|
Am I the only one annoyed by this?
rant
Fishing. Everywhere, more anglers and more fishing line. Not only do I need to worry about not hitting their lines or "getting too close" to them, but I also find my paddle and occasionally my rudder fouled by old discarded fishing line. Everywhere. Oh, and when they're about to cast, they look impatient while I pass by. As if that 10 seconds extra time for me to pass is going to cost them the "big catch of the day". A few of the more ignorant ones don't even care - they just cast off anyway. This is the case with ALL of the rivers and smaller lakes nearby. I'm beginning to wonder which is worse: jetski's or anglers... /rant -- "Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither." - B. Franklin |
Yes, you are the only one annoyed by this. The rest of us are fishing out
of our canoes as we paddle so we can get the "big" catch of the day :-) Shot "Professional Target" wrote in message ... rant Fishing. Everywhere, more anglers and more fishing line. Not only do I need to worry about not hitting their lines or "getting too close" to them, but I also find my paddle and occasionally my rudder fouled by old discarded fishing line. Everywhere. Oh, and when they're about to cast, they look impatient while I pass by. As if that 10 seconds extra time for me to pass is going to cost them the "big catch of the day". A few of the more ignorant ones don't even care - they just cast off anyway. This is the case with ALL of the rivers and smaller lakes nearby. I'm beginning to wonder which is worse: jetski's or anglers... /rant -- "Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither." - B. Franklin |
Who was there first, you or the fishermen? If you are within casting range
you are just being plain rude. You should take the ethical high ground and give them wide birth. Goes a long way towards local relations. "Hotshot" wrote in message r.com... Yes, you are the only one annoyed by this. The rest of us are fishing out of our canoes as we paddle so we can get the "big" catch of the day :-) Shot "Professional Target" wrote in message ... rant Fishing. Everywhere, more anglers and more fishing line. Not only do I need to worry about not hitting their lines or "getting too close" to them, but I also find my paddle and occasionally my rudder fouled by old discarded fishing line. Everywhere. Oh, and when they're about to cast, they look impatient while I pass by. As if that 10 seconds extra time for me to pass is going to cost them the "big catch of the day". A few of the more ignorant ones don't even care - they just cast off anyway. This is the case with ALL of the rivers and smaller lakes nearby. I'm beginning to wonder which is worse: jetski's or anglers... /rant -- "Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither." - B. Franklin |
"Ed" writes:
Who was there first, you or the fishermen? If you are within casting range you are just being plain rude. You should take the ethical high ground and give them wide birth. Goes a long way towards local relations. I always give them plenty of room. sometimes, in tight spots, it's not always possible, though, but for the most part, I stay as far away from them as possible. I don't look forward to digging some beer-mellowed idiot's fish hook out of my eyeball... -- Man is the only animal that laughs and weeps, for he is the only animal that is struck with the difference between what things are and what they ought to be. |
I do find fishing line when paddling which I know cripples wildlife so I gather it up. I also fretieve fishing tackle like floats and lures entangled in weeds and branches and give it away to fishermen I meet on the river. The only encouters I've had were one summer when I bought a fishing licence and had paddlers cutting corners on river bends paddling over my line inside the highly visible float. Mostly they were from a local canoe club and were too insensitive to alter course. They acted like dumb animals. They could see the fishing float, looked embarassed, and some even appologized, as they paddled over my line. Why they wouldn't alter course is beyond my comprehesion. The many ducks who are reputed to be less intelligent would alter course. Humans? Intelligent? No evidence of it there. Professional Target ) writes: rant Fishing. Everywhere, more anglers and more fishing line. Not only do I need to worry about not hitting their lines or "getting too close" to them, but I also find my paddle and occasionally my rudder fouled by old discarded fishing line. Everywhere. Oh, and when they're about to cast, they look impatient while I pass by. As if that 10 seconds extra time for me to pass is going to cost them the "big catch of the day". A few of the more ignorant ones don't even care - they just cast off anyway. This is the case with ALL of the rivers and smaller lakes nearby. I'm beginning to wonder which is worse: jetski's or anglers... /rant -- "Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither." - B. Franklin -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ William R Watt National Capital FreeNet Ottawa's free community network homepage: www.ncf.ca/~ag384/top.htm warning: non-FreeNet email must have "notspam" in subject or it's returned |
