For animal lovers...
 

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 5 May 2012 12:47:26 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 5 May 2012 11:39:49 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 5 May 2012 08:50:05 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...


You do understand that a very significant number of "released" fish
die from the experience?

Actually, treated correctly, most do NOT die and most don't hardly
suffer at all. Fish don't have the same neurology network that other
animals do.

I bet PETA would disagree with you.

Is that the source for your science?

It seems to be the source for your science against hunting.,

Nope, my stance is simple. How is killing an animal saving it? We are
encroaching on there space, not the other way around you know?

Killing a few to save many. It is an established program

Isn't that our policy in Afghanistan too?

War and sport killing are two entirely different things.

For animal lovers...
 

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 5 May 2012 12:48:17 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 5 May 2012 11:41:10 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,

Right... No animal species on earth can survive without man killing
them, huh?

Not without suitable habitat. The hunters seem to be the only ones who
are willing to actually PAY for that habitat.

And why is there not "suitable habitat?

Because nobody else is willing to pay the money to set it aside.

We are all living on the original habitat. The food we eat comes from
the original habitat and we drive on some more.
I suppose if we could just get rid of a few billion people, the
animals would have more elbow room. Obviously, most of this population
pressure is coming from the 3d world right now. That is why it is
significant that some hunting ranches are making room for soon to be
extinct African animals. The number that get shot every year pales in
comparison to the number killed in Africa by development..

Exactly my point! We are encroaching on the animal's land, not the other
way around.


Nobody ever said anything different. The only fix would be to wipe out
a couple billion people.

There you go, no different than regulated hunting of animals.

For animal lovers...
 

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 5 May 2012 12:49:58 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 5 May 2012 09:11:48 -0700, "Califbill"
wrote:

wrote in message ...

On Fri, 04 May 2012 19:28:55 -0400, X ` Man
wrote:


Bass fishermen are different, nobody wants to eat a freshwater bass
anyway, and artificials are perfect for them... Other fishermen catch
fish you want to eat, and they don't do as well with artificials. I
suppose you are gonna' tell us you never took a fish, never killed a
fish, and never used natural bait, right??? Pffffttt. I suppose you will.


Lots of people eat freshwater bass, jerkwater.

Not serious bass fishermen.

That is the old fish story isn't it? The largest recorded large mouth
was reportedly caught by an old woman who had it weighed at a local
store. When the word got out about it and the record people tracked
her down, they were just finishing it up ... or so the legend goes.

After all it is a fish story.

None of the guys I fish fresh water with keep a bass. They will catch
a mess of specks if they want a fish fry.

On the other hand all of the salt water people I know are in the
fillet and release club.
------------------------------------------

Go your local Asian market with live fish sales. There will be those Bass
for sale.

They eat dogs too.

There is also the traditional Asian dish Mo Goo Gai Cat.

I find it incredible that some here don't realize that bass is eaten (a
lot) and it's very good!

I suppose you want the biggest, fattest one you can catch too.

No, why? Do you have a point you're trying to make?

For animal lovers...
 

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 05 May 2012 13:17:55 -0400, X ` Man
wrote:

On 5/5/12 11:44 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 05 May 2012 10:37:50 -0400, X ` Man
wrote:

On 5/5/12 10:30 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 5 May 2012 08:50:05 -0400, wrote:

In ,
says...


You do understand that a very significant number of "released" fish
die from the experience?

Actually, treated correctly, most do NOT die and most don't hardly
suffer at all. Fish don't have the same neurology network that other
animals do.

I bet PETA would disagree with you.

So?

I am just pointing out the incongruities in "I"'s argument

He started out saying he was always catch and release, then he said he
eats the bass he catches, now he says the fish doesn't even feel a
hook in his cheek. That is denial.


Who "he"?


"I" man

And it's a lie, I never, ever said I "always catch and release".

For animal lovers...
 

In article om, 5@
5.com says...

On 5/6/2012 1:34 PM, iBoaterer wrote:
In ,
says...

On Sat, 05 May 2012 13:17:55 -0400, X ` Man
wrote:

On 5/5/12 11:44 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 05 May 2012 10:37:50 -0400, X ` Man
wrote:

On 5/5/12 10:30 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 5 May 2012 08:50:05 -0400, wrote:

In ,
says...


You do understand that a very significant number of "released" fish
die from the experience?

Actually, treated correctly, most do NOT die and most don't hardly
suffer at all. Fish don't have the same neurology network that other
animals do.

I bet PETA would disagree with you.

So?

I am just pointing out the incongruities in "I"'s argument

He started out saying he was always catch and release, then he said he
eats the bass he catches, now he says the fish doesn't even feel a
hook in his cheek. That is denial.


Who "he"?


"I" man

And it's a lie, I never, ever said I "always catch and release".

Musta been Krause who said it then.

Alter ego,

For animal lovers...
 

In article ,
says...

In article om, 5@
5.com says...

