Are You a Fan of Fishing? Share Your Best Catches!

[Townsend]

Yeah Right !

I could never club a baby seal...you Canadians can be really weird sometimes. How is clubbing even sporting? What chance does that baby seal have? None...how is that even fun? Do you have to buy a license to club baby seals? What purpose does it even serve?

Edited for spelling errors.

 

[zoobyshoe]

What purpose does it even serve?

IIRC they are after the pelts. This is part of the fur industry. Those guys are not sport hunters, they're paid to go out and do that. Not that I don't think it's pretty grotesque.

 

[stoned]

I could never club a baby seal...you Canadians can be really weird sometimes. How is clubbing even sporting? What chance does that baby seal have? None...how is that even fun? Do you have to buy a license to club baby seals? What purpose does it even serve?

Edited for spelling errors.

Gov. of Canada pays them to kill huge number of young seals because according to them there are too many seals and they eat all our fishes.
and also it provides some employment for out of work fishermens.

PS.try to tell those guys that they are not hunters, they club you to death !

"Canada is most compassionate and environmently friendly country in the World" ! that is what I have to listen to on our TV and read in newspapers almost everyday !

 

[ron damon]

All the talk about the "beauties" and "subtleties" of fishing are no more than rationalizations for the very objective and real fact that you are destroying a viable life, something no human has a right to do.

I certainly appreciate the joys of being out in the wild, the scenery, air, green and blue, the tranquility, etc, associated with fishing, yet all of that can be had without doing any killing.

My point is metaphysical. There are a million practical reasons for us humans to consume other beings' lifes, yet I could not EVER contemplate involving myself in an activity whose sole purpose is to extract joy out of death.

 

[DaveC426913]

...you are destroying a viable life, something no human has a right to do.

According to whom? Rights are a purely human invention.

We have long hunted to eat. Just because some people feel that they no longer need to does not make it an immoral act.

I can't abide people who make personal judgements and expect that the rest of the world will just comply.

 

[Moonbear]

Gov. of Canada pays them to kill huge number of young seals because according to them there are too many seals and they eat all our fishes.
and also it provides some employment for out of work fishermens.

That makes it a commercial industry, not sport hunting. They're also not supposed to club the seals, they're supposed to shoot them to be more humane, but apparently these commercial hunters are not following the rules and not being held accountable when they don't. There is nothing sporting about clubbing baby seals.

This is the very distinction Townsend and Zooby have been making between those who go out and sport fish either to throw back the fish or keep only what they will eat and promote saving the surrounding ecosystem (part of the fun of fishing is getting to enjoy nature while you're at it...for some, holding the fishing rod is just something to do while enjoying a pretty lake and watching the birds fly past) vs commercial fishermen who will completely over-fish an area and destroy the ecosystem in the process. Commercial fishermen and hunters are only interested in making a profit (or predominantly interested in profit anyway; there are many who also recognize that their livelihood depends on a healthy environment where the fish they are catching can thrive, but certainly not all).

Here is an article that discusses last year's seal hunt with both the Canadian government's views and those of the animal activists.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3618901.stm

 

[Moonbear]

All the talk about the "beauties" and "subtleties" of fishing are no more than rationalizations for the very objective and real fact that you are destroying a viable life, something no human has a right to do.

If that's your view, then stop eating immediately! How many plants and animals and their habitats were destroyed in order to plow fields for the soybeans to make your tofu? Far more than my handful of fish that I plan to eat, unlike all those organisms that you had no intention of eating, which were destroyed to plant crops.

Agricultural expansion is severe in biodiversity hotspots
Agriculture has been expanding since the domestication of crop plants 10,000 years ago. But in the past three centuries, exponential human population growth has led to a 500% expansion in the extent of cropland and pasture world-wide (see box 1, figure a). In Europe and North America, unchecked agricultural development has already transformed many natural habitats and depleted their biodiversity. Similar transformation is now underway in the tropics, where most of the world’s biodiversity is found, with huge implications for both wildlife populations and ecosystem functioning. Endemic Bird Areas (EBAs), globally important centres of biodiversity, are under above-average threat from agricultural expansion (box 1, figure b). As tropical forests are the predominant natural habitat in EBAs, this tells us that they too are particularly threatened by agriculture.

From:http://www.birdlife.net/action/science/sowb/pressure/32.html

Habitat destruction, fragmentation, and degradation continue at a rapid pace in the United States, mostly outside parks. Development fragments habitat, creating barriers to wildlife movement and complicating ecosystem management at the regional and landscape levels. Scientific evidence shows that no park ecosystem can remain healthy as an isolated refuge in a sea of development, yet parks—even large ones—are becoming surrounded.

