Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[firstlight]

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.

[blaydRnr]

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.

[Stratocaster]

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?

[troutbreath]

"Simple enough for you guys?"

If I was a gambler I'd bet on NO

[shmertis]

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!!!!!!!!!

   

[goblin59]

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.

[blaydRnr]

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!!!!!!!!!

   

    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.

[firstlight]

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.

[allwaysfishin]

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 ....

[blaydRnr]

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.
 

[allwaysfishin]

                                     

WOW...... more drivel.

okay... this time i'm done for good and will no longer be associated with this site.

[blaydRnr]

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?

[blaydRnr]

                                    

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.

[Rodney]

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.

Are you going to post a Stamp report next time?