Print

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

[obie1fish]

Re: Birds, buckshot, .22s, and flossing:

Go back a little farther, guys- like pre-gun era. That horse picture was not far off. Birds were hunted with clubs (for the larger ones) or, somewhat ironically, with...









NETS!

Don't that open up a can o' worms? They used them for a lot of stuff. Let's go a'hunting with our nets and get some ducks!

[Gooey]

Your are absolutely right Geff, its way more efficient to snag sockeye than to try and get then to bite, congrats, your figured out flossing But thats as close as you get with your little analogy...i don't think chris has ever questioned the "efficiency" of flossing, just the morality of it.

[bluesteele]

It is often suggested that using flossing as a fishing technique on the Fraser is unethical yet from a legal point of view it is allowed.

The question is: If flossing on the Fraser is legal, what makes it unethical or ethical?

Please do not make the discussion personal. Keep it specific to the Fraser, keep it objective and give some reasons why you think the way you think. For purposes of this discussion let's assume that no one is right or wrong, we just want to know why you think the way you do about the topic.

I'm gonna take one more swing at the dead horse LOL....

The bottom line is everyone has their own moral compass. What one man can do and live with and justify can be vastly different from other men.

Alwaysfishn wants to split the ethics of flossing down the middle. OK for food. Not OK for sport. Which I understand.
Personally I wont qualify whether flossing is ethical based on food. Reason being it is far more economical to simply goto the
store and purchase a fish. If you are that hard up financially maybe you should not be eating sockeye and buy a bag of pinks or pork

The most important fact to remember is laws change but ethics usually stand the test of time. We have folks here that say hey it's the law so it's OK.

Think back to 1955 when Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat. Hey the law said white folks sit black folks stand. Ethically at that time this law was wrong.
But many hid behind the law saying hey it;s the law so it's OK.

Slavery was allowed under the law. Ethically it was wrong and many folks shunned that law because it was not right.

Bringing things up to modern times. What about drinking and driving? It's against the law. But to stop someone whois drunk from getting behind the wheel
and driving off is not against the law in many jurisdictions.

But hey I am not breaking a law by letting Billy drive off blasted.

The point is you can hide behind the law all you want and call it what you will. When the sockeye are all gone you can tell yourself I didn't break any laws must have been
the commies or natives. Wrong. You are all part of it. Go daily take your 2 fill your freezer throw half of them out later LOL...

I see flossing as a part of the whole me me me selfishness problem we seem to have with society today.
Is it too much to go beyond what is written as law?

Maybe you should ask yourselves "what should I do" vs "what can I legally get away with"

As I said Laws change over time. Ethics stand the test of time.

It was alright for child labour to slave away in the coalmines. The law said it was OK. Starting to see my point


Most of you need to grow a pair and stand on your own two feet and quit hiding behind the law.

Just because the DFO stands behind you and  lets you floss means absolutely zero. Lousy excuse folks.

Bluesteele

[blaydRnr]

I'm gonna take one more swing at the dead horse LOL....

The bottom line is everyone has their own moral compass. What one man can do and live with and justify can be vastly different from other men.

Alwaysfishn wants to split the ethics of flossing down the middle. OK for food. Not OK for sport. Which I understand.
Personally I wont qualify whether flossing is ethical based on food. Reason being it is far more economical to simply goto the
store and purchase a fish. If you are that hard up financially maybe you should not be eating sockeye and buy a bag of pinks or pork

The most important fact to remember is laws change but ethics usually stand the test of time. We have folks here that say hey it's the law so it's OK.

Think back to 1955 when Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat. Hey the law said white folks sit black folks stand. Ethically at that time this law was wrong.
But many hid behind the law saying hey it;s the law so it's OK.

Slavery was allowed under the law. Ethically it was wrong and many folks shunned that law because it was not right.

Bringing things up to modern times. What about drinking and driving? It's against the law. But to stop someone whois drunk from getting behind the wheel
and driving off is not against the law in many jurisdictions.

But hey I am not breaking a law by letting Billy drive off blasted.