From:http://www.npca.org/wildlife_protection/biodiversity/report/threats/fragmentation.asp

In the Midwest, it is common to have more than 90 percent of a watershed used for row crop agriculture. Many areas, where farmers have used conservation practices such as reduced tillage, grassed waterways, strip or contour cropping, and terraces on at least 40 percent of the land, still experience some of the highest erosion rates...

As human population and living areas increase, wildlife is squeezed into ever smaller patches of habitat. In the Midwest, where only one in 10 acres is not used for either crop or pasture production, additional habitat can be critical to certain game and non-game wildlife species. Tile drainage that increased the amount of tillable land and allowed for bountiful harvests has dramatically reduced wildlife abundance and diversity. In North Dakota, 60 percent of the natural wetlands have been drained, compared to 90 percent lost in Iowa to agriculture and other uses.

From: http://www.extension.iastate.edu/Publications/PM1626A/IIa.html

 

[ron damon]

If that's your view, then stop eating immediately! How many plants and animals and their habitats were destroyed in order to plow fields for the soybeans to make your tofu? Far more than my handful of fish that I plan to eat, unlike all those destroyed to plant your vegetables that you had no intention of eating. Hunting and gathering for personal consumption is quite a natural way to survive.

So all of you go fishing because you're somehow starving and desperately in need of a source of protein, or because you just have a damn good time killing, and only later on find a lame excuse for it by eating the fish? ;-)

I'm not advocating extinction of our species by means of starvation. I am a practical man. Yet people going out on killing expeditions as a way of entertainment is a very sad and disillusioning sight...

 

[ron damon]

Rights are a purely human invention.

That's precisely it, my friend

 

[Townsend]

So all of you go fishing because you're somehow starving and desperately in need of a source of protein, or because you just have a damn good time killing, and only later on find a lame excuse for it by eating the fish? ;-)

I'm not advocating extinction of our species by means of starvation. I am a practical man. Yet people going out on killing expeditions as a way of entertainment is a very sad and disillusioning sight...

Fresh fish is very healthy. I do not eat the fish I take as an excuse but because I enjoy the meal and the making of the meal.

Where do you get your food from friend? Do you cry for the animals that lost their lives every time you sit down to eat?

You act like there is such a thing as a free lunch. Just because you did not physically kill the animal does not free you from any of the responsibility that goes along with its death.

 

[Integral]

So all of you go fishing because you're somehow starving and desperately in need of a source of protein, or because you just have a damn good time killing, and only later on find a lame excuse for it by eating the fish? ;-)

I'm not advocating extinction of our species by means of starvation. I am a practical man. Yet people going out on killing expeditions as a way of entertainment is a very sad and disillusioning sight...

Clearly you have not read the real contents of this thread. You should, before making such uninformed posts. Please actually read the thread before posting your opinions.

 

[Moonbear]

So all of you go fishing because you're somehow starving and desperately in need of a source of protein, or because you just have a damn good time killing, and only later on find a lame excuse for it by eating the fish? ;-)

I'm not advocating extinction of our species by means of starvation. I am a practical man. Yet people going out on killing expeditions as a way of entertainment is a very sad and disillusioning sight...

I find it more sad and disillusioning that people run off to the grocery store for their food with no understanding at all of how it somehow got from the land or water and into that package they are buying. Fishing and hunting keep you in touch with nature and provide a vested interest in preserving natural habitats, as opposed to showing up at the grocery store and demanding more pasta and tofu on the shelves, wanting your produce to look perfect, not caring what was destroyed to provide food for you, and content to remain oblivious to that information.

If you bothered to read the replies above, it is not about the killing. That farm-raised fish I buy at the grocery store is just as dead as the one I caught, although the one I catch myself is much fresher (tastier too), and didn't require gallons of diesel fuel to transport to me, and didn't require destroying a habitat to obtain.

I too am practical and realize that agriculture is a necessity in our society because most people aren't content to let those who can't catch their own food starve to death, but if you want to compare which is the greater evil, fishing and hunting for sport is not it.

 

[zoobyshoe]

All the talk about the "beauties" and "subtleties" of fishing are no more than rationalizations for the very objective and real fact that you are destroying a viable life, something no human has a right to do.

When it comes right down to it, the reason I don't fish is because I'm too squeamish to kill one, or even inconvenience it with catch and release. When I watch other people fish my question is "What is actually going on in their minds? Why do people do this when in isn't necessary any more for survival?"