Sure, anglers can be a lot of trouble, but of you think that's bad, come
to the Belgian Ardennes or try to paddle on so many of the nicer streams in Britain. Many of those streams (actually, most in Belgium) are closed to paddlers because of the stronger fisherman lobby. (BTW: Troll alert! http://wilko.webzone.ru/troll.html ) Wilko Professional Target wrote: rant Fishing. Everywhere, more anglers and more fishing line. Not only do I need to worry about not hitting their lines or "getting too close" to them, but I also find my paddle and occasionally my rudder fouled by old discarded fishing line. Everywhere. Oh, and when they're about to cast, they look impatient while I pass by. As if that 10 seconds extra time for me to pass is going to cost them the "big catch of the day". A few of the more ignorant ones don't even care - they just cast off anyway. This is the case with ALL of the rivers and smaller lakes nearby. I'm beginning to wonder which is worse: jetski's or anglers... /rant -- Wilko van den Bergh wilko(a t)dse(d o t)nl Eindhoven The Netherlands Europe ---Look at the possibilities, don't worry about the limitations.--- http://wilko.webzone.ru/ |
looie ) writes: On the Civic Holiday weekend, after launching my folding sailing kayake from a rather crowed launch site on Lake Scugog, I encountered as a teen I spent an afternoon with a friend and his father fishing somehwere near Rice Lake (all of this just east of Toronto) and even then the weekend fishermen of all ages were shoulder-to-shoulder along the banks of the river and standing out on a dam. Their biggest problem at the time was each other's lines. I doubt conditions would have improved over the years even though in those days residents of the province could fish without a licence. I find the best rural, as opposde to wilderness, paddling between farm fields and cottages where there is no public access to the shoreline. You get there by boat. Within the Ottawa city limits I can paddle for a weekday afternoon and not meet another person. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ William R Watt National Capital FreeNet Ottawa's free community network homepage: www.ncf.ca/~ag384/top.htm warning: non-FreeNet email must have "notspam" in subject or it's returned |
looie writes:
Especially the gasholes fishing from the local pier which features large signs proclaiming, "No Fishing Allowed" I see quite a number of these illiterates at some of the local lakes. I generally point to the sign and indicate they're not supposed to be fishing from there. Usually they get the hint and move on. Don't get me wrong - I've nothing against fishing; it's a wonderful sport, but I *do* have a problem with obnoxious fishermen and those who don't clean up after themselves. These seem to be in the majority around here, in my experience. -- Man is the only animal that laughs and weeps, for he is the only animal that is struck with the difference between what things are and what they ought to be. |
In message , Professional Target
writes looie writes: Especially the gasholes fishing from the local pier which features large signs proclaiming, "No Fishing Allowed" I see quite a number of these illiterates at some of the local lakes. I generally point to the sign and indicate they're not supposed to be fishing from there. Usually they get the hint and move on. Don't get me wrong - I've nothing against fishing; it's a wonderful sport, but I *do* have a problem with obnoxious fishermen and those who don't clean up after themselves. These seem to be in the majority around here, in my experience. I find the definition of fishing as a sport strange but for want of any other compartment I suppose sport will have to do. But if someone's sport involves putting a metal hook in a living creature's mouth and yanking it out of the river for fun then you do have to question it! -- Dave Manby Details of the Coruh river and my book "Many Rivers To Run" at http://www.dmanby.demon.co.uk |
Your being intolerant in an elitest sort of way.
