Can an aquarist be a fisherman too?

Fishing is one of my favorite things to do...and yes I do eat them as well. Now let me explain how my mind works. This could get scary. ;) I will eat them cause I don't "know them". The same holds true for any critter. I will not eat any of the deer that frequent my yard and I tried raising chickens to kill, but that didn't turn out to well. When the time came to eat them I couldn't bring myself to do it. I feel that as you get to know individual personalities, that changes everything. I can no longer just think of it as food.
 
So as long as it doesn't have a name it's OK to eat it. I get it... that actually makes a weird kind of sense.

I am truly surprised that no one has taken the opposing position. I figured this post was instant vilification for those of us who recreationally partake in fishing as a hobby.
 
I love to fish personally. I only catch and release and I try to make everything as easy as possible on the fish. You will eventually kill a few fish that swallow a hook but thats not really any worse than killing a fish with bad tank conditions. Theres risk of hurting fish either way.
 
I fish!! Like a lot of those above, it's mostly catch and release. I usually only eat them when I am camping/backpacking, since most of the food I bring is non-perishable. It's nice to get some meat in the diet. I respect the creatures, both that I keep as pets and those that I catch.

As far as keeping trout, or any other native fish in an aquarium, it is possible. Due to thier size you will need a huge tank, and special equipment to make a good current, chillers for the water(in the case of trout) etc. But it can be done, so long as it's legal in your state.
 
I keep fish, I go fishing, and seldom release anything that's not under/over limit.

I grew up on a horse ranch, raised dairy bulls for slaughter, kept rabbits and chickens for food (and preferred the rabbits--much cleaner to care for, tastes about the same), and have no problems identifying the difference between 'food' and 'pet'. All the dairy bulls had names--like Ground Beef, Sirloin, and Chuck. The breeder rabbits were named, the offspring were not.

It's not about the action--it's about your expectations.
 
I am a fisherman and an aquarist. I don't fish nearly as much as I used to, partially because I don't have as much time as I once did, and partially b/c the ultimate goal in fishing was to learn more about fishes. With my tanks and my studies being focused on fish and aquatic field work, my drive to go fishing has lessened considerably.

I do still enjoy fishing, and I still go when I get the chance.

With respect to catch-and-release, I keep most legal marine gamefish and release pretty much anything I catch in freshwater. Stripers, fluke, and bluefish taste much better than the black bass, pickerel, and sunfish in my area.
 
i fish a good amount though 99.9% of it is catch and release.
Click to expand...

Ditto. The only time I actually keep what I catch fishing is when I plan on dropping the trout into a frying pan that night.

Salmon, Tuna, and Sturgeon (off the Oregon Coast) however is different. They are so so big that there is no way I could eat them all that night. They get canned, steaked, filleted or frozen till we get to the eating part. One trip lasts us a whole year though.

Other then that my usual fishing trips are catch and release. It's more interesting outsmarting the fish and then letting them go. Most of the game fish in my area is hatchery bred/raised so they aren't really all that good eating anyway. Trout meat for instance is supposed to be pink (wild) not white (hatchery).

In fact I'm of the belief that catch and release improves the species as the fish learn that eating things with hooks in them is bad. I have absolutely no proof or research in this btw, just a goofy thought.
 
I would love to keep trout in an aquarium they're beautiful fish, but how hard would that be to set up? You wouldn't be able to make them a true enough habitat for them to be really comfortable (running water, constant current, cool, clean, etc.), and they get quite big, even the smaller species.
Click to expand...

I've thought about this many times but determined that a pond is the way to go for trout. An aquarium just isn't big enough unless you got some serious cash for a huge one. One thing I like about trout though is they can tolerate REALLY cold water so I don't think that heating a pond is a big necessity.

Maybe this weekend I'll go down to the park and take pictures of our public trout aquarium that the Fish and Game Department constructed. It's actually a pond, but on one side is dug out and a concrete wall with viewing glass has been installed. Can look in the viewing area or from the pond top. It's very cool.

But er starting to hijack...
 
Domandred said:
I've thought about this many times but determined that a pond is the way to go for trout. ...
Click to expand...
About 20 years ago there was a house a friend of my was renting back home in Ontario, Canada (did you say cold?) had a large pond in the backyard. VERY deep and pretty big for a pond. Hrm, I'd say it was at least 60' x 60'. That's just a guess, mind you.

The owners had built a platform at the house end of it, complete with a diving board and a rope and tire that were about 15 feet above the ground. We swam in there all the time. Then one day we stayed kinda late and our friends asked us if we wanted to help them feed the trout. Trout? Yah, brown trout. She gave me a 3g bucket full of what looked like puppy kibble and she picked up one, too. We walked to the end of the diving board. She banged the bucket on the board really hard and yelled, "Fishy dinner!"

My jaw just dropped. The ENTIRE surface literally exploded and it looked like it was boiling. Few minutes later and there had to be 20'x20' of gaping mouths right under our feet. It was awesome! They were HUGE, way bigger than koi, and real dark. I'd sure as heck like to know just how deep that dang pond was. It didn't freeze over, so it had to be pretty deep. I'm almost positive there was no filteration or anything. It could have been a natural spring fed pond. It definitely didn't have a "constructed" look to it. There were huge boulders under the water that you had to watch out for when you were diving.

Feeding those things was one of the coolest things I ever got to do. Wonder if the house is still there? This was outside of Guelph, on Elora Road, on the left, couple miles past the Hwy 6 turn off.

Roan
 
Last edited:
A Few Thoughts...

OK.. keeping & eating stocked fish is GOOD for the environment as far as I've heard. Stocked fish dilute the "wild" genes that ensure survival of the species. They outfeed natives, but have a poorer long term survival rate. I also agree that compared to wild fish, stocked fish taste like dirt, and there's a reason for that: complete nutrition and better muscle tone. In RI our hatcheries add shrimp to the trout's diet before realeasing them and that has added some flavor, but it's not the same.

HILARIOUS!!! The story about the fish responding to the "feeding time" banging is ABSOLUTELY TRUE. When you first fish a pond with "stockies", stamp your feet before you cast and it DRAWS THE FISH IN. Natives go the complete opposite direction, running away from the vibrations, while to the stockies it just means "feeding time". I have seen this phenomenon personally and heard quite a bit of anecdotal evidence of similar behaviour.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
AquariaCentral.com
Top Bottom