Catch and return? A load of old dangly bits!!

[theoldfart]

Nipper and me went fishing today and he was telling me that the thing is now to catch fish, and return them.

I say this is bollocks!!

The reason for this is simple.

I go fishing to catch fish to eat them.

I take what I need and don't take no more.

(The only time I can ever get to catch more than I needs is mackerel bashing and I don't kill fish for the sake of it )

S'pose I went and did this 'catch and return',

Now that's fine , so I goes back to Mrs Old Fart with no fish. What doe's she do??

She goes to Iceland, or Safeways and buys some frozen crap from them.

Now where did that fish come from?

Well let's have a guess?

A fleet of trawlers , who throw back half the catch dead because they are , the wrong fish, out of quota, wrong size, etc.

So what I am saying is that it is better to catch your own fish and keep them.

The less people that go to the supermarkets, the less they sell. The less they sell the less they buy. The less they buy the less orders there are for the bastard trawlers.

You want to preserve fish stocks? Keep what you catch!!

[trigger]

spot on t.o.f not sure purist will agree
regards trigger

[olly]

iv always fort this and same with the big supermarkets, use local shops and local farm shops. it all tastes better and keeps the locals up and running

[eccles]

I agree to some extent OF except that there are some folk who don't like to eat fish even though they know it's a healthy food. I also like to eat what I catch but draw the line at those too small to make it worthwhile and I also return large breeding fish such as pregnant smuts and bass over 7lbs.

[snoopy54]

Very elequently put Old Fart - I think most people are like minded - in this case I think you are looking for a debate which Im personally not going to get involved in as Ive got pretty strong views on this and its got me into trouble in the past

Bon Chance mes enfant

Clive

[iknowagoodplaice]

I would say to your son - good on you for being conservation minded. As Tom McGuane wrote, we are beyond the stage of putting back what we take out: we must put back more than we take.

That does not literally mean we should never take fish to eat but it does mean we should vigorously support conservation initiatives. For the most part, keeping a modest number of fish to eat (when we catch them) will have a negligble impact on fish stocks compared to commercial fishing. However, there may be exceptions - for example, fishing marks inaccessible to trawlers where a boat of anglers may have a significant impact on local stocks. I am aware of cases where a large number of double figure bass were killed; they caught them and killed every one. This is my view is excessive, and given the slow growth rates and relative rarity of big bass, likely to have an effect on stocks, especially if repeated by several boats.

So, nothing wrong in keeping a few fish to eat, but don't go mad if the opportunity arises. And as someone suggests, buy fish from local fishermen who fish sustainably if possible . Supermarkets get their fish from big trawlers (with the possible exception of Waitrose).

Give your son a pat on the back.

[snoopy54]

I think I may have heard the same story you refer to - something like 15 double figure Bass taken in one session and everyone of them killed - carnage