These people are causing you no harm. They are fishing. I see far more people fishing than I see kayaking. I usually find them to be very friendly and happy people. I have had interesting conversations pertaining to the location of alligators, snakes, fish, birds and other wildlife. We are in the outdoors together, lets not be kayak snobs. You think your sport is better than their's? Ask yourself this, what happens when fisherman no longer tolerate kayaking? Remember there are more fisherman than kayakers. What happens when homeowners decided they no longer can tolerate silent spying kayakers peering into their backyards? What happens when environmentalists become concerned that you may disturb nesting birds? I actually heard an "environmentalist" state that kayaks disturb birds because she saw a bird fly as a kayak approached. She seemed to imply that disturbance equalled harm. I told her how I spotted a bird at 100x through my C-5 get disturbed by a gentle breeze and if she was in favor of banning wind. I never got an answer. What happens when the state becomes concerned that too many kayakers are drowing on certain sections of rivers, so no selfish kayakers can kayak anywhere on the river? What happens when hunters decide to buy land and deny access to it because they are denied access to public land? What happens when environmentalist decide to buy land and deny access to it because they cannot have their way with public land? Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Your rights stop where my freedom begins. And Vice Versa. I know its hard sometimes. I hate Jet Ski's and Cigarette boats. They have their places, we have ours. Leave them alone. Besides, one day I may try one out for a couple of hours. Professional Target wrote: rant Fishing. Everywhere, more anglers and more fishing line. Not only do I need to worry about not hitting their lines or "getting too close" to them, but I also find my paddle and occasionally my rudder fouled by old discarded fishing line. Everywhere. Oh, and when they're about to cast, they look impatient while I pass by. As if that 10 seconds extra time for me to pass is going to cost them the "big catch of the day". A few of the more ignorant ones don't even care - they just cast off anyway. This is the case with ALL of the rivers and smaller lakes nearby. I'm beginning to wonder which is worse: jetski's or anglers... /rant |
Tracy writes:
[blah] Read the rest of what I wrote here. Get down off your own elitist horse for a moment. -- Man is the only animal that laughs and weeps, for he is the only animal that is struck with the difference between what things are and what they ought to be. |
In message , Tracy
writes Your being intolerant in an elitest sort of way. These people are causing you no harm. They are fishing. I see far more people fishing than I see kayaking. I usually find them to be very friendly and happy people. I have had interesting conversations pertaining to the location of alligators, snakes, fish, birds and other wildlife. We are in the outdoors together, lets not be kayak snobs. You think your sport is better than their's? Ask yourself this, what happens when fisherman no longer tolerate kayaking? Remember there are more fisherman than kayakers. Welcome to the UK What happens when homeowners decided they no longer can tolerate silent spying kayakers peering into their backyards? Welcome to the UK What happens when environmentalists become concerned that you may disturb nesting birds? I actually heard an "environmentalist" state that kayaks disturb birds because she saw a bird fly as a kayak approached. She seemed to imply that disturbance equalled harm. I told her how I spotted a bird at 100x through my C-5 get disturbed by a gentle breeze and if she was in favor of banning wind. I never got an answer. What happens when the state becomes concerned that too many kayakers are drowing on certain sections of rivers, so no selfish kayakers can kayak anywhere on the river? Has been tried over here in Europe. What happens when hunters decide to buy land and deny access to it because they are denied access to public land? Don't have hunters in England really just a bunch of eejits running around dressed in pink on horses chasing foxes for fun. What happens when environmentalist decide to buy land and deny access to it because they cannot have their way with public land? Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Yup that is the problem in the UK Your rights stop where my freedom begins. And Vice Versa. I know its hard sometimes. I hate Jet Ski's and Cigarette boats. They have their places, we have ours. Leave them alone. Besides, one day I may try one out for a couple of hours. We have the situation here where a fishing club denied permission for the three annual organised tours to pass through their fishing rights. These tours have been going on for over thirty years under one name or another. The fishing club has about 50 members. The tours bring on average 500 paddlers to the valley. Llangollen the town where most of the paddlers base themselves estimated the loss to the local economy to be around 20,000 pounds (not far off 38,000usd oh we do like your well run economy over here in the UK). I feel this is on the low side