The point is you can hide behind the law all you want and call it what you will. When the sockeye are all gone you can tell yourself I didn't break any laws must have been
the commies or natives. Wrong. You are all part of it. Go daily take your 2 fill your freezer throw half of them out later LOL...

I see flossing as a part of the whole me me me selfishness problem we seem to have with society today.
Is it too much to go beyond what is written as law?

Maybe you should ask yourselves "what should I do" vs "what can I legally get away with"

As I said Laws change over time. Ethics stand the test of time.

It was alright for child labour to slave away in the coalmines. The law said it was OK. Starting to see my point


Most of you need to grow a pair and stand on your own two feet and quit hiding behind the law.

Just because the DFO stands behind you and  lets you floss means absolutely zero. Lousy excuse folks.

Bluesteele

talk about derailment of a debated topic...no one is hiding behind the law which by the way is not written in stone...it is a guideline meant for humans to prevent chaos and total anarchy...to compare human slavery and suffering to animal cruelty is totally mindless... you want to talk semantics... i take it you would agree with vegans that killing for meat is murder and therefore should be punishable by the letter of the law? you're comparing apples to oranges so please stop flossing for scenerios just to try to get your own point across.

[bluesteele]

talk about derailment of a debated topic...no one is hiding behind the law which by the way is not written in stone...it is a guideline meant for humans to prevent chaos and total anarchy...to compare human slavery and suffering to animal cruelty is totally mindless... you want to talk semantics... i take it you would agree with vegans that killing for meat is murder and therefore should be punishable by the letter of the law? you're comparing apples to oranges so please stop flossing for scenerios just to try to get your own point across.

Killed all sorts of fish. All legally AND ethically. No I dont agree with killing for meat is murder LOL...

Point is flossing is legal and it is an individuals personal ethics whether they participate in this "questionable" fishery.

I understand you flossers just make a different ethical choice.    One day many of you will see the light as you become more experienced anglers. 
Hopefully you leave a few socks for the next gen.

[alwaysfishn]

I'm gonna take one more swing at the dead horse LOL....

The bottom line is everyone has their own moral compass. What one man can do and live with and justify can be vastly different from other men.

Alwaysfishn wants to split the ethics of flossing down the middle. OK for food. Not OK for sport. Which I understand.
Personally I wont qualify whether flossing is ethical based on food. Reason being it is far more economical to simply goto the
store and purchase a fish. If you are that hard up financially maybe you should not be eating sockeye and buy a bag of pinks or pork

The most important fact to remember is laws change but ethics usually stand the test of time. We have folks here that say hey it's the law so it's OK.

Think back to 1955 when Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat. Hey the law said white folks sit black folks stand. Ethically at that time this law was wrong.
But many hid behind the law saying hey it;s the law so it's OK.

Slavery was allowed under the law. Ethically it was wrong and many folks shunned that law because it was not right.

Bringing things up to modern times. What about drinking and driving? It's against the law. But to stop someone whois drunk from getting behind the wheel
and driving off is not against the law in many jurisdictions.

But hey I am not breaking a law by letting Billy drive off blasted.

The point is you can hide behind the law all you want and call it what you will. When the sockeye are all gone you can tell yourself I didn't break any laws must have been
the commies or natives. Wrong. You are all part of it. Go daily take your 2 fill your freezer throw half of them out later LOL...

I see flossing as a part of the whole me me me selfishness problem we seem to have with society today.
Is it too much to go beyond what is written as law?

Maybe you should ask yourselves "what should I do" vs "what can I legally get away with"

As I said Laws change over time. Ethics stand the test of time.

It was alright for child labour to slave away in the coalmines. The law said it was OK. Starting to see my point


Most of you need to grow a pair and stand on your own two feet and quit hiding behind the law.

Just because the DFO stands behind you and  lets you floss means absolutely zero. Lousy excuse folks.

Bluesteele

Take a breath bluesteele.........   you're hyper ventilating.

I don't know where you got the quote "Laws change over time. Ethics stand the test of time"     .......I suggest you made it up. 

