An observation and a suggestion

[Pablo]

I was just reading the last 2 threads on the sockeye fishery. The last one, started by BC Hunter was entitled "Sockeye, where are you?". I thought that
I would be reading about peoples' successes and failures with the sockeye fishery to this point. I found that both threads deteriorated into arguments about the ethics of crossing streams and using long leaders. I find some of the dialogue mean-spirited, and quite frankly, probably reflective of un-resolved issues elsewhere in people's lives. Super negative responses to threads cause me to visit the forum less frequently. So, here is my suggestion: If the thread states: "Sockeye, where are you?", but your issue is that you feel flossing is unethical, then start your own thread entitled, "Flossing is unethical". That way, those who choose, can read and respond to that, while others who want to dialogue about how their season is going can also do that without being hassled. It's like having someone from PETA respond to each thread a hunter starts. We really wouldn't want that,would we?

[Gatehouse]

Originally Posted by Pablo

I was just reading the last 2 threads on the sockeye fishery. The last one, started by BC Hunter was entitled "Sockeye, where are you?". I thought that
I would be reading about peoples' successes and failures with the sockeye fishery to this point. I found that both threads deteriorated into arguments about the ethics of crossing streams and using long leaders. I find some of the dialogue mean-spirited, and quite frankly, probably reflective of un-resolved issues elsewhere in people's lives. Super negative responses to threads cause me to visit the forum less frequently. So, here is my suggestion: If the thread states: "Sockeye, where are you?", but your issue is that you feel flossing is unethical, then start your own thread entitled, "Flossing is unethical". That way, those who choose, can read and respond to that, while others who want to dialogue about how their season is going can also do that without being hassled. It's like having someone from PETA respond to each thread a hunter starts. We really wouldn't want that,would we?

What you call "deteriorating into arguments" I call an "interesting debate."

Interesting debate causes me to visit the forum more frequently.

To each his own, I guess.

[barracuda]

I agree . I am beginning to think that we need Dr Frasier Crane to sign on to help people get over their personal problems

[MB_Boy]

I do find it interesting as well......but yes.....you go on to any forum that has the mention of fishing/flossing for salmon and it ALWAYS deteriorates.

I politely asked on one forum a few months back (having never been part of the river side of things) what the difference was in the two types of fishing, and all I wanted was a description. NO opinion was begged......I just wanted the methodology behind both, and yes.....it ended up getting shut down.

It is an always hottly contested issue when it comes up, and I will say that these discussions have been very tame and polite compared to others I have read. Knowledgable points from those who are passionate about a resource/"pastime" can easily go sideways. Unfortunately when you are reading posts and composing them (as opposed to normal verbal conversation) the conversation can easily slide and get off track.

Pablo....just realize that we are all not cut out of the same mold and as what may be "acceptable" by some may not be so much for others. Having been a member on this and other forums for ~2-3 yrs it should be very evident that although we are all 'hunters' that underneath that umbrella we are still a pretty diverse group in many aspects.

Just as an example.....although 2 members may participate in the sockeye fishery and go and on agreeing with one another.....just wait until one member states that they will drive across a salmon river....then, away goes that "alliance" on another tangent.

[Matt]

I agree that the discussion drifted from the original topic but that's the nature of discussion forums and what make them so great.

I also don't feel that the discussion was mean spirited - just people with strong opinions on a pretty heated topic.

That said I agree that it's a little odd that anglers and hunters are so hard on each other. Every angler is a hypocrite as we all have our impact on the resource and we all have our own set of morals and ethics. It seems to me that anglers are constantly trying to minimize someone elses impact and rarely look within.

[krazy]

Originally Posted by admin

Every angler is a hypocrite as we all have our impact on the resource and we all have our own set of morals and ethics. It seems to me that anglers are constantly trying to minimize someone elses impact and rarely look within.

Well said ...

[GG_20_to_3]

While I first I basically thought of pablo's post "boo hoo and cry me a river," I think, aside from the somewhat crass remarks about the ones willing to speak up about ethics, the environment and etc (too bad someone like this gets labled as having problems? ) he makes a very valid point.

If someone makes a post about something, and I have a concern about it, make a new post and take it from there. It's annoying to have what pablo describes happening. Im pleased he offered a solution for this issue instead of really slamming it and putting down the guys who speak up on issues as is often the case.

Admin, while always the guy who loves to point fingers (he then has four pointing back at him) I would hardly group the people who blow the whistle on things as being just as bad. If so, why do they care to speak up? It's not hypocrtical to share on how to lessen impact. Of course we make an impact, but ethics, sportmanship, common sense and a true caring for the sport and resource can lessen the impact.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by GG_20_to_3

Admin, while always the guy who loves to point fingers (he then has four pointing back at him) I would hardly group the people who blow the whistle on things as being just as bad. If so, why do they care to speak up? It's not hypocrtical to share on how to lessen impact. Of course we make an impact, but ethics, sportmanship, common sense and a true caring for the sport and resource can lessen the impact.

Agreed but I find it odd what is acceptable and what isn't in fishing. There is a ton of hypocrisy, and common sense doesn't always prevail. For instance are the following acts sportsmanlike?:

1) C&R fishing the Coquihalla for one of the 250 fish left
2) Playing 50 bull trout on the Upper Pitt in an afternoon
3) Operating a guide outfit in the Charlottes and sending 300 clients home a year with over 150 pounds in meat each.

All of the above are considered angling accomplishments but are they really? On FishBC there is a guy that represents a Charlottes lodge, and get paid well to do so, that kills thousands - hundreds of thousands - of pounds of fish every year. There is another guy that has posted pictures of overwintering boot steelhead he has caught from a stream that gets a couple hundred fish a year. Both are disgusted by the sockeye fishery and make a point to slam the guys that participate. It's always someone else that's the problem in fishing be it bait vs fly, jet vs wade and on and on.

Not trying to defend flossing, I would be happy if the sockeye fishery were to disappear. But that has more to do with me enjoying sitting on bar rods on an empty river than any moral argument.

[Turbo Al]

Thanks Pablo

[ratherbefishin]

from a purely resource based factor, it matters not one whit whether a salmon was harvested in the river, in the sea or by what method-all that counts is if the escapement is adequite to maintain the species.