but they calculated the sum and did not include purchases that were not of a "direct benefit" e.g.. petrol purchases. The paddlers are boycotting Corwen the offending town. Professional Target wrote: rant Fishing. Everywhere, more anglers and more fishing line. Not only do I need to worry about not hitting their lines or "getting too close" to them, but I also find my paddle and occasionally my rudder fouled by old discarded fishing line. Everywhere. Oh, and when they're about to cast, they look impatient while I pass by. As if that 10 seconds extra time for me to pass is going to cost them the "big catch of the day". A few of the more ignorant ones don't even care - they just cast off anyway. This is the case with ALL of the rivers and smaller lakes nearby. I'm beginning to wonder which is worse: jetski's or anglers... /rant -- Dave Manby Details of the Coruh river and my book "Many Rivers To Run" at http://www.dmanby.demon.co.uk |
Dave Manby ) writes: I find the definition of fishing as a sport strange but for want of any other compartment I suppose sport will have to do. But if someone's sport involves putting a metal hook in a living creature's mouth and yanking it out of the river for fun then you do have to question it! it's just as annoying to read accounts in this newsgroup from paddlers who's main objective is to see how much milage they can run up in a day in their sea kayaks or how many rapids they can run in their apparently short lifetimes. it's annoying when they show no appreciation for nature and deride slower paddlers who like being outdoors "birdwatching" and away from their high speed high tech highly competitive high cost environment. it's just as annoying to read the writings of people who think what they do for "recreation" is what everyone else should be made to do through legislation, regulation, certification, and any other from of restriction they can come up with. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ William R Watt National Capital FreeNet Ottawa's free community network homepage: www.ncf.ca/~ag384/top.htm warning: non-FreeNet email must have "notspam" in subject or it's returned |
William R. Watt wrote:
it's just as annoying to read the writings of people who think what they do for "recreation" is what everyone else should be made to do through legislation, regulation, certification, and any other from of restriction they can come up with. It's even more annoying to read the writings of someone who has so little grasp of the English language that he can't comprehend messages written by those who do. Of course, that utter lack of understanding doesn't stop him from applying his nonsensical ideas to replies to their posts... despite the fact that he is overreacting to something they never even mentioned in their posts in the first place. -- Wilko van den Bergh wilko(a t)dse(d o t)nl Eindhoven The Netherlands Europe ---Look at the possibilities, don't worry about the limitations.--- http://wilko.webzone.ru/ |
Tracy wrote:
Your being intolerant in an elitest sort of way. These people are causing you no harm. They are fishing. I see far more people fishing than I see kayaking. I usually find them to be very friendly and happy people. I have had interesting conversations pertaining to the location of alligators, snakes, fish, birds and other wildlife. We are in the outdoors together, lets not be kayak snobs. Tracy, Yes and no. Fishing line is a serious hazard to wildlife. It is found in the stomachs of, and around the necks of, sea mammals, fish, sea turtles, and a host of other animals in the wild. Last time I was paddling in Monterey, I saw an adolescent sea lion that was doomed to death because monofiliment line was wrapped around its neck. The animal was, otherwise, healthy, but the line had already cut through the flesh as the animal grew. While I think that parts of the post were questionable, fishing line needs to be retrieved, when possible, and disposed of properly. Most often, it is not. stuff deleted... ....stuff deleted What happens when environmentalists become concerned that you may disturb nesting birds? I actually heard an "environmentalist" state that kayaks disturb birds because she saw a bird fly as a kayak approached. She seemed to imply that disturbance equalled harm. I told her how I spotted a bird at 100x through my C-5 get disturbed by a gentle breeze and if she was in favor of banning wind. I never got an answer. Kayaking does disturb wildlife and may well cause harm. Humans, by their very presence, pose a hazard to wildlife. The bird may well have been protecting a nest and while fleeing from the paddler was unable to protect the offspring from the snake climbing the grass. Most of the damage we do in nature is accidental (or poorly considered). Your example trivializes an important issue, which is that we do scare animals when we paddle and it is best that we take care when we are in animal habitat. ....more deleted Your rights stop where my freedom begins. And Vice Versa. I know its hard sometimes. I hate Jet Ski's and Cigarette boats. They have their places, we have ours. Leave them alone. Besides, one day I may try one out for a couple of hours. Professional Target wrote: .... rest deleted |
I read you loud and clear.