The definition of ethics is.....  a social, religious, or civil code of behavior considered correct, esp that of a particular group, profession, or individual.     The question is how do we determine what the accepted code of behavior is for the fishing community?  Judging by the number of people out flossing today, I would suggest that the vast majority of fishermen believe that flossing for sockeye on the Fraser is a code of behavior considered correct.

Can we agree then that flossing is ethical? 

[bluesteele]

Take a breath bluesteele.........   you're hyper ventilating.

I don't know where you got the quote "Laws change over time. Ethics stand the test of time"     .......I suggest you made it up. 

The definition of ethics is.....  a social, religious, or civil code of behavior considered correct, esp that of a particular group, profession, or individual.     The question is how do we determine what the accepted code of behavior is for the fishing community?  Judging by the number of people out flossing today, I would suggest that the vast majority of fishermen believe that flossing for sockeye on the Fraser is a code of behavior considered correct.

Can we agree then that flossing is ethical? 

LOL thats funny quick give me a paperbag 

The point being made was laws change over time as we hopefully progress as a society. Ethics/Moral compasses generally stay the same.

You like my quote "Laws change over time. Ethics stand the test of time."-Bluesteele
You heard it here first LOL

Flossing is 100% unethical in my view...

As for your definition. I prefer "a system of moral principles."
Actually the vast majority of fisherman were not out flossing today. 

So if a whole big whack of people start low holing me in the graveyard run oh for several yrs say.. It can then be considered ethical behavior?
Fuzzy logic at best. We all kicked the blacks out of the seats way back when. Was that ethical behavior because groups of people were doing that?

Just because you witness a large group of people doing a certain activity does not then define it as ethical behavior.

[blaydRnr]

I understand you flossers just make a different ethical choice.    One day many of you will see the light as you become more experienced anglers. 
Hopefully you leave a few socks for the next gen.

hahaha... so now you're assuming lack of experience because i don't agree with your stance? funny considering i've been fishing since i was seven.

i think you're barking up the wrong tree and exerting energy on a group of fishers that have the lowest impact on sockeye mortality. you talk ethics and morals, but don't back up your argument with relevance to key issues... in essence, you yourself, are a flosser.

unless you boycott all forms of animal harvest either commercially or recreational you're nothing more than a hypocrite.

[Gooey]

You know everything is on wikipedia now a days...check out the definition of snagging: "It is a common term used to describe a method of fishing that entails catching a fish using bait without the fish having to bite it...." West Virginia Fishing Regulations, 2009, P. 8

Forget ethical etc, a flossed  fish doesnt bite the hook hence it was snagged...I have always maintained flossing is just a matter of being low on enforcements priority list.

By many peoples standards here (ie bladrnr, alwaysfishn, etc), selling drugs must legal too...I mean they do it on granville street and hastings in broad day light...same with the hookers down on richards etc, etc, it must be legal cause the cops don't bust em 24/7.....

PS - you will find that numerous other states have anti snagging laws along with verbiage the the one quoted above...check out Washingtons regs....they'd be writing tickets right n left if we took our fraser river circus south of the boarder.

[blaydRnr]

Killed all sorts of fish. All legally AND ethically. No I dont agree with killing for meat is murder LOL...

Point is flossing is legal and it is an individuals personal ethics whether they participate in this "questionable" fishery.

I understand you flossers just make a different ethical choice.    One day many of you will see the light as you become more experienced anglers.  
Hopefully you leave a few socks for the next gen.

i suppose when ever you buy meat at a store you make sure they're free range and lack growth hormones? or check to make sure they were not genetically altered through selective breeding? you make sure all your seafood is non farmed (regardless of species) or check to see if the fish were gill netted or long lined?

where do your ethics lie with these? or is it only bound by the compounds of fwr discussion forum?

[Gooey]

sports fishing has rules and laws that we are supposed to abide by...there are now laws about where i can do my groceries 

Seriously I like debating things so if you disagree with me, please do reply but also try and muster up a response that shows a ounce of inteligence!

here's another for you - albert' s definition of snaggin:

Alberta Regs 2010

Snagging – means attempting to catch or catching a fish using a hook:
(a) other than to induce the fish to voluntarily take the hook in its mouth

don't you see, flossing goes against sport fishing...call it something else (food fishery), manage it separately...fine...just don't wrap it up and manage it with sport fishing thus bastardizing something so dear to so many british columbians!

