical angler is well known to me, even though we may not know each other personally.....
Dion... your analogy is BANG ON BROTHER
This is my last post on this site and while i respect many members here..... there are too many morons posting drivel these days..... like how bout the moron that said steelhead don't taste good...... How do you know Carl? you ever evn caught one??
So long kiddies ....
wow. i'm really disappointed with your response. i've dealt with you for many years when you worked at berry's. i've always respected your views and skills not only as a fishermen, but as an avid outdoorsman. don't forget most of us don't know MC, so his intent and values are unknown to us. fish cops? morons? i've spoken with you many times on similar topics....so tell me, when did your values diminish? :(
-
::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::)
WOW...... more drivel.
okay... this time i'm done for good and will no longer be associated with this site.
are you sure this time? ::) seems you go through this same episode year after year, especially when you don't like the discussion. almost like a melodramatic actress, playing the role of a martyr. ::)
-
He can tell you in an email. ;)
We are done. If only I could get $1 everytime when someone announces "I'm done!" and returns when the good times come...
in the end it does make for some entertaining reading.
MC, it sure did, some constructive criticisms first, then I was rather amazed by how an omission of one detail in a report can lead to such an in-depth debate. As expected, you were intelligent and secure enough not to be bothered by it, but I guess the discussion was too sensitive for a few others. ;D
Are you going to post a Stamp report next time? ;)