You have no problem labeling fisherman as illiterates. You seek to enforce rules banning them from fishing. You will be the first to whine when fisherman and other assorted people place signs prohibiting kayak launching. Mind your own business and paddle. Professional Target wrote: Tracy writes: [blah] Read the rest of what I wrote here. Get down off your own elitist horse for a moment. |
Rick wrote: Tracy wrote: Your being intolerant in an elitest sort of way. These people are causing you no harm. They are fishing. I see far more people fishing than I see kayaking. I usually find them to be very friendly and happy people. I have had interesting conversations pertaining to the location of alligators, snakes, fish, birds and other wildlife. We are in the outdoors together, lets not be kayak snobs. Tracy, Yes and no. Fishing line is a serious hazard to wildlife. It is found in the stomachs of, and around the necks of, sea mammals, fish, sea turtles, and a host of other animals in the wild. Last time I was paddling in Monterey, I saw an adolescent sea lion that was doomed to death because monofiliment line was wrapped around its neck. The animal was, otherwise, healthy, but the line had already cut through the flesh as the animal grew. While I think that parts of the post were questionable, fishing line needs to be retrieved, when possible, and disposed of properly. Most often, it is not. There are morons in every crowd. Some of them happen to be fisherman. Everyone does something stupid at some time in their life including me and probably you. I bought some fishing line the other day and found that the package was labled specifically telling buyers not to unspool line in the wild because of the things you are talking about. In fact, the store that I bought the line from offers a service where they will unspool and respool your line thus ensuring proper disposal. I remember thinking it would be great if the line were recycled by the spool or chopped into 12" segment by the unspooling machine. (I don't really fish, I was buying the line and a sinker to launch into a tree so I could use it to pull a rope to remove a dead and dangerous branch. I do however reserve the right to change my mind and annoy Professional Target by deciding to cast a line in the water. I will try to put on a fake smile and bow while he passes to make him feel more comfortable.) I have seen a few spools of line in the bayous. Since fishing line lasts a very long time, I know that the vast majority must be disposed of properly or I simply couldn't paddle since the bayous have been heavily fished for a very long time. I agree that dumped line is a problem for human swimmers as well as wildlife. I believe that education will stop most people from dumping it. I know that education will not stop a few from dumping line. The point is that we shouldn't treat every fisherman as a criminal because some moron might happen to be a fisherman. stuff deleted... ...stuff deleted What happens when environmentalists become concerned that you may disturb nesting birds? I actually heard an "environmentalist" state that kayaks disturb birds because she saw a bird fly as a kayak approached. She seemed to imply that disturbance equalled harm. I told her how I spotted a bird at 100x through my C-5 get disturbed by a gentle breeze and if she was in favor of banning wind. I never got an answer. Kayaking does disturb wildlife and may well cause harm. Humans, by their very presence, pose a hazard to wildlife. The bird may well have been protecting a nest and while fleeing from the paddler was unable to protect the offspring from the snake climbing the grass. Most of the damage we do in nature is accidental (or poorly considered). Your example trivializes an important issue, which is that we do scare animals when we paddle and it is best that we take care when we are in animal habitat. Oh bull****. Maybe the snake would have died if he hadn't eaten a cute little baby bird. Don't breath, drink, eat, ****, ****, pass wind, pass go, or collect $200. Just sit there, grow old and die. Don't get cremated because that will pollute the air. Don't get buried because that will disturb the earthworms. Just melt away like Fosty the Snowman. Be carefull not to drown the fire ants. ...more deleted Your rights stop where my freedom begins. And Vice Versa. I know its hard sometimes. I hate Jet Ski's and Cigarette boats. They have their places, we have ours. Leave them alone. Besides, one day I may try one out for a couple of hours. Professional Target wrote: ... rest deleted |
Tracy writes:
I read you loud and clear. Apparently you do not. You have no problem labeling fisherman as illiterates. Since your own literacy is apparently in question, I shall refrain from continuing this discussion with you. Instead, I'll let you read Rick's reply in this thread which sums it up quit nicely. -- Man is the only animal that laughs and weeps, for he is the only animal that is struck with the difference between what things are and what they ought to be. |
....stuff deleted