The answer I can up with for myself is that this impulse to outsmart a fish (or a deer, or a bear etc.) has to have been responsible for early man's baseline survival. We haven't been away from the necessity of hunting and fishing long enough for it to have been bred out of us. I can't take a hard stance against it, because we may yet need it in case of emergency to survive.

I certainly appreciate the joys of being out in the wild, the scenery, air, green and blue, the tranquility, etc, associated with fishing, yet all of that can be had without doing any killing.

Yeah, but don't ignore what we've been telling you about not all fishermen killing their fish. As we said there are flyfishermen who don't even wan't to hook them. Others catch and release.

My point is metaphysical. There are a million practical reasons for us humans to consume other beings' lifes, yet I could not EVER contemplate involving myself in an activity whose sole purpose is to extract joy out of death.

This is good. Humans would also never have survived if we didn't also have a nurturing instinct. Why can't we lay off fishing, even if it ends up merely inconveniencing the fish with catch and release, if we aren't starving? I can. I just feel like it's good that the specific skills involved in catching a fish are kept alive by a minority of people, for the same reason, I guess, that there are people who know how to survive in the wilderness.

 

[ron damon]

Do you cry for the animals that lost their lives every time you sit down to eat?

As a matter of fact I do, and lately I've been experiencing some difficulties because of it, but maybe it's just that I'm insane ;-)

Nonetheless, there is a basic principle in jurisprudence called "bad acts and guilty minds". The two make up a crime. All of us have got to eat, so all of us are killers in a way. Yet, and this is what all of you never address in your replies, when you go hunting you are driven not by a need for food, but by the ENJOYMENT you take out of the experience. That makes you cold blooded killers.

Remember Einstein, who said something like "humanity could achieve no greater enlightenment than a transition to an all-vegetarian diet" (I'm paraphrasing of course).

 

[stoned]

fishing and hunting keeps you in touch with the nature ?
did you ever hear about hiking in the forest or walking besides the river ?

 

[ron damon]

Yeah, but don't ignore what we've been telling you about not all fishermen killing their fish. As we said there are flyfishermen who don't even wan't to hook them. Others catch and release.

If you can scientifically prove fish don't suffer significant harm, pain or trauma by the experience, then I'm all for it.

 

[Townsend]

Nonetheless, there is a basic principle in jurisprudence called "bad acts and guilty minds". The two make up a crime. All of us have got to eat, so all of us are killers in a way. Yet, and this is what all of you never address in your replies, when you go hunting you are driven not by a need for food, but by the ENJOYMENT you take out of the experience. That makes you cold blooded killers.

Help me to understand why you are not just as guilty as I am. You have killed to eat food by purchasing food from the store. Just because you did not pull the trigger on the gun, or run the slaughter house, or destroy the habitat of and endanger species for farming does not mean you did not contribute to the cold blooded murder of animals. Why not get out and see for yourself what it takes to put the food on your table? You go out there are get the food and prepare it and eat. If you do that then you will start to appreciate your food and respect it. But in either case you are killing the animals. You only think you can sit back and act like you have not killed for your food but you have. You just cannot seem to make that connection yet. Nature is a battle for food, if you are taking it in, then you are taking away from an animal/animals that would have otherwise consumed it.

There is and there never will be a free lunch. That goes for everything. At least everything I can think of.

 

[Townsend]

If you can scientifically prove fish don't suffer significant harm, pain or trauma by the experience, then I'm all for it.

They do...no need to debate it. However they suffer much more from commercial industry, which is supported by consumers. You do much harm and cause much suffering simply by buying a loaf of bread. If nature can teach us anything at all, it can teach us that one must die for another to live. It is a struggle to survive and just because we have commercialized and removed ourselves from the acts of killing does not means that animals are not dying. In fact although I cannot support this with any real evidence I can say with all my heart that animals suffer more pain than ever due to the fact that killing is done commercially instead of by individuals getting their own food.

I believe that if you were to kill your own food, you would do less harm to nature and animals than by going out and buying it.

 

[ron damon]

There is and there never will be a free lunch.

Thank you very much, but I think I know my Milton Friedman :-) (and my thermodyanmics)

rest of your post

You didn't really argue with my reasoning. The motives for murder in each case are diametrically opposite. Fun vs. survival. In that distinction lays your crime.

