Print

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

[mastercaster]

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. 

[Stratocaster]

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?

[blaydRnr]

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.

 

[blaydRnr]

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.

[BladeKid]

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

[hotrod]

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

[Gooey]

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?

[mastercaster]

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.

[EZ_Rolling]

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

[scallop]

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.

[firstlight]

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.

[Geff_t]

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.

[troutbreath]

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...

[shmertis]

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

[mastercaster]

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.