Deal or No Deal

[DTro]

If you could trade your right to harvest/keep fish (C&R only) for quality world class fishing on a daily basis, would you say.....

Deal or No Deal?

For me this is a hard one. Some of the mystique of fishing is the challenge. If there is no challenge, would it still be fun? I don't know, probably.

I think I can count on two hands the total number of fish I harvested last year, so it wouldn't have a big impact on me.

[gspman]

Deal. World class fishing doesn't mean you don't have to work for it. Also you can learn more in 1 week at a world class fishery than you will learn in 10 at a so-so fishery.

[prov1900]

I am all for C&R and would certainly call deal...with a twist. If everything was C&R, then I believe there would be an imbalance, causing overpopulation, stunting, etc. Of course, there is the flipside to that coin in that harvest typically leads to overharvest and ultimately, waste. You and I...and numbers of others are practicing a balanced sport. If everyone did (never happen), then your question would have been moot. You could have a world class fishery and the occasional meal. So that leads back to your question. Definately world class fishery.

[BDR]

DEAL!! I love a fresh fish dinner now and then, But it is not about that for me. It is therapy, memories, and relaxation.

If it was all about food, it be a whole lot cheaper catching them at the grocery store.

[Cyberfish]

No deal. For me having a shore lunch of fresh fish I caught is part of a world class fishing experience , plus selective harvest can sometimes be better for a fishery than total release.

[LMITOUT]

I'm hitting the red button with no hesitation and saying "DEAL!"

[76k20]

no deal, selective harvest is the answer. tighter limits perhaps but taking meat out of fishing all together would impact the # of anglers and in turn the income the dnr has to work with in efforts to manage populations and resources.

[76k20]

lol with a name like limit out I have a hard time believing you dont like to take home a few for the table once in a while.

[PEATMOSS]

No deal. If you're not supposed to eat fish, why are they made out of meat?....I reject the whole premise of no harvest=world class fishery. There are many other factors besides harvest that affect fish populations and fishing. I'm 100% in the selective harvest camp.

[Cyberfish]

I dunno, dogfish are made of meat, but ya wont catch me eatin one!

[JohnMickish]

Deal, if I want fish for dinner Cub foods has a bunch of choices. Lots of which I can't catch here in Minnesota to boot. Fresh fish is real nice but can you imagine being able to catch a 6+ lb walleye or a 30+ inch northern every time you went out? For me this would be a no brainer.

[DEADhead]

no deal. I believe selective harvest is a an integral tool of fish management. Besides, I don't know about you but I live in a "world class" fishery here in Detroit Lakes. Compared to the rest of the country, the walleye fishery here is top notch. Sure Canada and Alaska have some great fisheries, but that's just because they are remote. For the amount of pressure the lakes around here recieve, I think it's amazing a guy can catch 10+lb walleyes, and trophy muskies and northerns. I think it's great that I can walk out my back door, hit the lake, and have a shot at trophy Pike, Muskie, and Walleye, and could catch a sturgeon to boot.

In case anyone was wondering, the only fish I kept last year were hatchery raised and stocked rainbow trout.

[harvey lee]

No deal-I enjoy fishing,and eating a meal of fresh fish. If all I ever caught was trophy fish I believe that it would get old and there would be no thrill of finding and catching nicer fish. SELECTIVE HARVEST would do the same thing or close.

It would be the same thing with deer hunting,if you shot a trophy buck every time,what would be the challenge?

[eyepatrol]

No question about it for me...no deal! I love to eat fish as much as catch them, and getting them from the store doesn't even compare to fresh from the lake. I also think, in some respects, having all world class lakes would eventually get old, for me anyway. It's the challenge and persuit of a world class fish that makes the experience exciting. If I caught world class fish on a daily or weekly basis, it wouldn't be much different than catching slot-size fish on a daily or weekly basis. I'd get used to it and the anticipation of catching the big one just wouldn't be the same because it would be a regular occurance. I'm not sure if I'm reading into it wrong, but a world class fishery to me means you're catching big'uns on a regular basis, like the crappies on URL.

Just my opinion though. Good post!

[Slyster]

I LOVE to eat fish too!

But would never keep a local fish. I used to keep some.. and last summer I kept two... but for this summer I will not be keeping any fish.

We eat Cod, Salmon, and Catfish at least twice per week... We like them better than any local fish.. so that's where we get our fish diet fix.

I DO realize that the fish I buy are dead.. so I count these as fish kept.

I have to say I would do anything to improve fishing locally.. even if it meant keeping certain fish to eliminate a portion of the population to promote a healthy system. That is what counts here... the fishing experience... not our stomachs.. obviously.. since we aren't a subsistence society anymore.

And no one tell me they eat fish to save money... calculating the costs of your time, boat, gas, taxes, licenses, etc... and the result is no one is feeding the family from the "fat of the land!"

But if people prefer local fish.. enjoy! I have no problem with people keeping fish. If NO fish were kept.. I imagine it would be like deer overpopulation and a bad thing.

