Anglers who are "Antis"??
 

I’ve noticed a trend amongst some catch-and-release fishermen, and that some (not ALL) of them appear to be against fishing for food. It could be a comment in a thread I’m reading on a fishing forum, or a line buried within a fishing article I’m reading. For example, I was reading an article on hooksets. A good, informative article…ending with the line, “Don't forget though, the most important part of boating fish is making sure you turn them loose!”

What gives? Is it that so many of these—I’ll go ahead call them “antis”—care so much for the life of the fish they are driving hooks into, that they would be devastated to know that someone would kill and eat it? Or is it really about having more fish to catch…over and over again? As far as I know, people have been fishing for food much longer than people have been fishing for the simple sport of it. I won’t buy a “conservationist” argument, because wildlife authorities (or individuals themselves…imagine that!!) can impose limits when and if they need to, and do.

I feel like it’s the same thing as the horn-hunter turning his nose at someone for taking a 6-pointer (or a spike for that matter). Maybe we should start hunting with tranquilizer guns and just take pictures.

Don’t get me wrong…I have NOTHING against catch-and-release anglers at all. I know a guy who loves to fish but can barely stand to touch the fish when he gets it in, lol! I just don’t understand why some of them turn their noses at those of us who like to eat what we catch.

Most of the people I meet that are strictly catch and release are people who aren't in a position, or have never been in a position, where they rely on fish for food. Most have big expensive boats, super nice/expensive rods and reels, and are of a financial status that they never need to think of fish as a food source. Every angler that I have met while bank fishing was either looking for food, or had no problem keeping a fish for food. It's the fishermen with the high and mighty "holier than thou" attitude that always seem to impose their opinions on others.

That's a good point, Gangly…maybe that’s the primary source of the criticism. I'm not in a position where I need to have the fish I catch in order to eat. In fact, I'm sure it will be awhile before I catch enough fish to cover the cost of my gear. But the entire reason I started fishing last year was to learn how to fish so that I could get food if I fell on hard times. It just so happens that I fell in love with fishing! So, I go quite often...but I don't always catch fish!

I can understand catch-and-release fishing from a sheer love of catching those fish, but, for me, it isn't something I'm interested in doing, even if I don't NEED the fish for a meal. I love the satisfaction of bringing home a meal to my family that I personally procured, rather than having purchased it from a store. Hopefully I’ll become good enough at it that when I need it, I’ll have it. Plus…and this is just a personal thing…I don’t want to put a fish through a battle like that just to do it.

It depends on the fish species, there a game fish and there are sport fish.

The easiest example is Bass. Why keep a Bass when you can go and catch Bluegills, Bream, Specks, Crappie (in most cases). Thus, releasing that Bass give it an opportunity to become a real trophy. This depends on body of water, but C&R Bass fishing has proven itself over and over again.... and they taste like *$&% compared to other species.

Trout are a very touchy subject around this area. Some people love 'em to eat, others are strictly C&R. This goes into a whole different subject of body and water and NATURAL reproduction vs. PLANTER fish.

There is a ton of information, I jsut haven't got the time to dive into it.

To each his own, if they are within legality, who gives.

I practice catch and release only with fish I don't eat; like bass and catfish, but I really hate when people take more than their creel limit or take undersized fish.

It is just people that feel a need to take a stand on personal preference (another great example of this is mechanical vs. coc broadheads). I personally dont keep any but maybe 3 fish a year & if someone is going to keep as many as allowed them by the state who am I to feel poorly against their decision. I know a couple people that only fish enough to catch a meal & most of my other buddies fish just to be out there & dont keep a thing... it all works.

-South

Where I fish, bass are the easiest fish to catch. The bluegills and similar sunfish that I catch are usually very small...too small to be worth filleting. And the crappie are very difficult to catch because there is very little structure in my reservoir, and I have no boat.

I don't find bass under 1.5lbs to be bad-tasting at all! I prefer crappie and larger bluegill, but, prepared correctly, a bass makes a delicious meal and my kids and wife agree.

That's the part I don't care about, personally. So then, is that what the fuss is about when a bass is not released (I am not saying YOU are fussing)? Because I'm eating a bass that a C&Rer wants to catch again when it gets big so he can say, "Look at the big bass I caught!"?

What do you mean by this? What has it proven, exactly?

And I guess that is my point...why am I always reading these jabs at those who don't release?

Personal Opinion, I think Bass don't hold a candle to any panfish species, and I will not eat them.

People make a fuss because Bass are no longer viewed as Game fish, they are now viewed as Sport fish. Its the same idea with athletics. They were once played for fun, now it is a big competition. Fish were once caught as a mechanism of survivng off the land, now they are caught for sport.

The fact that C&R bass is proven over and over is something that has to be looked at in big, popular Bass fisheries. Look at the Bass Master Classic, for example. 100s of great anglers take to the best Bass waters across the United States and catch some of the most quaility biological "genes" fish out of a body of water, some often during spawning season supporting 1000000s of eggs which have great potential. This is just in 1 tournament, let alone the anglers who pursue these fish day in and day out.

I don't read (and I read too much about fishing) to many jabs at fisherman who keep fish, and if I ever do its about Sport Bass Fishing or Natural Reproduction Trout and Salmonoids. Just one of those things you brush off your shoulder, if it bugs ya that bad I would recommend thicker skin.