 

[Townsend]

Thank you very much, but I think I know my Milton Friedman :-)



You didn't really argue with my reasoning. The motive for murder in each case is diametrically opposite. Fun vs. survival. In that distinction lays your crime.

Wrong...their in lies your own personal deceptions. You enjoy your life and what you do because you are sustained by the death of animals. I don't extract pleasure from killing in the sense that I get all happy and giddy inside. You really, really don't have any idea what it is like to go fishing.

If you were concerned with sustaining your life with minimal pain cause to animals then you would part take in the killing of your own food. By not doing so your survival causes more pain and suffering to animals than is absolutely necessary for your survival.

I think everyone will agree that whatever causes the least amount of suffering of animals is the best for them. Fishermen/women and hunters will win that contest hands down.

QED as far as I am concerned.

 

[Townsend]

The motives for murder in each case are diametrically opposite. Fun vs. survival.

That is an assumption...both are means to and end...put good food on the table. On one hand I can buy fish caught by someone else and eat it. On the other hand I can take the responsibility for the death of an animal and catch it and kill it myself. How is that diametrically opposite? How is one a crime and the other ok?

 

[Moonbear]

All of us have got to eat, so all of us are killers in a way. Yet, and this is what all of you never address in your replies, when you go hunting you are driven not by a need for food, but by the ENJOYMENT you take out of the experience. That makes you cold blooded killers.

No, the enjoyment is a combination of getting back to our roots, putting the modern, mechanized world behind us for the simplicity of going out and catching our own dinner, and the satisfaction of mastering a survival skill. With larger fish, it's also the thrill of the fight, a test of strength and skill to be able to reel it in. The pleasure is not from killing itself. I also used to enjoy going out with a field guide to fish and learn to identify the different fish we caught and tossed back.

Do you know where the fish that you're eating came from, how it was killed, and how quickly? If it's like most commercial fishing boats, the fish are dumped alive into the icy hold of the fishing boat until until they suffocate out of water. You still want the fish dead and on your plate, you just think you can pass the responsibility for killing that fish onto someone else. This is the danger of becoming so disconnected from the process of food-gathering, that you are under the illusion it is bad to kill for survival and at the same time are under the illusion you can personally be guilt-free because somebody else killed the animal or harvested the crop for you. If anything, distancing yourself from the act and allowing others to profit from it as a commercial enterprise encourages wastefulness and killing of more animals than for those who have felt the impact first hand of having to kill an animal and realizing it's no trivial act.

If you wish to call us cold-blooded murderers, then according to your analogy, you're the one who hired the hitman.

Oh, clamming was fun too, and with those, the objective is to get them home alive, just like if you buy them at the fish market. Spending a day walking around the mud flats, digging up one clam at a time with your toes and tossing it into the basket floating beside you, and then going back to the beach house for a clam bake is far more satisfying than picking up a bag of clams at the fish market. Digging in mud all day is fun (except when you discover a crab with your toe ).

 

[ron damon]

Let me hypothesize: if in the future all of our sustaining needs could be fulfilled by ingesting a synthetically produced pill, would people still go out fishing and hunting? Wanna venture a guess? What would be their excuse then?

You eat because you NEED to. You don't NEED to go fishing => You fish because you LIKE to. LIKING to kill is murder.

 

[zoobyshoe]

LIKING to kill is murder.

Liking to kill is sadism.

 

[Moonbear]

Murder only refers to killing another human, thus cannot be applied to fish.

From dictionary.com:

mur·der Pronunciation Key (mûrdr)
n.
The unlawful killing of one human by another, especially with premeditated malice.
Slang. Something that is very uncomfortable, difficult, or hazardous: The rush hour traffic is murder.
A flock of crows. See Synonyms at flock1.

 

[Townsend]

Let me hypothesize: if in the future all of our sustaining needs could be fulfilled by ingesting a synthetically produced pill, would people still go out fishing and hunting? Wanna venture a guess? What would be their excuse then?

You eat because you NEED to. You don't NEED to go fishing => You fish because you LIKE to. LIKING to kill is murder.

By the way Ron...humans are animals and a part of the animal kingdom. Sorry if I cannot escape the desire to acquire my own food from nature. Often the best way to overcome temptation is to yield to it. Our desire for meat and animal protein is not far from our predator instincts to hunt and kill. The only difference is that I am honest with myself. I think it is much better to admit who I am than to pretend that to be something I could never be.

Do you play video games Ron? Have you ever had fun playing a video game where you kill someone or something? I hope not because you seem to think that people should never ever get enjoyment from killing. But it is who we are and I don’t think very many people will disagree with me.