PLUS.. there's the METRO vs. RURAL thing to consider. Rural lakes have very little pressure and I would guess most can feel free to keep the limit every day!

But just THINK of the pressure of our metro lakes... we are a BIG CITY here... I would think we NEED to practice C&R as a rule to preserve the lakes for our kids!

[gunflint]

No deal. Interesting that as I go through the posts, most of the metro guys say deal and the rural guys are saying no deal. It must mean somsthing but I'll let the philosophers figure that one out.

I would like the names of the lakes where they're catching limits every day.

I have never herd anyone say that catching fish is cheaper than buying fish.

C&R only is really nothing but tournament fishing. There is no justifiable use for it. The anti's would be able to stop fishing once and for all.

Most C&R only fisherman are hiding behind a pious attitude of superiority that they want to save the fishery and save fishing for the future. They really just don't want to clean fish. Hey, someone had to say it.

[soldoncass]

NO DEAL no way, no chance!!!!! The anti's would stop fishing altogether then (cause it hurts the fish, and some die, and nobody eats them anyway, etc. etc.). I can justify the cost of my fishing and hunting because I can take some meat home to help the food bill-- try to do that with other sports--(golf,comes to mind right away). Besides that I don't TRADE my rights for anything,too many brave people have died in this country to preserve them. NO DEAL!!!

[Surface Tension]

Tell the dealer to shove it where the sun doesn't shine!

***********************NO DEAL!*****************************

Selective Harvest Works!

I don't like this question at all and it plays into the hands of groups like PETA.

I realize some folks don't like to eat fish, so they'd have everything to gain if MN went to C&R only. Thats pretty selfish thinking. If your into C&R only thats up to you, don't try and change heritage and traditions of others.

I enjoy every aspect of fishing and that includes eating some of the fish I catch. News Flash about buying fish from the grocery store, those fish once lived in water.

This question really has struck a nerve and I'm sorry for being sharp. Practicing Selective Harvest is the answer!

[Cliff Wagenbach]

Total no-harvest fishing makes about as much sense to me as sitting on a deer stand all season without a gun or bow! I like to eat fish and venison to much!

Cliff

[Fever]

You would eat that dogfish if you had to... I'm for selective harvest, smaller limits, and fisherman education. We have gun training that educates younger kids on the topic of gun resposibilities and outdoor rules and regs, why couldn't there be a short half day fishing seminar to educate all those on the subject of lake and river ecology prior to receiving a licence age (16). Something like that may reach a few people that think that every fish that is caught should be filleted.

[DTro]

Quote:

---

Tell the dealer to shove it where the sun doesn't shine!

***********************NO DEAL!*****************************

Selective Harvest Works!

I don't like this question at all and it plays into the hands of groups like PETA.

I realize some folks don't like to eat fish, so they'd have everything to gain if MN went to C&R only. Thats pretty selfish thinking. If your into C&R only thats up to you, don't try and change heritage and traditions of others.

I enjoy every aspect of fishing and that includes eating some of the fish I catch. News Flash about buying fish from the grocery store, those fish once lived in water.

This question really has struck a nerve and I'm sorry for being sharp. Practicing Selective Harvest is the answer!

---

Easy Frank, nobody is changing anything, just a friendly discussion.

The world is always changing. 30 yrs ago we thought we had the answer, we may think selective harvest is the answer now, but what will we be doing in 30 yrs from now?

How is discussing a trade off between C&R fishing for an "imaginary" world class fishery playing into the hands of PETA?

IMO C&R would not in itself create that great fishery. It was a meant as a fun question. Would you make the deal?

Why can we not have a fun discussion here?

Who said anything about changing heritages and traditions? My grandfathers and friends "traditions" were to fill the basket, bring em home and go out and fill it again.

[Havin' Fun]

NO DEAL!

With all C/R it would be like going to the State Fair and fishing in their fish tank there. Not quite the challenge it is now.

I would like to compare fish management to deer management. QDM works with deer and everyone knows it. A smaller herd because of some harvest of does with the "I'll only take a 10 pointer off my land" for the bucks works. However, the breeding stock needs to remain. It's selective harvest, just like fishing.

[JohnMickish]

Hey guys, I didn't see where selective harvest was part of the original deal.

I would have voted for that but that wasn't an option the way I read it. Which way would go if selective harvest wasn't an option?

I believe that selective harvest is the way to go because if we don't force people to conserve the resource they wont.

[Northlander]

No deal. I enjoy a fresh fish fry every once in a while. Ya I love BIG fish but I have no problem harvesting a few meals here and there. Besides we in the Duluth area are lucky and have trophy fishing within shorts drives all around us.

[Cyberfish]

I just assumed harvest meant selective harvest. Anyone who releases some fish, even if it is because they were too small or the wrong kind is practicing a form of selective harvest.

If the deal was keep all that you catch or throw em all back, I think i would have to move to cheeseland!