Well, the title says it all, do " Stockies " deserve to go back ?

If I'm on a put and take fishery, I'm there to take the fish I've caught home and put them on the table. My view is the fish are reared for killing .

It's not that I don't respect them it's just that I don't see the point in putting a " Stockie " back.

Everyone is entitled to their own view and what's yours ?

__________________
Tight Lines. :)

This is not a word I would choose to use.They have every right to go back.

Jim

__________________
The Fishermans Friend is the Flirty Fly,Fickle Food for Fleeting Fish.

imo Its just like everything else you eat beef chicken why not trout

craig

I hate the term 'put and take', and what it implies- that a water is stocked with fish, then they are taken away, with little sport involved.My view is that the fish are reared for primarily for sport, not just killing.The point in putting a stockie back is that in four months time it will be worth catching, and eating.I have nothing against the taking of occasional limit bags (make hay whist the sun shines!) but do you really put every trout you kill on the table? One fish a week is enough for me, and by fish I mean a grown on fish, not a stockie, which vary in quality from horrid to o.k.

__________________
Behold the fisherman
He riseth up early and disturbeth the whole household.
MIGHTY ARE HIS PREPARATIONS!
He goeth forth full of hope and when the day is far spent he returneth
Smelling of strong drink, and the truth is not in him

Stock fish should be killed on rivers too. The principle of increasing the biomass of a length of stream by 1000 fold is crazy enough but to then return the stockie is bonkers. There are exceptions for when stockies should be returned such as stock fish introduced to kick start a population after a fish kill etc and when the river in question runs through the grounds of a lunatic asylum.

If the intention of stocking a water was to ensure a healthy, self-reproducing population, the water would be stocked with fry. Such fish IMHO are difficult to catch and I find the sport challenging. I put such fish back, but for one or two destined for the weekend's family dinner.

If the water was used to merely grow fish, the water would be stocked with pre-grown fish, i.e. "stockies". Sport with stockies I personally find unsatisfactory. I pay to take fish from there, which is why I don't visit them very often; when I do however, I take the children who don't mind easily caught fish, and have wonderful hours there.

Cheers,

jpj

It is not as much to do with how we view the fish, but how we view ourselves and how we wish to be seen by others. I love fishing. All my life I have fished in one form or another. I love everything to do with fishing and I love fish. I can't walk past a puddle without stopping to have a look in. Whether I am trying to catch them, see them, read books or watch TV programmes about them, I find fish fascinating and beautiful creatures. Travel to another part to the world and there is a whole new set of fish to encounter.

Now they are still an animal, not a person and not your pet. So although I do not approve of the extreme zealousness in fish care and welfare that are seen in some forms of angling, I do believe that we have a duty to treat our catch with respect. If you despise the idea of a stocked fish so much that you can not treat it with the simple respect that you would afford a wild creature, perhaps you should not be fishing for them. That would be your choice and would hold no relevance at all to those who make different choices.

I have said before that I hate something that I love so much being described in ugly and derogatory terms. Having spent a life time fishing for many different types of fish in many different places I now find that what I do most is fish for stillwater rainbow trout.

I think BlackDon is talking about stillwaters when he says 'put and take' fishery.I agree though that when a fishery has ample spawning opportunities it should not be stocked, and the amount of fish taken restricted.The idea of fishing beautiful streams for big stock fish appalls me, and I too would kill them all in an effort to 'cleanse' the river.

__________________
Behold the fisherman
He riseth up early and disturbeth the whole household.
MIGHTY ARE HIS PREPARATIONS!
He goeth forth full of hope and when the day is far spent he returneth
Smelling of strong drink, and the truth is not in him

Now I agree that not everyone wants a freezer full of trout, or the hassle of gutting them at the end of a long day, especially if no facilities are provided at the fishery and a long drive home awaits.

But I feel that it does more damage to a fishery than good. Last season I watched a large number of anglers at various fisheries catch and play fish gently on light tackle with Barbed hooks !!by the time the fish is netted it is totally exhausted, it is often handled excessively and on many occasions unhooked in the bottom of the boat or on the bank, flapping against tackle bags, rocks etc.. When it is released it has the majority of its protective mucus/slime removed and is prone to infection. In my experience the fish often goes belly up and just sinks to the bottom to die. This problem is compounded in the summer months when the water temperature is high and the oxygen levels are low.

Most anglers agree that after sustained angling pressure, fish soon wise up to bright lures etc and become finicky often following or tapping the fly, the catch rate will plummet and often the fish can only be caught on the more natural patterns. Experienced anglers accept that this is part of fishing but I don’t think it helps to bring new anglers or children into the sport, especially if the fishing is extremely difficult. Computer games, DVD’s ect.. seem to offer instant entertainment to the average child and its hard to convince your son or daughter that fishing is a much more enjoyable activity especially when they struggle to catch.

I think that not only angling but catch and release is a learning curve and I freely admit that I have sat on shoals of stockfish in the not to distant past catching them one after the other, and I enjoyed it ! (and no i'm not some kind of saint now either !)However I was not aware of the damage that I was doing to the fishery or that I was not progressing as an angler.

I disagree with catch and release in most instances, with the exception being for wild fish (usually in lochs or rivers) where the adult fish must survive in order to breed etc....

As regards Reservoirs and Stillwaters, then I'm sorry if you find my views different to yours, but I very rarely release. But any fish that I do kill are not wasted as they are smoked, sold or given away !

Sorry about the length of this post.....but you did ask for our opinions

__________________
Mock me, vilify me, but don’t ignore me!

I think we can kill fish for the table but still dispatch them cleanly and humanely. We can treat them with the respect they deserve and take the pleasure from their capture. Killing or not killing is not so much the isssue, but how we treat, and of course are seen to treat, our quarry.

Why would anyone get so involved and give so much of their time, effort and money to a creature that they appeared not to actually like?