Conference wahoo::fishing

    
    	Ed,
    		I copied your note over to the Hunting file, I am really
    curious as to the extent of this.  If you object to it being there,
    please have the moderator delete.  Thanks for the information -
    
    Rob
    

    re .1
    
    I heard it on the radio. Apparently the wisenheimers behind the
    initiative tied it in with another popular initiative, so a vote for
    one was a vote for the other. A dirty trick, but a common one...
    
    re .2
    
    Perhaps "cat" and release won't be affected - long as you let 'em go!
    
    Ed

    
    I think you are misinformed,The law doesn't have anything to do
    with deer hunting only the endangered Montain lion. And it has
    nothing to do with fishing, I think your just paranoid , I have
    never heard ANY ENVIROMENTAL group say anything about fishing
    they just want to protect animal that is almost gone from this
    earth.

    
    Two months ago in "The American Rifleman" they had an article
    on this. It did state that if the mountain lion was put on the 
    endangered species list, deer hunting would not be allowed because
    it would interfere with the food source of the mountain lion.
                      
    What irks me most is that the game biologists, and people from the
    dept of Natural Resources(?) all say the mountain lion *is not*
    an endangered species. I'll even post the article (or relevant
    portions) if you folks want to read it. It is a long article,
    and this is the fishing file.
    
    As for no enviormentalist group wanting to ban fishing, think again.
    It  has happened. over in either germany or italy, i forget which,
    a judge said that catch and release was inhumane because it harmed
    fish in the name of sport. however to catch and eat was o.k. if
    it happened there it can happen here.
                                         
                                         Walt
                                 

 I have heard several "conservation" groups that were against any form of
fishing and they were in the US. There's nothing worse than a little knowledge,
which is all these so called conservationists ever have.

 The Doctah

    What size hook would you use to catch these animals. I dont know
    if my 8 pound test can handle it but I am always up for a good fight..

    > I think you are misinformed,The law doesn't have anything to do
    > with deer hunting only the endangered Montain lion. 
    
    First of all, the mountain lion is not endangered. Second, the law
    prohibits interference with the primary food source of the mountain
    lion, which is deer. This effectively prohibits deer hunting.
    
    > And it has nothing to do with fishing, I think your just paranoid
    
    No, the law has nothing to do with fishing, but I see it as the tip of
    the iceberg of a wave of similar political maneuvering designed to ban
    all forms of what these extremist kooks call "blood sports," ie,
    hunting, fishing and trapping. I personally only participate in 
    fishing, and have no interest in the others, but I am reasonable
    enough to see the value in wise management of our wildlife resources,
    part of which includes selective harvesting, which can actually enhance
    the resource rather than diminish it. I know that one of the states in
    the midwest restricted deer hunting for a few years, with disastrous
    results to the deer population. I believe that they went back to a more
    sensible balance of hunting and conservation, with better results.
    
    > I have never heard ANY ENVIROMENTAL group say anything about fishing
    > they just want to protect animal that is almost gone from this
    > earth.
    
    Perhaps you have not heard of such groups, but they exist. I'm sure
    that you will hear of them eventually, if this trend continues.
    
    I am all for protecting any animal that is almost gone from this earth
    (providing there is at least some value to do so), but as I said, the
    mountain lion is not part of this group.
    
    No, I am not paranoid, but I am not going to sit on my can and let
    misguided "environmentalist" whackos impose their unbalanced extremist
    sensibilities on the entire population, to the detriment of all,
    including the species they claim to want to "protect."
    
    Ed

>>>    First of all, the mountain lion is not endangered. Second, the law
>>>    prohibits interference with the primary food source of the mountain
>>>    lion, which is deer. This effectively prohibits deer hunting.
    
>>>    No, the law has nothing to do with fishing, but I see it as the tip of
>>>    the iceberg of a wave of similar political maneuvering designed to ban




                     Deer eat fish don't they?

         From what I understand, the Mountain Lion may or may not be
    "endangered" over much of its range in the Continental U.S.  The
    jury is out on this subject because the Lion is one of the most
    wary animals out there.  For example, people keep reporting Lion
    sightings in the Quabbin, in Vermont's Northeast Kingdom, and in
    Northwest Maine but no one has been able to get a picture.  A lady
    by the name of Virginia Fifield (sp.?) has been heading up a project
    to research the existence of the Mountain Lion in Massachusetts,
    N.Y. and Vermont.  She has made casts of tracks from Western Mass.
    but again has no reliable pictures.  A recent article in Outside
    Magazine points out that even in Montana, where the Lion probably
    is not "endangered", no one can get a reliable count of how many
    lions are out there.  
    
         I consider myself both a fisherman and environmentalist.  I
    get put off by "extremists" within the membership of any group I'm
    involved in.  I must admit however that if I have to choose between
    a "wacko" environmentalist who has a somewhat misguided idea on
    how to save the Mountain Lion or that "small{?}" group of slob
    "sportsmen" who trash our rivers and streams with beer cans, mono
    line, and broken glass, or who get liquored up in deer camp and
    shoot every porcupine, blue jay or red fox that they see, well I'll
    pick the wacko environmentalist everytime.
    
