Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Wed, 12 Sep 2007 15:59:08 -0000,
wrote:

On Sep 12, 7:19 am, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

I've fired off a letter to Trout Unlimited to see if they are involved
with this in any way. I give them a fair amount of money every year
and this better not have been on the national agenda.
What would you do about the situation? Would you just let nature do
it's thing?

Yes. Killing all the pike is over...er...kill. :)

On top of it, they are being really stupid about it. I mean, poison?

We've become our own eco-terrorists because of trout fishermen.

Damn trout fishermen.


I guess you're not the piker I thought you were.... :{

On Sep 12, 12:05 pm, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:
wrote in message

ups.com...

On Sep 12, 7:19 am, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

I've fired off a letter to Trout Unlimited to see if they are involved
with this in any way. I give them a fair amount of money every year
and this better not have been on the national agenda.

What would you do about the situation? Would you just let nature do
it's thing?

The answer is obvious. Hire the fishing equivalent of the Terminator: A lady
I know who catches more damned pike than I've ever seen, and usually very
large fish, and almost always with an ultralight and 4 lb test, no leader.
Always with this lure, always that color, sometimes different sizes
depending on wind and hunches:

http://www.lurenet.com/productdetail.aspx?id=B08AXC5

Her record is 14 in one day. She was hoping for bass. She probably would've
caught more, but we got hungry and had to find dinner.

I'll send her the article.

I have seen folks in my time who only use rooster tails, only use bass
assasins (sp?), only use rubber, only use this or that. They all catch
fish, I still think it depends more on how you present a bait to the
fish, as opposed to what bait it is.

wrote in message
ups.com...
On Sep 12, 12:05 pm, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:
wrote in message

ups.com...

On Sep 12, 7:19 am, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

I've fired off a letter to Trout Unlimited to see if they are involved
with this in any way. I give them a fair amount of money every year
and this better not have been on the national agenda.

What would you do about the situation? Would you just let nature do
it's thing?

The answer is obvious. Hire the fishing equivalent of the Terminator: A
lady
I know who catches more damned pike than I've ever seen, and usually very
large fish, and almost always with an ultralight and 4 lb test, no
leader.
Always with this lure, always that color, sometimes different sizes
depending on wind and hunches:

http://www.lurenet.com/productdetail.aspx?id=B08AXC5

Her record is 14 in one day. She was hoping for bass. She probably
would've
caught more, but we got hungry and had to find dinner.

I'll send her the article.

I have seen folks in my time who only use rooster tails, only use bass
assasins (sp?), only use rubber, only use this or that. They all catch
fish, I still think it depends more on how you present a bait to the
fish, as opposed to what bait it is.


Or something.

On Sep 12, 12:02 pm, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:
On Wed, 12 Sep 2007 15:59:08 -0000,
wrote:

On Sep 12, 7:19 am, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:

I've fired off a letter to Trout Unlimited to see if they are involved
with this in any way. I give them a fair amount of money every year
and this better not have been on the national agenda.

What would you do about the situation? Would you just let nature do
it's thing?

Yes. Killing all the pike is over...er...kill. :)

On top of it, they are being really stupid about it. I mean, poison?

We've become our own eco-terrorists because of trout fishermen.

Damn trout fishermen.

Hey, I represent that statement

What's it lookin' like Captain? Light winds from the north, sunny
skies, predicted. High tides around 11-12 depending on location??

Wayne.B wrote:
On Wed, 12 Sep 2007 07:28:19 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
wrote:

I can understand their concern about an invasive fish, upsetting the
ecosystem, but they really do seem like Wile E.Coyote.

Elmer Fudd would have known how to deal with this "wascally pike"
problem.

We were freaking out about the Snake Head fish here in the DC Area a
couple of years ago but now that they have established themselves in the
Potomac River and many ponds and lakes in the area without eating all of
the children nobody cares about them.

"JimH" ask wrote in message
...

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
Trout Rule - Pike Drool?

What the hell are these people thinking? Piscatorial genocide?

All they have to do is offer free fishing licenses to folks from
fly-over country - like Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, N/S Dakota,
Michigan and a free trip to the lake for a week's fishing.

I guarentee you there won't be any pike left. :)



My Dad (God bless his soul) caught a monster Northern Pike when fishing on
Lake Erie and had it mounted. It was a good size fish and had plenty of
sharp teeth. As a kid I was always impressed when looking at the mount.

He probably caught that fish sometime in the 1950's and always talked
about the fight in the fish, especially when landing it (from a 16 foot
row boat).

I have caught muskie (Chautaugua Lake) and walleye and hope to some day
land a northern pike!

FANTASTIC!

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 12 Sep 2007 07:15:01 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
wrote:

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:

But like Captain Ahab or perhaps Wile E. Coyote, the state has not let
a little adversity stop it.

This is the best line in the article.

And here's the real reason for the poisoning.

"After the poisoning is complete - and all the dead fish are scooped
out of the water - the lake will be tested for toxicity, and will
remain closed for two months, Mr. Martarano said. After that,
restocking will begin, with a goal of one million trout in Lake Davis
by 2010."

I've fired off a letter to Trout Unlimited to see if they are involved
with this in any way. I give them a fair amount of money every year
and this better not have been on the national agenda.

