….. an angler Catching 20 small Whiting, Mackerall or Coalfish for bait. And a Match angler killing 20small fish to weigh in.

Now let me make it clear from the start that I am not advocating the latter as there is a very obvious public relations problem with this as well as a possible (but I would have thought small in most situations) conservation issue. There are also I am sure other issues that I am about to learn about.

However from a purely moral perspective surely the end result is that 20 fish die purely for our gratification. Now I can justify that to myself and anyone else that wants to argue the point, but I can’t see what the difference is.

Please educate me. :confused: :

With the most simplistic argument, there is no difference. But there is at a least a subtle difference. One could argue then that there is nothing wrong with trawlers throwing 95% bycatch back into the sea in order to catch 5% of wanted fish. Or that there is no difference between intensive farming, fox hunting, fishing ....... killing rats as vermin, killing the flu virus in your system.....

Can't get into this too deeply today as I'm servicing and relining the reels before I go out again in a few hours.

In the first they are killed to be used.

In the second they are killed just to say I caught more than you.

It is not just small fish that are killed and thrown away.

I saw a "pleasure angler" kill a doggie and throw it back because it took a bait intended for bass. SAD, SAD, SAD.

hey worm, the question you are asking is more complex than you think, freshwater anglers fit in to mostly two catergories, ie, first liesure anglers enjoy catching fish including the fight of the fish whether specimen size or not on mostly light tackle and there is the enjoyment of the day out in pleasant surroundings etc. second match anglers dont mind what they catch as long as they can be competitive and stand a chance of the win, there is also an important common denominator in they both put their fish back and take care of them in doing so. now the sea angler he does things similar as the freshwater man but there are more catergories,ie, there is one called the food angler who is intent on killing and eating anything he catches, like some prehistoric man that if he does'nt he might starve to death, then there is the plain greedy angler who does the same as the food angler but after killing them leaves them on the beach or pier piled up for some one else to dispose of, sea match anglers do the same at the weigh in. then i guess there is the bait angler who catches undersized fish for what he sees as justification, for the catching of larger fish. anyway there is im shure many more catergorys that sea anglers can fit in to, but the common denominator with most sea anglers is the complete oposite to the freshwater fraternity is, they dont often put fish back alive and when they do they are not put back with much care, mostly resulting in the fishes death. unless us sea anglers can shake off the hunter gatherer image that the general public and the commercial fishermen percieve of us it is going to be very difficult to argue our case under the grounds of conservation alone. as to the answer to your question worm personally yes there is no difference, but they are both wrong and i dont agree to the killing at all.

Hmmmm…

Stavey, whilst your point of view is admirable you are partaking in a blood-sport.

yeh agreed tiga, just trying to put my point about the complexities that suround sea angling. and if we are going to fight out of our corner on the conservation front than we better practice what we preach dont you think, personally i think we should just stick to our rights as at least equal stakeholders. that should be the most and only prominent basis for our argument. but we have laid out our stall now.

Yep, I use dead baits for Common Skate. They are tagged with the approval of the WWF & Shark Trust both are leading conservation groups who support anglers effort with regards to apex preditors. If it had not been for anglers making a fuss we probably wouldn't have any Commons left around our shores, as it is they are critically endangered

Even if you go down the local chippy or purchase fish fingers at the end off the day one could say you are indulging in the hunter instinct.

Not all freshwater fishing is totally free of the killer sydrome, most trout lakes will not allow catch and release.

If an angler only takes one or two fish for the table, I can see little harm done, providing the fish are dispatch swiftly.

All to often you see live fish put into a plastic bag and left to die.

However a portion of fish and chips could have put an enormous dent in the cod ranks, at least anglers have the opportunity to be selective on what they take home.

I always think of a bloodsport as a person who takes part just for the joy of killing.

A pheasant shoot where you line up to see how many birds you kill in a day cannot be compared to a rough shoot where a couple of birds or rabbits are shot for the table.

Moderation and usage is the key factor and I think that the USA and Australia have put in place sensible laws to try an eliminate killing for killings sake when fishing and we should try to do like wise.

so ken i take it you would be in favour of bag limits then

200% certain