You should not resist who you are. When people try to ignore who they are you get things like priest molesting boys. Not good…

In any case it is not wrong of me to want to fish any more than it is wrong of you to be attracted to a pretty woman, or man if you're into that sort of thing. (Just trying to be PC about everything..never know these days).

Regards,

 

[ron damon]

Liking to kill is sadism.

Murder is dependant upon intent, not just the cessation of life. That's what I meant.

 

[ron damon]

By the way Ron...humans are animals and a part of the animal kingdom. Sorry if I cannot escape the desire to acquire my own food from nature. Often the best way to overcome temptation is to yield to it. Our desire for meat and animal protein is not far from our predator instincts to hunt and kill. The only difference is that I am honest with myself. I think it is much better to admit who I am than to pretend that to be something I could never be.

So you are admitting fishing and hunting activities are a response not to an unavoidable need for sustenance, but to a different kind of instinct...? I think you should reflect about the consequences of your above words.

Do you play video games Ron? Have you ever had fun playing a video game where you kill someone or something?

Yeah, but they are made out of pixels and bytes, and as far as we know do not feel any pain or have independent existences.

In any case it is not wrong of me to want to fish any more than it is wrong of you to be attracted to a pretty woman, or man if you're into that sort of thing. (Just trying to be PC about everything..never know these days).

Ha! I do like girls, and agree with you that some of nature's bounty, like sex, is there to be enjoyed without guilt.

You should not resist who you are.

Well, I thank you for being honest, and that's what I mainly hoped to achieve. Maybe the next time you go out fishing and are holding that rod, looking down and imagining all the rich life whirling below the surface, you'll remember this conversation, and maybe a spark will light in your heart, and you'll realize how precious life is and how no being with a conscience and a soul has a right to put an end to it, and then maybe you'll lift that rod and experience the thrill of seeing a fish swim away rather than holding its lifeless body in your hand.

 

[Danger]

That makes it a commercial industry, not sport hunting. They're also not supposed to club the seals, they're supposed to shoot them to be more humane, but apparently these commercial hunters are not following the rules and not being held accountable when they don't.]

I don't have the time or inclination to get into any sort of discussion, or even to read your attachments right now. What I can tell you is that if the new policy is supposed to be shooting them, somebody has really screwed up. My friend is a very well-respected veterinarian and member of several humane societies. He was commissioned about 25 years ago to accompany the seal hunt as an observer and to make recommendations for a more humane killing methods. After a lot of consideration, he determined that clubbing was as good as it could get. Shooting was ruled out because of the unacceptable risk of ricochets on an ice surface as well as the probability of pelt damage. If the hunters have to be close enough to ensure head shots and guarantee the safety of fellow hunters, then knives or clubs are just as practical. Since seals are really squirmy little things, attempting to slit their throats would most likely result in a lot of painful wounding before a killing stroke. A quick whap upside the head is much better. What people don't realize is that most of that flopping around and squealing is in an unconscious state and is not a reaction to pain.

 

[Huckleberry]

Ah, the tranquility of nature. Nothing pleases me more than a good walk around the lake in a mountain valley. I can see how the trees compete for sunlight and the older taller ones starve the younger ones to death. I can see birds scouring the bark of trees for insects, a quick early morning snack. A hawk whirls about in the sky and positions himself for a quick strike on an unsuspecting squirrel. On the trail I see a buck with 10 points. I wonder if he will end up as lunch for the bear that is around somewhere, judging by the scat and tree damage I saw a while back.

I finally get to the lake. It looks calm and undisturbed. It helps me feel the same way. I prepare my line and cast it into the air. It lands with a little 'bloop' and ripples expand across the lake. I made those ripples. That's me.

There is a sharp tug on the line. I feel the line take. I jerk the pole up sharply and begin to reel in my prey. I feel the motion of the fish under the surface of the water. Pull and reel, pull and reel. In less than one minute it is mine. I can already see myself back at camp gutting and cleaning the fish and cooking it over a fire. It is so much more satisfying to eat this fish than it would be to buy one in a store.

I feel that I am a man that is at one with nature. Men make rights for other men. Nature determines what is right for all animals. Being human gives me the wonderful opportunity to see the beauty of nature and enjoy my place in it as an animal, a human animal.

