Go Back   Alberta Outdoorsmen Forum > Main Category > Fishing Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 01-18-2010, 01:19 AM
skidderman skidderman is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Spruce Grove, AB
Posts: 3,039
Default Barbless Hooks

A good timely thread. Personally when Co's go the extent mentioned I feel they lose a lot of respect and in the end do more damage than good. I couldn't begin to count the stories I've heard of CO's having a so called, "bad day", with law abiding people. They have the right and should go unglued on those that purposely break the law but the kind of stuff mentioned here is harrassment from the very people we are supposed to respect. If I have to cary a dremel tool to file barbs off and use Q tips to inspect it I think I'll take up another sport!
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 01-18-2010, 12:20 PM
curious curious is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 29
Default

WOW, those are very interesting comment, I am curious about a few things, firstly we seem to be bouncing back and forth between CO's and F&W... can anyone tell me the difference, I believe it is significant but not sure. Secondly, it sounds this fish cop really did something wrong by looking through the tackle box. Can he get into a lot of trouble for that? It sounds like the poor fisherman who was wrongfully charged told the fish cop that he always presses the barbs down. I sure hope that fish cop was not looking through the tackle box to subtantiate the fisherman's claims... that would mean that he was looking for a way to use discretion not to write the ticket... someone earlier said that would be wrong...

What if the fisherman was actually having a bad day, not the fish cop... we should find out who that fish cop was, F&W or CO or whatever and ask him to post his thoughts on the whole interaction with our friend... I would very much be interested in hearing both sides of all these stories. And the so-called Line Test??? What is that, some kind of home made field test to help the fisherman beat the system??? Man imagine the Judges face when you take your $200 ticket into court and tell the judge that you did a line test on the hook like one CO showed you and the next guy writes you a ticket... can you imagine how quickly that ticket would get thrown out because you tested the line and did what was suggested??? Would that be sweet?? Oh and best of all, wouldn't that be good for the fish too, especially when you are releasing them... I am curious...
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 01-18-2010, 12:46 PM
AlbertaAngler AlbertaAngler is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 369
Default

No they are not the same. CO is used rather generically here because most other provinces have CO's.

In Alberta Fish and Wildlife Officers under Sustainable Resource Development are responsible for enforcement of the Wildlife Act and the various Fisheries Acts and regulations across the province (with a few exceptions and memorandums). Conservation Officers under Tourism, Parks and Recreation are responsible for the parks act in Provincial Parks and recreation areas. CO's are appointed under the Wildlife Act and Fisheries Act and generally will deal with these things while patrolling in a park or recreation area.

As for looking in the tackle box. There is a difference between searching and inspection. An officer has the right to inspect any container that he has reasonable grounds to believe has fishing equipment or fish.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 01-18-2010, 12:58 PM
Okotokian's Avatar
Okotokian Okotokian is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Uh, guess? :)
Posts: 26,739
Default

I have no idea what the mental state of the officer in question was, but it seems to me a reasonable person would issue a fine where someone had not bothered to try to follow the law, but would simply advise and educate someone who was trying to follow the law (as evidenced by pinching the barb in the first plave) but had just not done the job quite up to the officer's standard. The latter approach would probably result in an "oh, ok. Thanks officer" from the "offender" and likely perfect barb pinching from then on.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 01-18-2010, 01:20 PM
Wulfespirit's Avatar
Wulfespirit Wulfespirit is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Stony Plain
Posts: 654
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Okotokian View Post
I have no idea what the mental state of the officer in question was, but it seems to me a reasonable person would issue a fine where someone had not bothered to try to follow the law, but would simply advise and educate someone who was trying to follow the law (as evidenced by pinching the barb in the first plave) but had just not done the job quite up to the officer's standard. The latter approach would probably result in an "oh, ok. Thanks officer" from the "offender" and likely perfect barb pinching from then on.
X2

It's too bad that common sense and goodwill can't be taught to graduating COs.

The guy who checked us on Saturday up north was great. It'll be guys like him that unfortunately have tarnished names due to the wannabe Judge Dreads of F&W.
__________________
"It is no measure of health to be well-adjusted to a profoundly sick society." - Krishnamurti
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 01-18-2010, 01:52 PM
curious curious is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 29
Default

Thank you for that explanation.