         Come on folks, sportsmen and environmentalists should be the
    strongest of allies.
                        

    I don't know about anywhere else..., BUT the mountain lion is alive and
    doing very well here in Colorado.
    
    For the past two nights, a (1 or 2) mountain lion has come down into
    the town of Manatou Springs and attached/killed dogs who had been tied
    out over night.
    
    There are plenty of deer in this area, but still the mountain lion goes
    for the dogs.
    
    WELL, back to the subject at hand....!!!!
    
    Bob G.
    

    
    A few years back the state of Virginia refused to assist Jacques
    Cousteau in establishing some type of reseearch center.  Why you ask,
    because he is against sportfishing, he believes it endangers the fish.
    
    Bob 

    We don hab lions don chere, but there are dankerouses. A dankerous is
    bout de meanest ting in de world. He is an alleygater wit a head on
    both ends, bitin all de time at eberyting!!
    
    An chew can't sneak op on him either. Me, I neber seen wun, but plenty
    people hab. Mebbe dem environmentals wud becom endangered if dey found
    a dankerous!!
    
    Coonass

    > I must admit however that if I have to choose between
    > a "wacko" environmentalist who has a somewhat misguided idea on
    > how to save the Mountain Lion or that "small{?}" group of slob
    > "sportsmen" who trash our rivers and streams with beer cans, mono
    > line, and broken glass, or who get liquored up in deer camp and
    > shoot every porcupine, blue jay or red fox that they see, well I'll
    > pick the wacko environmentalist everytime.
    
    Good thing nobody is forced to choose between those two groups... and
    most people do not fall into those two groups either - at least I hope
    not.
    
    There used to be a nice word called "conservation" that I think covered
    the topic best. Conservationists promoted responsible hunting and
    fishing, and environmental responsibilities equally, with beneficial
    results for all. Where are the conservationists now?
    
    >    Come on folks, sportsmen and environmentalists should be the
    > strongest of allies.
                        
    I agree. But the kind of people I'm talking about would automatically 
    lump you, me, every one in this conference, and every one who hunts 
    and fishes, in the same category as the slob sportsmen, sight unseen. 
    I don't think they can conceive of a difference. To them we are all
    animal abusers and "environmental rapists".
    
    Ed

    I am an environmentalist. I am also a fisherman. I resent it when my
    environmentalist friends complain about fishermen, as a class, because
    they have found lengths of mono or beer cans by their favorite local
    pond. I also resent it when my sportsmen friends complain about
    environmentalists, as a class, because they read about some fringe nuts
    caught up in the Bambi syndrome.
    
    An excellent example of the two(?) groups working together is the
    current striper situation on the east coast. Because of the
    restrictions on all kinds of fishing (commercial and recreational) in 
    the last few years, it looks like the striper is making a comeback. 
    There were some members of the fishing community arguing against 
    any restrictions. Thankfully, they lost. If they hadn't, there probably
    wouldn't have been any significant number of them left for any of us to
    catch by now.
                                                    TOM 

    re: -.1
    
    Tom, I heartily agree with you.  The striper population is really
    starting to develop into something great, thanks to the joint efforts
    of environmentalists and fisherpersons.  From what I'm hearing,
    there are so many around right now that they're chasing mack's up
    the Merrimack right into Haverhill!  How's that for a comeback?
    
    				
    				john
    

Sincere environmentalist and sportspersons can and do work 
together to accomplish some really great things; however, 
environmentalist are too often joined by by various nut groups 
that have a totally different agendas.  I've seen this over and
over, especially with issues of conservation.  In every well-
meaning conservation group there lies the a few die-hard 
preservationist that deliberatly obscure themselves behind well
meaning individuals and groups.

Does anyone recall, here in Taxachusetts, the election where
one of the referendum questions, if passed, would have virtually
banned veal production (cruel and inhumane treatment to cows...
and they had some good points).  Well, as it turned out the
ballot question was really supported by a bunch of vegetarian
Cambridge activist that really wanted to ban any meat from the
dinner table.  The Animal Rightist, who have ligitimate concerns 
and issues were joined by this vegetarian nut group with a totally
digfferent agenda and virtually assimilated the Animal Rightist.

It really makes opposition more difficult. First, we have to
find out who's who, then we have to convince the 'good guys'
that we have ligitimate issues, too, and that we are not 
necessarily the 'bad guys' and we can work together towards a
win-win solution.


Jim

    re -.1
    
    I agree. I consider myself an environmentalist (though I like the term
    conservationist better), and find myself more and more distressed and
    angered by these new nature-nazis and humaniacs. Whatever happened to
    common sense?
    
    We have to keep informed or we'll lose big...
    
    Ed