just caught a 15lb atlantic salmon from the Hampshire avon.
my wife bought me a contour head cam to capture the moment on camera.
Have a look at the following link to see the action
picture can be found at
That is a nice fish. Hope you returned it.
I'll have a look at the video later.
my son Jared (17) just caught his first salmon today - I will upload pics later
Totally agree Kish,
As a fellow game / sea angler (and also a veterinary surgeon that lectures on fish medicine) I take the same view that whilst catching fish for the table is an acceptable activity (and probably better for fish welfare than commercial harvestibg techniques), "Catch and Release" - causing pain and distress to the fish purely for the angler's enjoyment - is not for me.
Also, although there is a definite need to preserve spawning stocks to ensure future fish generations, there is a serious lack of evidence on the future reproductive success of fish (particularly Salmon, where this may be their one and only attempt at spawning) after a major stressful encounter such as being caught and released (especially where the 'sporting' approach of using 'light tackle' and 'playing the fish' into submission is followed).
Here it is! My son's first atlantic salmon caught on HD quality video.
Fish of about 12lb's caught on a mepps 4 copper spinner - red and yellow beaded body
he was delighted. he has been trying for 4 years and finally acheived his goal!
my father used to do a lot of fly fishing but I never got the hang of it ( too many midgies in Wester Ross ), Iused to go fishing for mackerel when a boy ( used to catch a few )
its a great past time and if you do it with friends and family you build relationships and enjoy the beauty of the countryside.
we have seen otters, herons,lapwings, mink,kingfishers,and all manner of bird life as we walk the avon valley. Its so much more than a fishing expereince.
my son is having a great start to the fishing season - just landed a beautiful 17lb pike off the Hampshire Avon
Kish Logan wrote (see)
I'm sorry you returned it. For me (& I also fish the Hants Avon, though higher up, at Kingsworthy) my only excuse for causing distress to fish is that I intend to kill and eat them. But there we are - we all have to find our own path. I just didn't want the assumption left hanging unchallenged that catch&return=good while killing fish = bad.
I can see your point of view, Kish and Hugh Falkus (amongst others) argued the same, although in his case it was more to counter the objections of the anti-fishing lobby. If we were talking about stocked fish, I would completely agree with you.
However, with the huge pressure on wild fish stocks, Atlantic Salmon in particular, anything that helps their numbers must be a good thing. I know that sporting fishermen aren't the greatest threat - salmon farming, the failure to cull seals and commercial netting are way more important but anglers should do their bit.
I love fly fishing (for trout) and don't do any other kind of fishing. However, I don't much like eating freshwater fish and I think that wild trout and salmon are too precious to be caught only once.
Jake wrote (see)
I agree totally (except for the bit about culling seals), but "anglers doing their bit" could equally apply to not catching the fish in the first place. I have serious professional concerns that the pain and distress of catching and releasing a Salmon may well cause such disruption to corticosteroid and reproductive hormone cycles that successful spawning may not occur.
I think that wild trout and salmon are too precious to be caught only once.
That's the bit I have a very big problem with - I too love fishing, but I have very serious ethical concerns - to me your statement is pretty much the same as saying "Wild trout and salmon are so precious we should cause them pain and suffering more than once".
To me they are so precious that we should only be catching them if there is a very good reason to, and "sport" alone is not a good reason.
Ron Rees Davies wrote (see)
Jake wrote (see)I think that wild trout and salmon are too precious to be caught only once.That's the bit I have a very big problem with - I too love fishing, but I have very serious ethical concerns - to me your statement is pretty much the same as saying "Wild trout and salmon are so precious we should cause them pain and suffering more than once". To me they are so precious that we should only be catching them if there is a very good reason to, and "sport" alone is not a good reason.
Well, we're not going to agree on that point. Due to family and work commitments, I don't do much fishing. I also don't do any kind of fishing other than fly fishing for Trout so I don't fish at all for half the year. Therefore I feel that I'm already doing enough 'not to catch them in the first place'.
I don't see that there are ethical concerns; wild fish have a much better quality of life (if you accept such an anthromorphicl construct in the first place) than battery farm animals, for example. In return for anglers contributing (sometimes substantial) money and time to preserve and improve the quality of the river environment, some of the fish have to put up with getting caught now and again. It seems to me that the fish get a pretty good deal out of it overall.
Essentially you are arguing for a massive reduction in angling with no catch and release. Incidentally, I assume your argument extends to coarse and sea fish as well and, as coarse fish are mostly inedible, coarse fishing would effectively be banned. In fact, if your concern is solely about causing fish pain and suffering, why do you fish at all, even for food?
I'm not saying you don't have a valid point of view, just that it cannot be reconciled with sport fishing as it currently exists.
"wild fish have a much better quality of life (if you accept such an anthromorphicl construct in the first place) than battery farm animals, for example" you accept that construct to be able to make that statement. surely?
" In return for anglers contributing (sometimes substantial) money and time to preserve and improve the quality of the river environment," but not for the fish's benefit. solely for your benefit to partake in the sport and fun of catching them (grouse moors spring to mind as a similar thing)
my point of view is why cause any creature suffering, hopefully unecessary*, if you aren't going to kill it either to eat or dispose of. it looks like spiteful cruelty - whether it is is another matter.
* we have general comtradiction of emotive response to "suffering" depending upon what the creature is - cutesie ickle lamb or cuddly ickle doggy woggy (look at those eyes) and what we view as vermin, disease carriers or "lower" forms of life
In response to point 1:
That's why I said "If". As it happens, I don't accept that anthropormorphic construct but it is a popular one and a point of reference for many people.
In response to point 2:
Yes, we do pay to improve the rivers in order to get better sport but the fish benefit as well. Why does the motive matter? Fish aren't capable of making an ethical judgement on the origin of their improved environment. Surely the fact that the river is preserved is worth something to us all, regardless of whether we are fishermen or not? I certainly like walking by rivers and they would be less pleasant without the contribution that anglers make.
I'm not sure what you define as 'unnecessary suffering'. If the justification for killing is eating what you kill, why is that? Humans don't need to eat meat or fish so surely any killing of animals for food is technically unnecessary? If I killed and ate every fish that I caught, would that be preferable to catch and release? What if every fisherman did that? Stocks would collapse. How is that a better outcome for wild brown trout as a species?
Ontario is a vast adventure playground just waiting to be explored and experienced
Minimal & lightweight footwear designed to enhance your outdoors experience
Become a fan of OutdoorsMagic
Follow us on twitter
Sign up to our free newsletter
Meet partners in our forum
Other Immediate Media Sites
Our eCommerce Platform
© Immediate Media Company Ltd 2012. This website is owned and published by Immediate Media Company Limited. www.immediatemedia.co.uk