As I am new to this, I have read a lot of the threads to try to catch up. Correct me if I am wrong, but it seems to me that the requirement for fishing barbless in Alberta has been around for many years, or am I mistaken? I read somewhere that it was implemented in 2002 or 2003 but am not sure. I also read somewhere that Alberta has a lot of fisherman, around 800 thousand (I think that was from the SRD website) but only 800 fishable bodies of what... most of which are struggling, have no fish in them, or have what the biologist refer to as low recruitment (what the “H” is that)... the long and the short of it is that our lakes and the fish in them are struggling. I am new to fishing but I think that removing a hook from a fish is a whole lot easier on the fish when the hook is barbless, please correct me if I am wrong. It also seems to me that the avid fishermen, much like the ones who share their comments on here, should be extremely concerned about the condition of our lakes and want to do everything possible to ensure that new fisherman such as myself actually have a fish to catch and eventually release.

I think the law has been in place long enough that the fisherman of Alberta, especially the avid ones, should know the law, understand the law, know how to comply with the law and respect that law, regardless of whether they agree with the law or not...

Some of the comments was that the “Dink”, referring to an officer who was there to ensure that your fish were being given the respect that they deserve, was having a ****y day or was on a power trip… there was also a comment that he had written several tickets for barbed hooks that day… what does that say about the type of respect that the so-called avid fishermen have for the fish they covet so dearly? If we care about the fish as much as we claim, wouldn’t we have a ****y day too if we found out that nobody was respecting our fish I am just curious…
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 01-18-2010, 02:13 PM
Wulfespirit's Avatar
Wulfespirit Wulfespirit is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Stony Plain
Posts: 654
Default

This has little to do with agreeing with the law. It has to do with having undefined standards in regards to barbless hooks and officers seemingly being very eager to enforce their personal standard on someone trying to comply with the law. Furthermore, it has to do with the same type of officer taking these actions while other, more harmful actions (blatant poaching, sustenance netting for the purpose of sale (or waste)) against our fisheries receive inadequate attention.

The situation is analagous to a mountie pulling someone over and writing them up for going 101 kph in a 100 kph zone while people doing 140kph speed by.

If you believe that the OP was somehow not respecting fish or fisheries, you need to think again.
__________________
"It is no measure of health to be well-adjusted to a profoundly sick society." - Krishnamurti
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 01-18-2010, 02:15 PM
AlbertaAngler AlbertaAngler is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 369
Default

Without being there it is very hard to offer any significant opinion. According to the original poster he had made the attempt to fish barbless. As is it is still hard to find lures with barbless hooks, the general rule is that a fisherman "pinches" the barbs with a pair of pliers. From the regulations
Quote:
includes a hook the barbs of which are pressed against the shaft of the hook so that the barbs are not functional.
The question in this situation was that the officer was deciding whether the barbs were functional or not. Is there a standard method that F&W is using to determine this? Are officers across the province holding every angler to the same standard? Would a warning have gained future compliance?

Last edited by AlbertaAngler; 01-18-2010 at 02:16 PM. Reason: grammar
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 01-18-2010, 02:22 PM
Okotokian's Avatar
Okotokian Okotokian is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Uh, guess? :)
Posts: 26,739
Default

Well I know my barbs are certainly pinched to the point of being non-functional. Never mind making it easier to release, I swear I lose more fish than I land when I'm fly fishing in particular.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 01-18-2010, 03:02 PM
curious curious is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 29
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wulfespirit View Post
This has little to do with agreeing with the law. It has to do with having undefined standards in regards to barbless hooks and officers seemingly being very eager to enforce their personal standard on someone trying to comply with the law. Furthermore, it has to do with the same type of officer taking these actions while other, more harmful actions (blatant poaching, sustenance netting for the purpose of sale (or waste)) against our fisheries receive inadequate attention.

The situation is analagous to a mountie pulling someone over and writing them up for going 101 kph in a 100 kph zone while people doing 140kph speed by.

If you believe that the OP was somehow not respecting fish or fisheries, you need to think again.
Please forgive me and my naivety, I was under the impression that the law had defined the standard for a barbless hook… either it is functioning or it is not, I didn’t think it was possible to be almost pregnant… I really like the suggestion that I can use a line to run it over the barb to see if I have pressed it down enough.

I seem to remember reading a statistic somewhere that depending on the type of fish, 8 to 30 percent of all caught and released fish die after being released. It was reported that the number of dead fish increased if they were caught with a barbed hook and increased even more if caught during ice fishing and were exposed to the cold for any length of time. Apparently their eyes freeze very quickly and they eventually starve to death because they cannot see their prey. I’m not sure I buy that but whatever… I guess the question I have is how many people were fishing in Alberta this past weekend? How many fish were caught and released? I will just throw out a number to make math easy, let’s say 3000 fish. At that number between 240 to 900 fish died after they were released, according to the study anyway… Maybe the study was wrong, maybe it was less or more, I don’t know. That is a lot of fish!!! What if we could get that number even lower by ensuring that everyone used nothing but hooks that meet the requirement of the law?? How many fish were killed legally??? I know that my friends and I took 45 perch…

As for the more harmful actions, I didn’t realize that was going on this past weekend, sorry, like I said I am new to this. Do you think there were 240 to 900 fish illegally caught in nets? WOW that is just crazy!! Do the officers know where this is happening? If they don’t, why has nobody reported it to them? Was this going on around the area where the officers were working?