As buckhunter said, it depends on the body of water. In a lot of small lakes and ponds, bass (eating size - 1-3 lb) MUST be kept to balance the pond ecosystem. A lot of these bodies of water are man made. So you can't think of them as "natural." Picture a garden, its not a naturally present thing, man made it, so it therefore requires A LOT of work. Watering, pruning, etc. Small lakes and ponds are very much the same. Now again, personal opinion here but I love the taste of bass. I have never had a bad one and its a lot more meat than panfish and I can't tell a huge difference in the taste. They may taste diff based on diff geographic locations. So back to the original point, there is absolutely nothing wrong with keeping any fish from any waters as long as 1) they are safe for consumption, 2) they come from a sustainable population and their numbers aren't in jeopardy, 3) you actually eat them rather than keep them and then decide your too tired to clean them and trash them. I catch and release trout usually because I dont like dealing with the small numerous bones. However I sometimes keep them too. Bass I usually release unless I am wanting a fish fry and only keep smaller ones. Most panfish are so prolific you can't keep too many. As for the people that turn their nose up to people that keep fish, those are the same people who will buy fish to eat at the grocery store or nice restaurants that were caught in a way more destructive manner than your average avid outdoorsman. Most people who truly love fishing are the best stewards of the resources they love opposed to the people just trying to make a buck selling fish.

Also, as for the C&R bass fishing, it very much depends on the body of water. However, even the trophy places have to shock up and take a lot of the smaller bass or you can end up with a stunted population. So it is usually best to keep those smaller 1-2lb bass. Its better to C&R those larger ones. Again I don't claim to be an absolute authority on all things fishing, but I do know a lot about managment and genetics as I did my master's in fisheries at Auburn University which has been recognized as the #1 fisheries dept in the world. There are some very brilliant professors there that are world reknown experts in fisheries management, genetics, disease, aquaculture production, etc. While my specialty was bacterial genetics as it relates to disease in humans, I learned a lot of everything while there. So I'm not bragging, but I'm not just spouting information I've read from Field&Stream, nor am I implying any of you are.

Great read mrl0004

I have no biological degrees, etc. But I do alot of reading and make the most possible informed judgements based on readings and personal experience.



Currently in Michigan, we are having many miles of gear restrictions put on PUBLIC waters. This is due to, in part, big organizations that influence government decisions.

Tell me that wouldn't tick ya off.... the government telling you you can only use flies in a section of trout stream... I'm talking like a 100 mile section of river.

I can't speak for all states but here in MA the water isn't clean at all and the fisherman who catch and keep outweigh the catch and release fisherman. We have no real seasons of fish so it's fair game everyday of the year (minus a few bodies of water). The state puts in trout because there are very little wild trout left. The state hasn't done anything with Bass in years and years and now there isn't much fishing on 90% of the waters. You can find great fishing in the backwoods ponds or farm ponds but you've got to get permission because it's private land.

Good stuff mrl0004,

Buckhunter14 - There are a lot of "fly fishing only" waters here in the northeast and it is a real bad deal for those of us who never fly fish. You know - our license money goes for stream management just like the fly fishing elites does. How many times have you seen a sign on a river saying- "bait fishing only?" I've never seen one. I have been against this kind of discrimination for as long as I have been aware of it and I preach against it whenever I get a chance.
There are a lot of public ponds and lakes in the northeast, that are managed strictly for trout and salmon and are fly fishing only. Quite often, lately - the state boys are complaining that someone is illegally planting other species of fish in these nice ponds - like Smallmouth Bass or Northern Pike or Chain Pickerel or bluegills. It's my theory - that a lot of the ordinary guys and their families who fish from the bank with live bait, want something other than the sacred trout or salmon to fish for and so, they make it happen - and there is really no way to stop them all. It's high time the state quits wasting time and money catering to the trout and salmon elite, and starts managing all the waters, for all the fishermen and women.
And by the way - Bass - both Smallies and Largemouth are delicious if you fillet and skin them - they are some of my favorite eating, and I eat a lot of them every year, plus put some in the freezer for winter. C & R - in my opinion, is a matter of personal preference - just like what religion you choose - it is a free country yet.
When I lived in Alaska - and fished for Arctic Grayling on some remote streams in the tundra - I practiced C&R most of the time, as those fish populations were very vulnerable and had never seen a lure of any kind before - you could literally catch a hundred or more on a good stretch of river - just walking along casting a # 2 Mepps spinner from the bank. The only time I ever kept any, was to cook a couple up on a gravel bar for my lunch. It just depends on the situation.
Tight lines and bouncing bobbers.

IMO that makes you smarter than the people that do have the degrees a lot of the time. I definitely am not an expert on fisheries management, as previously stated, but I learned a lot while there doing what I was doing. But what you said sums up what true intelligence is all about, because with any information, the only thing we can do is take it in and apply it with our own experiences to make the best judgements. With the bass stuff though, I have seen it with my own eyes, if a lot of the 14-16 bass aren't culled it will severely stunt the whole bass population. Now this applies from 1 acre ponds to 150 acre lakes. Beyond that I am not sure.

I certainly agree, but I haven't seen it personally. I have noticed this specifically with Bluegill or Bream.

Pertaining to Bass, I live on a private 14 acre lake. There are about 10 houses on it and I can count on one hand the number of fisherman who fish it. Fish numbers (Pike, Bluegill, Specks/Crappie, Bass) are all in very large numbers. I will bet that over the course of a year less than 5 Largemouth bass are taken out of the system. I continually catch half pound bass, and 5 pound bass, a few up in the 6.5 and 7 pound range. For some reason the fish have found a way to maintain the life cycle.

They probably did that by keeping the bass population in check by adding a second predator (pike). The reason the bass are typically stunted is that they are stocked with panfish (bluegill, crappie, etc.) and catfish. The bass produce without anything eating them, and compete with the catfish for the panfish. Therefore, you are left with a lot of bass that can't grow due to food being a limiting factor, which is why they must be culled. In that case, humans must act as the bass predator. So it all goes back to what we both were originally saying: it all depends on the body of water (size of water, other species present, etc.)