We tried to kill off the Northern Pike a few years ago, and either did not
dump enough poison into the lake or go far enough up the feeder streams, or
some asshole restocked the lake with NP. The danger is if they get out of
the lake, and they have an electrical fence and chooper upper barrier, the
pike get into the Sacramento River system and decimate the salmon runs.
Costing the state billions of bucks. There is at least one river system in
Alaska where some selfish ******* stocked the pike. There are no salmon
runs in the rivers anymore. You want to fish for pike, go where they are
native. Lake Davis was a trophy trout lake for many years until the pike
were introduced. The region survives on fishing tourism. So the state has
to restock the lake after killing all the fish. Has nothing to do with just
having trout in there. Is the danger of a collapse of the salmon fishery in
California.

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Reginald P. Smithers III" wrote in message
...
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Wed, 12 Sep 2007 07:15:01 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
wrote:

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:

But like Captain Ahab or perhaps Wile E. Coyote, the state has not let
a little adversity stop it.
This is the best line in the article.

And here's the real reason for the poisoning.

"After the poisoning is complete - and all the dead fish are scooped
out of the water - the lake will be tested for toxicity, and will
remain closed for two months, Mr. Martarano said. After that,
restocking will begin, with a goal of one million trout in Lake Davis
by 2010."

I've fired off a letter to Trout Unlimited to see if they are involved
with this in any way. I give them a fair amount of money every year
and this better not have been on the national agenda.

I can understand their concern about an invasive fish, upsetting the
ecosystem, but they really do seem like Wile E.Coyote.

I did check up on Rotenone http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotenone. I
don't believe I would get back in the lake for a LONG time.


Yeah, but so many morons have been hypnotized (or bribed) by the chemical
industry. I'm sure the state will be lying to people about the safety of
rotenone as soon as the lake is opened.


Is a short lived poison only toxic to gilled animals. Plus they Rotenoned
the lake a couple of years ago. Seems as if we did not create any Blobs.

"Calif Bill" wrote in message
...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Reginald P. Smithers III" wrote in message
...
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Wed, 12 Sep 2007 07:15:01 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
wrote:

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:

But like Captain Ahab or perhaps Wile E. Coyote, the state has not
let
a little adversity stop it.
This is the best line in the article.

And here's the real reason for the poisoning.

"After the poisoning is complete - and all the dead fish are scooped
out of the water - the lake will be tested for toxicity, and will
remain closed for two months, Mr. Martarano said. After that,
restocking will begin, with a goal of one million trout in Lake Davis
by 2010."

I've fired off a letter to Trout Unlimited to see if they are involved
with this in any way. I give them a fair amount of money every year
and this better not have been on the national agenda.

I can understand their concern about an invasive fish, upsetting the
ecosystem, but they really do seem like Wile E.Coyote.

I did check up on Rotenone http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotenone. I
don't believe I would get back in the lake for a LONG time.


Yeah, but so many morons have been hypnotized (or bribed) by the chemical
industry. I'm sure the state will be lying to people about the safety of
rotenone as soon as the lake is opened.


Is a short lived poison only toxic to gilled animals. Plus they Rotenoned
the lake a couple of years ago. Seems as if we did not create any Blobs.


Yet.

Since chemicals like that have not and cannot be PROPERLY tested on humans,
we will NEVER know if they are safe. According to the chemical industry,
animal tests are not a valid method for predicting the effects on humans, so
that argument is no longer permissible.

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Calif Bill" wrote in message
...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Reginald P. Smithers III" wrote in message
...
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Wed, 12 Sep 2007 07:15:01 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
wrote:

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:

But like Captain Ahab or perhaps Wile E. Coyote, the state has not
let
a little adversity stop it.
This is the best line in the article.

And here's the real reason for the poisoning.

"After the poisoning is complete - and all the dead fish are scooped
out of the water - the lake will be tested for toxicity, and will
remain closed for two months, Mr. Martarano said. After that,
restocking will begin, with a goal of one million trout in Lake Davis
by 2010."

I've fired off a letter to Trout Unlimited to see if they are involved
with this in any way. I give them a fair amount of money every year
and this better not have been on the national agenda.

I can understand their concern about an invasive fish, upsetting the
ecosystem, but they really do seem like Wile E.Coyote.

I did check up on Rotenone http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotenone. I
don't believe I would get back in the lake for a LONG time.


Yeah, but so many morons have been hypnotized (or bribed) by the
chemical industry. I'm sure the state will be lying to people about the
safety of rotenone as soon as the lake is opened.


Is a short lived poison only toxic to gilled animals. Plus they
Rotenoned the lake a couple of years ago. Seems as if we did not create
any Blobs.


Yet.

Since chemicals like that have not and cannot be PROPERLY tested on
humans, we will NEVER know if they are safe. According to the chemical
industry, animal tests are not a valid method for predicting the effects
on humans, so that argument is no longer permissible.



Sure it is. You may not like it. But is a permissible argument. And since
it has been used lots of places without any noticable impact on humans
since, we can assume it is not that affecting to humans. We live with a lot
more chemicals that are a lot worse for us and we are required to use them.
Where are your arguments against their use? For one example is the fire
protectants that all childrens pajamas and bedding are required to use.
Blood analysis of children show up frightening amounts of these chemicals,
but no rotenone.