[alwaysfishn]

You know everything is on wikipedia now a days...check out the definition of snagging: "It is a common term used to describe a method of fishing that entails catching a fish using bait without the fish having to bite it...." West Virginia Fishing Regulations, 2009, P. 8

Forget ethical etc, a flossed  fish doesnt bite the hook hence it was snagged...I have always maintained flossing is just a matter of being low on enforcements priority list.

By many peoples standards here (ie bladrnr, alwaysfishn, etc), selling drugs must legal too...I mean they do it on granville street and hastings in broad day light...same with the hookers down on richards etc, etc, it must be legal cause the cops don't bust em 24/7.....

PS - you will find that numerous other states have anti snagging laws along with verbiage the the one quoted above...check out Washingtons regs....they'd be writing tickets right n left if we took our fraser river circus south of the boarder.

Not sure why you keep quoting laws from the US and other provinces. What do they have to do with how we catch fish in BC?

Maybe you can also answer why a 4 year study has been commissioned to understand the survival rates of flossed sockeye? Why study something that is illegal?  

[bluesteele]

hahaha... so now you're assuming lack of experience because i don't agree with your stance? funny considering i've been fishing since i was seven.

i think you're barking up the wrong tree and exerting energy on a group of fishers that have the lowest impact on sockeye mortality. you talk ethics and morals, but don't back up your argument with relevance to key issues... in essence, you yourself, are a flosser.

unless you boycott all forms of animal harvest either commercially or recreational you're nothing more than a hypocrite.

Hmmm...flossers have the lowest impact on sockeye mortality??? Show me the science.
Enlighten me with what the relevant key issues are and maybe I can address them for you.

[bluesteele]

i suppose when ever you buy meat at a store you make sure they're free range and lack growth hormones? or check to make sure they were not genetically altered through selective breeding? you make sure all your seafood is non farmed (regardless of species) or check to see if the fish were gill netted or long lined?

where do your ethics lie with these? or is it only bound by the compounds of fwr discussion forum?

Beef/pork/poultry I eat em all ..Yum...growth hormones like those too 
I do tho only eat wild seafood and if at a restaurant will not eat seafood that isn't wild. No farmed salmon for me.

BTW I believe we should have a bait ban on the Thompson as well.(stir) 

But hey the rules say bait is OK. My personal ethics tho tell me to not use bait. Although for the record I have used bait on the T in the past 

Anything else you would like to know fire away and I will help you if  I can.

[blaydRnr]

You know everything is on wikipedia now a days...check out the definition of snagging: "It is a common term used to describe a method of fishing that entails catching a fish using bait without the fish having to bite it...." West Virginia Fishing Regulations, 2009, P. 8

Forget ethical etc, a flossed  fish doesnt bite the hook hence it was snagged...I have always maintained flossing is just a matter of being low on enforcements priority list.

By many peoples standards here (ie bladrnr, alwaysfishn, etc), selling drugs must legal too...I mean they do it on granville street and hastings in broad day light...same with the hookers down on richards etc, etc, it must be legal cause the cops don't bust em 24/7.....

PS - you will find that numerous other states have anti snagging laws along with verbiage the the one quoted above...check out Washingtons regs....they'd be writing tickets right n left if we took our fraser river circus south of the boarder.

low on the enforcement list? quite the contradiction there considering i've bottom bounced side by side with you and your dad without you even knowing who i was...my brother and his friend pointed you out on several occasions, but never took the time to introduce myself because of our past disagreements and grievances.

you compare bbing the fraser with drug trafficking? how ingenious...maybe you and bluesteele need to form a coalition and new forum titled "fishing with ethics and morals...the hypocrisy version"

you want to play the mirror game?   look into one and ask yourself...where are your holy ethics when you go out and sell betties or when you bottom bounce the fraser with your dad? does that morally make you a drug dealer who don't do drugs, but will sell it to kids?