I guess respect for the fisheries is a relative thing, the poacher look at is as a way to make money, the office looks at it how…? One comment seemed to elude it is a way to make money for SRD (which everyone knows is ridicules because they get no funds from the tickets they write). Who has the biggest impact on the fish? Netters? Poachers? Fisherman? I would really like to know your thoughts… Just Curious…
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 01-18-2010, 03:05 PM
curious curious is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 29
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AlbertaAngler View Post
Would a warning have gained future compliance?
Have warnings been working for the past 6 or 7 years since the law was put in place?? If so then I agree, it may have done just that, if not then what?
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 01-18-2010, 03:17 PM
valve god's Avatar
valve god valve god is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Drayton Valley AB
Posts: 154
Default The barbless debate

I have no problem with barbless hooks! the regs are vague on the barbless hook.(as I stated earlier) I have practiced catch and release all the time when fishing even before size come in to effect. I care about our fish stock in alberta and have seen it dwindle over the 40 some years I have been fishing. It seems that the onus is put on the average angler to save the lake and the fish stock. The Pembina River has turned into a creek over the last 10 years growing more weeds in spots where 5 years ago there was great fishing spots, fertilizers maybe? How many fish and wildlife where killed when CNR dumped the bunker crude into Lake Wabamun? Swan Hills that is another story,regs say do not eat the fish around the waste plant. The bull trout is threatened is this because of overfishing or the streams that they spawn are gone or very little water left. Have you fished down stream of Edmonton in the North Sask. River after a big rain,be careful you could catch more than fish!!!!!
Again I have no problem with barbless hooks but the regs should be changed to say completly removed!!!!! Just my opinion
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 01-18-2010, 03:18 PM
Okotokian's Avatar
Okotokian Okotokian is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Uh, guess? :)
Posts: 26,739
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by curious View Post
Please forgive me and my naivety, I was under the impression that the law had defined the standard for a barbless hook… either it is functioning or it is not, I didn’t think it was possible to be almost pregnant…
I think if you read the act again you will find no reference to catching line when run over it as being a test of the standard. The true test would be whether the barb has any power to hold a fish, not whether a piece of line snags on it or not.The particular officer chose to use that as a test, but it's not written anywhere that it is valid. In the case mentioned by Douggie55 the judge, in fact, ruled that it wasn't.

Quote:
Originally Posted by curious View Post
As for the more harmful actions, I didn’t realize that was going on this past weekend, sorry, like I said I am new to this. Do you think there were 240 to 900 fish illegally caught in nets? WOW that is just crazy!! Do the officers know where this is happening? If they don’t, why has nobody reported it to them? Was this going on around the area where the officers were working?
I have to admit you lost me here. What do nets have to do with this discussion? Do officers know where what is happening?
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 01-18-2010, 03:23 PM
Wulfespirit's Avatar
Wulfespirit Wulfespirit is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Stony Plain
Posts: 654
Default

Curious,

Obviously you've already made up your mind and the sudden appearance of your account, quoting of statistics and regulations, and claims of being 'new' all seem a little off. You're making a huge effort to try and present your case in a passive aggressive way and are coming across with heaps of subtle sarcasm. I suspect you're alot more involved in angling in this province in one way or another than you're trying to appear to be.

With that said, there is at least one significant study out there that shows only a miniscule percentage difference in release mortality when using barbed vs. barbless hooks. I'm sure there are others that show a more significant difference. Perhaps more science is required to firm up your numbers.

Perhaps we also need a study to determine how a barb that's been pinched so that only a micron of space exists between the barb and the hook compares to hook that's been manufactured without a barb and one that is fully barbed too? Perhaps a new law should require anglers to purchase a piece of 2lb test in order to test each lure after pinching the barb should be mandated - that sounds like a law you'd like to see.

Did the illegal acquisition of large numbers of fish happen this weekend due to illegal angling/netting practices? I'll bet you dollars to donuts that it did. I'll bet you dollars to donuts that most F&W are well aware of the hotspots where these sorts of activities commonly occur. And I'll bet you more dollars to donuts that the amount of fish killed as a result outnumbered the ones saved by officers ticketing those like the OP this weekend.

