Originally Posted by
Slartibartfast
Some ppl fish to catch food and not just a thrill. LMB elitists are always whining about ppl who keep a fish because they 'feel' that it is taking away from their thrill and so they make moralist arguments againsts keeping bass.
Consider this, the person who fishes for food will likely catch a few then take them home. If you're the type who believes in god, well then it's the way god would have intended. The SPORT fisher keeps on fishing as his thrill of the hunt is practically insatiable; he disturbs many more nests, leaves much more pollution, and I believe is more to blame for thinning LMB populations than the few who actually fish for food. I am a sport fisher myself and would never keep a LMB especially a preggo one (or anything besides fresh stocked trout), but I also accept that some are not fishermen merely for sport, they would love to eat a fat bass that is filled with roe. Some aruge that bass are not good eating...can you be more subjective? And if you've ever actually tried to eat LMB and didn't like it, can you please be more fascist? Most would agree that carp are not good eating yet nobody complains when ppl keep them, even sport-carp fishers. Well, carp populations are probably not thinning like the LMBs are yet ppl keep them way more frequently, so that would point to a carp's resiliency in a changing, more polluted environment being a reason why they are doing fine.
Our environmental balance is going down the toilet fast due to 'progress' but you are an elitist, conditioned not to attack systems but only individuals.
They offer a scapegoat and you will hang it, and in essence THAT is why LMB populations are on the down.