Quack wrote:
No it just means they don’t impact the resource as much as the avid angler, even if the avid releases a lot, and shouldn’t be preached to for eating fish they catch.
The amount of impact someone has on the fishery depends on a lot of factors. Without getting too much in to the science, a person could have a larger impact on the health of a fishery by keeping 10 large fish versus someone selectively harvesting 50 small fish. I know a lot of avid anglers that never keep any fish.
We all make decisions how to spend our free time. I have a lot of buddies that say they don't have time to fish anymore. In reality they spend their free time doing other things they enjoy. Some have them turned in to workaholics and don't have as much time to fish. Those are their choices. I could spend my free time doing a lot of other things that I enjoy. I enjoy fishing more so I pass on a lot of those things and fish instead. Those are my choices. I don't see why someone who chooses to spend less time fishing shouldn't have regard for the resource.
Some guys only go hunting on duck opener weekend. Some of those guys want to get their monies worth and shoot a lot and will sky bomb at everything within 100 yards. Is it wrong to tell those people they should reconsider how they conduct themselves in the field because they are disrespecting the resource and hurting others hunting? Or should be just stay quiet because they only choose to hunt 2 days out of the year?
Some people come off as a dick when discussing the resource and how someone's catch affects that resource. Others present it in an educational manner such as felon and personally I don't see anything wrong with that. If someone is educated on how they impact the resource and choose to continue to keep whatever they like that is their legal right. Just like it is someone's legal right to sky blast at every duck within sight the two days they hunt a year. We all make decisions and those decisions have impacts. Being educated helps people decide what decisions they are going to make.
When my old man was my age selectively harvesting fish wasn't even a thing. People kept the biggest fish they could. At some point he started releasing bigger fish species like trout and walleye as people became more aware of the importance of doing so but never really changed his ways with panfish. I became educated on the need to selectively harvest panfish and shared that science with my old man and he changed his ways. He now has his own personal slot limit because he wants to respect the resource.
As technology advances fisherman constantly are improving their abilities to catch fish making selectively harvesting fish even more important. Every tom, dick and harry has a flasher and gps map now. That technology has significantly increased catches.
Quack wrote:
Fishing for eating is a natural course of nature. Many species do it.
Fishing for catch n release is perversion and ego stroking.
Hunting is a natural course of nature. Many species do it. Is it wrong for people to pass on small bucks in hopes of harvesting them when they are larger? Is it wrong for people to selectively harvest drakes? Is it wrong for people to only harvest more desirable puddle ducks and pass on divers?
Some people use fishing to boost their ego but a majority do not. A lot of the best anglers I know don't share pictures with the world. Hell, a lot of them don't even take pictures. Is running marathons ego stroking? Golfing a lot to try to lower your strokes? You could go on and on with various hobbies. Some people will certainly use their hobbies to stroke their ego but many do not.