Catch and Release policy
AC
the 3 June meeting of Anglers Alliance:
"The discussion moved to catch-and-release policies in general, and M
Stevens made the point that catch-and-release should be avoided as a
policy, even if it seemed to be a sensible way to manage a fishery.
He suggested that imposing a 'slot limit' would be a more socially
acceptable management tool."
I congratulate Mr Stevens for his view, although I think I would want
to take issue with the assertion that catch and release seems like a
sensible way to manage a fishery. If ever our sport were to develop
an 'Achilles Heel' I do believe that the misguided notion of catch and
release just has to be it!
In the first place, I think we would do well to examine where the idea
of catch and release was spawned and how appropriate it might
therefore be for our own fishery. The United States is a country with
a massive population (a great many of whom are sportsfisherman) and
limited fishing resources. Various strategies are employed there to
ensure that everybody gets a fair go at the fishing. Catch and
release is a commonly accepted strategy there, as is a thing called
delayed harvest. Delayed harvest waters are stocked at the beginning
of the season and then people are able to fish those waters, but must
release any fish caught up until a prescribed date. After that date,
the fish may be caught and retained by anglers.
What this means is that any fish that happens to have the fortune to
be a 'stocker' in a heavily fished delayed harvest water can look
forward to being caught repeatedly through the season until a certain
date, after which it will become dinner! The only concession for a
strictly catch and release water fish, is that he will hopefully avoid
ever being dinner .... and will get off with only being captured over
and over again until he dies from injury and mis-handling ....... or
(improbably) natural causes.
The fact is, the fishing scene in Tasmania (for now anyhow) is
characterised by abundant fishing waters, ample fish and low angler
numbers. It is a vastly different world to that in which our US
brother and sister anglers exist.
I am thrilled that we don't have a delayed harvest mentality here in
Tassie. But I do see the 'catch and release' philosophy seeping into
our thinking.
This is a subject where everyone has a personal opinion and I have
heard arguments both for and against. For what it is worth, my own
view is simply that fishing for the fun of it, with no need or desire
to eat what you catch is in a similar league to cock fighting, bear
baiting and bull fighting. I cannot imagine how we manage to convince
ourselves that there is anything noble or sporting about tearing up a
fishes mouth, dragging the creature (preferably exhausted) from the
water into a totally foreign environment, hold its body and damage its
delicate scale and slime covering (while someone catches a happy snap)
and then return the poor terrified creature to the water, to take its
cahnces at recovery ... until the next time.
One day, the people from Peta and similar organisations will stamp out
our 'sport'. I believe that so-called 'fisheries management'
strategies that use such devices as catch and release or delayed
harvest will be the very reason they will succeed.
There are better ways of looking after the fishery, bag limits and
take limits are obvious and can be tailored to suit the conditions.
Deer hunting is carried out in a controlled manner, with hunters being
strictly limited in the number of animals they may take in a season.
Perhaps angling will some day need to be regulated in such a way.
Maybe along with an all season Angling Licence, we could be issued
with non-transferrable tokens entitling us to catch a limited number
of fish for the season.
At the moment, the current strategy of bag and size limits seems to
provide us all with a rewarding angling experience.
I don't think though, that anyone will ever convince me that fishing
for fun (not food) is noble or sporting! To me, it is just plain
cruel. If i catch it and its legal, it is dinner!
I don't expect other anglers to agree with me on this issue. But if
this item serves just to stimulate some thinking on the matter and
perhaps spark some sensible and informed debate, then I do believe
that it will serve a worthwhile purpose.
Cheers all,
AC
sorells1trostizz
agree it sets anglers up for attack by PETA and similar groups. I
don't fish with a view to distressing the fish - although that is
necessarily colateral damage. I only release undersized fish or
species caught by accident. Once I have enough, or the local bag
limit, I stop fishing. Catch and release just for the sake of it
seems unacceptably cruel to me. I know there are those who disagree,
but their arguments don't sway me.