Kayaking does disturb wildlife and may well cause harm. Humans, by their very presence, pose a hazard to wildlife. The bird may well have been protecting a nest and while fleeing from the paddler was unable to protect the offspring from the snake climbing the grass. Most of the damage we do in nature is accidental (or poorly considered). Your example trivializes an important issue, which is that we do scare animals when we paddle and it is best that we take care when we are in animal habitat. Oh bull****. Maybe the snake would have died if he hadn't eaten a cute little baby bird. Don't breath, drink, eat, ****, ****, pass wind, pass go, or collect $200. Just sit there, grow old and die. Don't get cremated because that will pollute the air. Don't get buried because that will disturb the earthworms. Just melt away like Fosty the Snowman. Be carefull not to drown the fire ants. Tracy, You are letting your ignorance show. Humans always have impacts in nature. What those are go largely unnoticed by us, so we have a tendency to believe thay don't happen. I've seen humans kill animals in just this way, most commonly a young sea lion being trampled to death when a kayaker wanted to get a picture of the animals from their kayak at the rock wall protecting Monterey harbor. I have worked with marine mammals, and their handlers, and have been battered about the head and shoulders of "don't do's" for years now. I am not saying that this "always" happens, just that it does. Our ignorance of our impact is part of the paroblem. Personally, I take pains not to disturb animals in their habitat, you don't. Animals can't set rules (such as wipe your feet) in their environment, so we have to do some of that for them. Your insensitivity and closed mind does not speak well of you. Rick ...more deleted Your rights stop where my freedom begins. And Vice Versa. I know its hard sometimes. I hate Jet Ski's and Cigarette boats. They have their places, we have ours. Leave them alone. Besides, one day I may try one out for a couple of hours. Professional Target wrote: ... rest deleted |
Rick wrote: ...stuff deleted Kayaking does disturb wildlife and may well cause harm. Humans, by their very presence, pose a hazard to wildlife. The bird may well have been protecting a nest and while fleeing from the paddler was unable to protect the offspring from the snake climbing the grass. Most of the damage we do in nature is accidental (or poorly considered). Your example trivializes an important issue, which is that we do scare animals when we paddle and it is best that we take care when we are in animal habitat. Oh bull****. Maybe the snake would have died if he hadn't eaten a cute little baby bird. Don't breath, drink, eat, ****, ****, pass wind, pass go, or collect $200. Just sit there, grow old and die. Don't get cremated because that will pollute the air. Don't get buried because that will disturb the earthworms. Just melt away like Fosty the Snowman. Be carefull not to drown the fire ants. Tracy, You are letting your ignorance show. Humans always have impacts in nature. What those are go largely unnoticed by us, so we have a tendency to believe thay don't happen. I've seen humans kill animals in just this way, most commonly a young sea lion being trampled to death when a kayaker wanted to get a picture of the animals from their kayak at the rock wall protecting Monterey harbor. I have worked with marine mammals, and their handlers, and have been battered about the head and shoulders of "don't do's" for years now. I am not saying that this "always" happens, just that it does. Our ignorance of our impact is part of the paroblem Personally, I take pains not to disturb animals in their habitat, you don't. I presume that you are a human. "Humans, by their very presence, pose a hazard to wildlife." Those are your words. So your "pains" do not matter. You by your very presence as a human are disturbing animals in their habitat. And yet you continue to invade their habitat. You violate your own rules. You obviously do not feel that it is wrong for you to violate your own rules. You only feel that it wrong for other people, ignorant people like me, to violate your rules. In your world, I am not one of you and therefore I must be harming the animals. In your prejudice you have presumed that I have harmed or that I will harm the environment and the animals that live there. The animals are fine with me. I know, because when I return the same ones are still there. The habitat is the same. My point is simply this. You will not be setting the rules for me. I will ignore your rules as you do. You may go bite your lip and scream if you like. The animals will have nothing to fear because I ignore your rules. The reason for this is that I have my own rules, rules that actually do good. I follow those rules. The reason that I must press this in a very blunt and rather rude fashion is because I have seen the explosion of hysterical rules. Various groups are trying to stop the enjoyment of the outdoors by other people. They are usually elitest types like you that think a paddle placed too harshly will cause some irreparable and permanent harm. It is a problem of degree. You don't know where to draw the line, therefore you can't be trusted to set the rules. You draw the line at a standard that can't be met. That's why you