Bob
I was thinking of addressing your case in my post - but I didnt. I havent ever fished with you. I am sure you are a nice fella, but I havent wanted to joing you on the river precisely because of your views on C&R. I am not a club wielding neanderthal, but I like knowing when I put the fish back in the water it is my choice to do so, not because my guide would have an issue if I didnt. I am pretty certain your clients are most all of the same mindset. I agree, you will not be affected. But it is selfish of you to imply that none of the other guides on the river will be affected. I know I will not be back next year, and will focus on rivers elsewhere. Want to say I am a special case and not representative? Go right ahead. I know how I feel, and I suspect I am not alone.

Todd
It is a shame you missed the point about the taking of photographs. Let me do a better job of explaining the irony and farce. Obviously many on this board are keen to pose and take pictures of big fish. Well, so along comes a law that instantly means your views are outdated and obsolete. You are now a neanderthal for having posed with a fish, gasping and sucking air instead of water. Suddenly, what you thought was okay isnt. Suddenly, you have become a harmer of fish.

In your post you dismissed the new stay in the water law as being not that useful. Hello. What exactly do you mean by that? Do you mean you dont think it applies to you, or do you simply mean you dont think it will make a difference. If the latter, how can you say that? Arent all new restricive fish laws good laws by definition? Careful with your answer here. It has EVERYTHING to do with this thread.


You said 'If going from 30 to 5 didn't reduce harvest, why would going from 5 to 3'? If what you say is true, then going from three to zero wont make any difference either will it?

You said 'The rest of the guides in the state, the other 85% or so, already can't keep natives in their boats.' We arent talking about the rest of the crappy rivers in this state. We are talking about the good ones that have strong enough returns to support a harvest, and should continue to do so as long as the numbers support some level of it.

I think this is very very bad. Dont ask me or expect me to chill when I am pissed. I am being honest - not disrespectful.