On 5/6/2012 1:34 PM, iBoaterer wrote:
In ,
says...

On Sat, 05 May 2012 13:17:55 -0400, X ` Man
wrote:

On 5/5/12 11:44 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 05 May 2012 10:37:50 -0400, X ` Man
wrote:

On 5/5/12 10:30 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 5 May 2012 08:50:05 -0400, wrote:

In ,
says...


You do understand that a very significant number of "released" fish
die from the experience?

Actually, treated correctly, most do NOT die and most don't hardly
suffer at all. Fish don't have the same neurology network that other
animals do.

I bet PETA would disagree with you.

So?

I am just pointing out the incongruities in "I"'s argument

He started out saying he was always catch and release, then he said he
eats the bass he catches, now he says the fish doesn't even feel a
hook in his cheek. That is denial.


Who "he"?


"I" man

And it's a lie, I never, ever said I "always catch and release".

Musta been Krause who said it then.

Alter ego,

Bull****. Show me my exact quote then. I NEVER said I "always catch and
release."

For animal lovers...
 

On 5/6/2012 1:34 PM, iBoaterer wrote:
In ,
says...

On Sat, 05 May 2012 13:17:55 -0400, X ` Man
wrote:

On 5/5/12 11:44 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 05 May 2012 10:37:50 -0400, X ` Man
wrote:

On 5/5/12 10:30 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 5 May 2012 08:50:05 -0400, wrote:

In ,
says...


You do understand that a very significant number of "released" fish
die from the experience?

Actually, treated correctly, most do NOT die and most don't hardly
suffer at all. Fish don't have the same neurology network that other
animals do.

I bet PETA would disagree with you.

So?

I am just pointing out the incongruities in "I"'s argument

He started out saying he was always catch and release, then he said he
eats the bass he catches, now he says the fish doesn't even feel a
hook in his cheek. That is denial.


Who "he"?


"I" man

And it's a lie, I never, ever said I "always catch and release".

Musta been Krause who said it then.

For animal lovers...
 

On Sun, 06 May 2012 12:20:12 -0400, wrote:

On Sat, 05 May 2012 13:24:49 -0400, X ` Man
wrote:

On 5/5/12 6:42 AM, JustWait wrote:
On 5/5/2012 1:40 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 04 May 2012 19:28:55 -0400, X ` Man
wrote:


Bass fishermen are different, nobody wants to eat a freshwater bass
anyway, and artificials are perfect for them... Other fishermen catch
fish you want to eat, and they don't do as well with artificials. I
suppose you are gonna' tell us you never took a fish, never killed a
fish, and never used natural bait, right??? Pffffttt. I suppose you
will.


Lots of people eat freshwater bass, jerkwater.

Not serious bass fishermen.

That is the old fish story isn't it? The largest recorded large mouth
was reportedly caught by an old woman who had it weighed at a local
store. When the word got out about it and the record people tracked
her down, they were just finishing it up ... or so the legend goes.

After all it is a fish story.

None of the guys I fish fresh water with keep a bass. They will catch
a mess of specks if they want a fish fry.

On the other hand all of the salt water people I know are in the
fillet and release club.

Of course nobody eats fresh water Bass, he just said it, it's what he
does...

"Of course nobody eats fresh water Bass..."

Yet another example of your not knowing anything real. Plenty of people
eat freshwater largemouth bass.

I said "serious bass fishermen".

It is the same as serious "bill fish" fishermen. They put them back
live if at all possible. Even if you want a mount, it seldom actually
has any of your "fish" in it.
Take a picture of it next to the boat and turn it loose.

I had a Bass in a fishtank once. We would feed it a dozen 1 1/2 inch
goldfish every week or so. It would get them all in less than a
minute. Glittering scales would puff from the gills slits in a pretty
cloud.

Casady

For animal lovers...
 

On Sun, 06 May 2012 15:37:53 -0500, Richard Casady
wrote:

I had a Bass in a fishtank once. We would feed it a dozen 1 1/2 inch
goldfish every week or so. It would get them all in less than a
minute. Glittering scales would puff from the gills slits in a pretty
cloud.

====

I have a cousin in Michigan with a pond behind her house that they
stock with bass just for entertainment, sort of a real world fish
tank. They feed the bass every evening just before sunset, some kind
of fish food pellets that they buy. The bass show up right on
schedule and go into a feeding frenzy when the pellets hit the water.
Some of the bass have recognizable features and get named accordingly.

For animal lovers...
 

On 5/6/2012 3:04 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 6 May 2012 13:32:57 -0400, wrote:

In ,
says...

Exactly my point! We are encroaching on the animal's land, not the other
way around.


Nobody ever said anything different. The only fix would be to wipe out
a couple billion people.

There you go, no different than regulated hunting of animals.

I can't think of much that is more regulated now than the hunting of
animals. My point is we are getting more habitat set aside by
sportsmen than by animal rights people.

PETA is about as interested in saving animals, as Planned Parenthood is
in planning Parenthood...