must break your own rules. You are the insensitve one. You don't care about other people. Just animals. You assume that only you care about habitat and no one else could possibly care as much. Well your wrong. We cherish our wild places. We're just not hysterical if someone eats a fish. We want rules that perserve wildlife but allow access. There is a balance. Reasonable people can find the balance. Hysterical ones must be ignored because they set rules that will be broken. The only way I can explain it to you is this. When the speed limit was 70 mph, most everyone obeyed. When the speed limit was set at 55mph, we became a nation of speeders. Animals can't set rules (such as wipe your feet) in their environment, so we have to do some of that for them. Your insensitivity and closed mind does not speak well of you. My words speak for me. Rick ...more deleted Your rights stop where my freedom begins. And Vice Versa. I know its hard sometimes. I hate Jet Ski's and Cigarette boats. They have their places, we have ours. Leave them alone. Besides, one day I may try one out for a couple of hours. Professional Target wrote: ... rest deleted |
....stuff deleted
I presume that you are a human. "Humans, by their very presence, pose a hazard to wildlife." Those are your words. No, they aren't, but I'll accept the paraphrase. We have, effectively, removed ourselves from the ecosystem as it existed naturally, so the end result is that when we go into nature, we do so as invaders. So your "pains" do not matter. You by your very presence as a human are disturbing animals in their habitat. And yet you continue to invade their habitat. Indeed, I do. Yet I do what I can to minimize that impact. You, do not. Therein lies the difference. Your sophistry aside, you do not have a point, nor a leg to stand upon. The general scientific consensus is that man/animal interactions are generally detrimental to the animal. You violate your own rules. You obviously do not feel that it is wrong for you to violate your own rules. You only feel that it wrong for other people, ignorant people like me, to violate your rules. In your world, I am not one of you and therefore I must be harming the animals. In your prejudice you have presumed that I have harmed or that I will harm the environment and the animals that live there. The animals are fine with me. I know, because when I return the same ones are still there. The habitat is the same. I did not state that these are "rules," nor that they are mine. The boy scouts have rules. If, for example, you puke at Philmont, the wilderness scout ranch, you are expected to return the contents of your stomach back from whence they came. The scouts have adopted an attitude of minimizing their impact in the area, but I don't think I'll go by their "rules." My point is simply this. You will not be setting the rules for me. I will ignore your rules as you do. You may go bite your lip and scream if you like. My point is that you are a impolite individual who lacks the social skills of discourse. Sad that you think your pathetic argument has any emotional impact upon me, but then, you are pretty full or yourself. The animals will have nothing to fear because I ignore your rules. The reason for this is that I have my own rules, rules that actually do good. I follow those rules. The reason that I must press this in a very blunt and rather rude fashion is because... You are a rude individual. I have seen the explosion of hysterical rules. Various groups are trying to stop the enjoyment of the outdoors by other people. They are usually elitest types like you that think a paddle placed too harshly will cause some irreparable and permanent harm. It is a problem of degree. You don't know where to draw the line, therefore you can't be trusted to set the rules. You draw the line at a standard that can't be met. That's why you must break your own rules. I set rules for myself only. I believed I was attempting to edify someone who knew very little about the subject. Instead, I find myself facing an individual who is proud of her ignorance. You don't know me, you don't know my philosophies, and you don't know what you are talking about. You are the insensitve one. You don't care about other people. Just animals. You assume that only you care about habitat and no one else could possibly care as much. Well your wrong. We cherish our wild places. We're just not hysterical if someone eats a fish. We want rules that perserve wildlife but allow access. There is a balance. Reasonable people can find the balance. Hysterical ones must be ignored because they set rules that will be broken. The only way I can explain it to you is this. When the speed limit was 70 mph, most everyone obeyed. When the speed limit was set at 55mph, we became a nation of speeders. Bull****, to use your oh so eloquent words. I was there when the speed limit was 70. I was driving then. There was as much adherence to the speed limit then as there is now. The difference, however, was that people back then stopped for yellow and red lights. A rare example of when life in the 60's was a (modest) improvement. Animals can't set rules (such as wipe your feet) in their environment, so we have to do some of that for them. Your insensitivity and closed mind does not speak well of you. My words speak for me. Feebly, but they do speak. Rick |
