The problem with ethics is that they are a luxury and more importantly, a matter of individual perspective, ethics are NOT simply a matter of black and white, otherwise it would be called a law. What some people people view as "sports fishing", others might view as an ignorant way of treating an animal, much the way, some view "trophy hunting"
When I speak of "luxury", if you are starving, and see a fish you can hit over the head, who would begrudge a man his sustinence? So the better along in society you are, the easier it is to hold to ethics as far as I can tell. If a man brings his entire family out to get thier "quota", is that ethical? I guess its a matter of perspective. If I am one man getting a fish for my freezer, and okay with flossing, I may look down on this mans behaviour, considering it unethical, yet here I am partaking in the same fishery, so what allows a man to harvest the river with his entire family, how does his conscience allow him to justify his ethics, maybe this man is the sole supporter of his family(back to the starving man ethics) or maybe it's simply a matter of "victimstance" and beleives that, if we allow for netting, than how is his behaviour any less ethical, than the man who buys it from superstore as a direct result of netting?
Ethics, and more importantly a mans belief system (think religion) has caused wars and civil unrest since the beginning of time, and will not be solved by (1) thread on a board.
Although the fact we can speak together on a board with out resorting to a brawl or war is a good start.