 

[Moonbear]

I don't have the time or inclination to get into any sort of discussion, or even to read your attachments right now. What I can tell you is that if the new policy is supposed to be shooting them, somebody has really screwed up. My friend is a very well-respected veterinarian and member of several humane societies. He was commissioned about 25 years ago to accompany the seal hunt as an observer and to make recommendations for a more humane killing methods. After a lot of consideration, he determined that clubbing was as good as it could get. Shooting was ruled out because of the unacceptable risk of ricochets on an ice surface as well as the probability of pelt damage. If the hunters have to be close enough to ensure head shots and guarantee the safety of fellow hunters, then knives or clubs are just as practical. Since seals are really squirmy little things, attempting to slit their throats would most likely result in a lot of painful wounding before a killing stroke. A quick whap upside the head is much better. What people don't realize is that most of that flopping around and squealing is in an unconscious state and is not a reaction to pain.

I just know what the BBC article says. I don't really know which would be better, a shot to the head or a whack with a club. I'd think either would greatly depend on the skill of the person weilding the weapon and hitting the right place. I don't know enough about the anatomy of a seal skull to know how hard it would be to deliver a fatal blow in one hit. It's true that sometimes what appears more humane to the casual observer is not really the most humane method.

I was more surprised that seal hunting was not only permitted, but something the government was paying people to do since I thought it had been banned ages ago. As I looked for articles to find out if it was legal hunting or poaching, that was the fairest article I could find (the others were all animal rights websites with a clear bias). I didn't spend a lot of time searching though, so there might be something that better addresses the issue out there, but at least this one gave the Canadian government's side of the story as well. It did say shooting was supposed to be used, but maybe if they know clubbing is more humane, for the sake of public perception may have said shooting and then gave a wink wink nudge nudge to the hunters that clubbing might be okay in "some" cases.

Of course this has nothing to do with the topic of fishing, other than seals really enjoy fishing too.

 

[stoned]

Since I was a small kid I used to love fishing, but man suppose to grow not only physically but mentally as well, and strive to be compassionate towards living things, I'm happy to say that I acheved that. but still some work needs to be done.

 

[Townsend]

So you are admitting fishing and hunting activities are a response not to an unavoidable need for sustenance, but to a different kind of instinct...? I think you should reflect about the consequences of your above words.



Yeah, but they are made out of pixels and bytes, and as far as we know do not feel any pain or have independent existences.



Ha! I do like girls, and agree with you that some of nature's bounty, like sex, is there to be enjoyed without guilt.



Well, I thank you for being honest, and that's what I mainly hoped to achieve. Maybe the next time you go out fishing and are holding that rod, looking down and imagining all the rich life whirling below the surface, you'll remember this conversation, and maybe a spark will light in your heart, and you'll realize how precious life is and how no being with a conscience and a soul has a right to put an end to it, and then maybe you'll lift that rod and experience the thrill of seeing a fish swim away rather than holding its lifeless body in your hand.

Ok, well now I am totally confused. Are you saying that causing more pain and suffering to animals is ok as long as it is in the name of survival? While if I succumb to my desire to hunt or fish, which incidentally helps animals suffer less, I am wrong and should think about it? You say this knowing full well that you could ease the pain and suffering of animals by being a part of nature instead of pretending your not a part of whole sale slaughtering of animals in the name of profit and NOT survival? What is the issue being addressed here? If is about causing pain and suffering to animals then fishing has you beat. If is about the instinct to hunt and kill then I also have you beat…playing video games is still yielding to that instinct much the same as in sex. You are causing more harm then me but I am wrong and you are right? You reason that by taking your natural desires and misplacing them on video games you are helping an animal suffer less? That is ridiculous and delusional. If you supplemented your diet with food you brought in by hunting, fishing or gathering you would be taking a step towards the better for all the animals in the world. In no way is not hunting better for the world or any of the animals that we share this world with.

The desire to have sex causes a lot of harms in this world. The least of which is sexually transmitted diseases. Yet you will yield to that desire which is ultimately there for the same reason as hunting and fishing, the selfish gene. You cannot justify one desire and ignore its harms and then denounce the other when the other has no real harms at all. That is not reasonable by my standards and it shouldn’t be by yours either.

 

[Townsend]

To put this thread back on fish I have a video of the pallid sturgeon and spoon bill. My wife filmed this on her digital camera at the Gavins Point Dam aquarium along the Missouri river. That is where I do most of my fishing. This year I have put in for a raffle to get a paddle fish tag. If I get one I will take pics and post them here.

The spoon bill in the video are babies. The adults can grow to be seven feet long. They are huge...

Here is the video...

http://rapidshare.de/files/1829732/100_2175.MOV.html

Hope it works...