On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 21:50:08 +0200, Wilko wrote:
It's even more annoying to read the writings of someone who has so little grasp of the English language that he can't comprehend messages written by those who do. Of course, that utter lack of understanding doesn't stop him from applying his nonsensical ideas to replies to their posts... despite the fact that he is overreacting to something they never even mentioned in their posts in the first place. It's even more annoying to read the writings of someone who really has no intelligent response at all, and instead falls back upon the tired and old nonsensical reply that the author's grasp of the English language is so poor he cannot possibly understand what he has read or wrote. Perhaps if this someone had a valid point or arguement, then I could understand the response. But to mearly take a shot at someone because they may or may not understand English is ignorant at best. |
Professional Target wrote:
: rant : Fishing. Everywhere, more anglers and more fishing line. Not only do I : need to worry about not hitting their lines or "getting too close" to them, : but I also find my paddle and occasionally my rudder fouled by old discarded : fishing line. Everywhere. : Oh, and when they're about to cast, they look impatient while I pass by. As : if that 10 seconds extra time for me to pass is going to cost them the "big : catch of the day". A few of the more ignorant ones don't even care - they : just cast off anyway. : This is the case with ALL of the rivers and smaller lakes nearby. I'm : beginning to wonder which is worse: jetski's or anglers... : /rant I've been drivin into woodpiles by jetski's, so i'd vote them as worst, usually anglers are pretty polite and often ask if I can free up their line (Rescued a RC airplane once too). Say "Hi", talk nice to them, and watch how nice they can be. -- John Nelson ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Chicago Area Paddling/Fishing Page http://www.chicagopaddling.org http://www.chicagofishing.org (A Non-Commercial Web Site: No Sponsors, No Paid Ads and Nothing to Sell) |
When the speed limit was 70 mph, most everyone obeyed. When the speed
limit was set at 55mph, we became a nation of speeders. Do you really believe that? When the speed limit was 55, people drove 70. When the speed limit was changed to 70, people started driving 85. I drive 75 and get passed like I'm standing still. "Reasonable people can find the balance"? Maybe, but only if they see the need for balance in the first place. ~~~~~~~~~~ Theirs is a hidden land; wolf-haunted, Stormy highlands with perilous paths, Where mountain torrents plunge through the mists And flow unseen... -Beowulf ~~~~~~~~~~ |
Chicago Paddling-Fishing writes:
I've been drivin into woodpiles by jetski's, so i'd vote them as worst, usually anglers are pretty polite and often ask if I can free up their line (Rescued a RC airplane once too). Say "Hi", talk nice to them, and watch how nice they can be. Oh, I have, and some of them are great people. My only complaint is with the apparently increasing numbers of those who aren't so great... -- Man is the only animal that laughs and weeps, for he is the only animal that is struck with the difference between what things are and what they ought to be. |
Sorry Moose, *you* don't get it...
This related to another thread, is which your countryman (which is supposed to have at least a basic grasp of the English language, it being his native tongue) took several words out of context and made up other statements out of thin air, which he refers to in this post of his, at which his "pot shot" was taken. It might be nice of you to try to stand up for someone else, but you definately picked the wrong person here. Wilko Moose wrote: On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 21:50:08 +0200, Wilko wrote: It's even more annoying to read the writings of someone who has so little grasp of the English language that he can't comprehend messages written by those who do. Of course, that utter lack of understanding doesn't stop him from applying his nonsensical ideas to replies to their posts... despite the fact that he is overreacting to something they never even mentioned in their posts in the first place. It's even more annoying to read the writings of someone who really has no intelligent response at all, and instead falls back upon the tired and old nonsensical reply that the author's grasp of the English language is so poor he cannot possibly understand what he has read or wrote. Perhaps if this someone had a valid point or arguement, then I could understand the response. But to mearly take a shot at someone because they may or may not understand English is ignorant at best. -- Wilko van den Bergh wilko(a t)dse(d o t)nl Eindhoven The Netherlands Europe ---Look at the possibilities, don't worry about the limitations.--- http://wilko.webzone.ru/ |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:01 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com