Despire all that, I like seeing F&W officers out checking anglers. Just their appearance goes along way to curbing shady practices. But in truth, nitpicking little guys who tried to obey a law seems like a bad practice all around.

That's just my opinion.. correct me if I'm wrong and sorry for my naievity and all that.

Cheers!
__________________
"It is no measure of health to be well-adjusted to a profoundly sick society." - Krishnamurti

Last edited by Wulfespirit; 01-18-2010 at 03:50 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 01-18-2010, 03:38 PM
DarkAisling's Avatar
DarkAisling DarkAisling is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Calgary, AB
Posts: 4,970
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wulfespirit View Post
With that said, there is at least one significant study out there that shows only a miniscule percentage difference in release mortality when using barbed vs. barbless hooks. I'm sure there are others that show a more significant difference. Perhaps more science is required to firm up your numbers.
The study I read in great detail (but haven't been able to locate again), also indicated a very minimal difference in mortality rates between barbed and barbless hooks.

The study did indicate that the fish are more inclined to suffer ocular damage with the use of barbed hooks.

I did a heck of a lot of damage to a fish this weekend with a single barbless hook . . . more damage than I've ever done to a fish before: even when I used nothing but barbed treble hooks. At least it was legal to keep it. I don't think it would have survived.
__________________
Shelley

God promised men that good and obedient wives would be found in all corners of the world. Then he made the earth round . . . and laughed.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 01-18-2010, 03:49 PM
BBJTKLE&FISHINGADVENTURES BBJTKLE&FISHINGADVENTURES is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Fort Saskatchewan Ab
Posts: 8,926
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by valve god View Post
Was fishing on Isle lake Fish and Wildlife come over and check us out. When he asked to see my hooks he found one that in his OPINON was still barbed. I have followed the barbless law since it was implemented years ago. According the the regs the barb must pressed against the shaft.Quote from regs:Barbless Hook – includes a hook the barbs of which are pressed against the shaft of the hook so that the barbs are not functional.
He informed me that I have to file the barbs off the hook but no where in the regs it says this. He said if you run your line across the barb and it gets caught, it is still barbed. To make a long story short $200.00 later and a seized hook. So beware out there he had given out many of these tickets on that lake that day!!!!!
Oh Id fight that , take the Regulations where it states the the defenetion of a pinched barb . I myself use Fly fishing Forceps pinches that barb , ive had hooks inspected by several fish and wildlife officers and Conservation officers to say thats the best darn job they had seen . I kind of take pride in that .
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 01-18-2010, 03:59 PM
DustDee's Avatar
DustDee DustDee is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Middle of the Prairies
Posts: 400
Default

x2 wulfespirit
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 01-18-2010, 04:00 PM
Okotokian's Avatar
Okotokian Okotokian is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Uh, guess? :)
Posts: 26,739
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wulfespirit View Post
You're making a huge effort to try and present your case in a passive aggressive way and are coming across with heaps of subtle sarcasm. !
Oh come on Wulfie. Don't spoil the fun. If we eliminated passive aggressive sarcasm how would we ever have any fun on this board? It still beats calling the other poster a "*&#^! moron" like some here favour.
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 01-18-2010, 04:05 PM
Wulfespirit's Avatar
Wulfespirit Wulfespirit is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Stony Plain
Posts: 654
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Okotokian View Post
Oh come on Wulfie. Don't spoil the fun. If we eliminated passive aggressive sarcasm how would we ever have any fun on this board? It still beats calling the other poster a "*&#^! moron" like some here favour.
I'd rather have someone call me nasty profane names than try and accomplish the same under the guise of subtle sarcasm and polite soapboxing. But you have a point.. he -did- get me to write a post 400 times longer than my average one.
__________________
"It is no measure of health to be well-adjusted to a profoundly sick society." - Krishnamurti
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 01-18-2010, 04:12 PM
curious curious is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 29
Default

HA HA HA... it seems I have stirred the pot a bit by not jumping on the bandwagon and agreeing with everyone else!! I don't know about you, but some may say that creating thought instead of negativity is a good thing.

I must agree with VG… so many places in the world that were once paradises, are now wastelands. I am told that Alberta has a few, including those mentioned by VG. I have not read the law, but maybe the words “completely removed” needs to be there.

Douggie55 did mention something about a “Judge” scolding an officer… was that F&W or CO, DFO, Stream Watch, CPS, EPS? What level of court was that? Where did this happen? What experience did the “Judge” have with fishing? Is the term “Judge” used generically here to refer to any person who sits at the bench in a court room? Much like CO is used generically to refer to a wide range of people employed by the government who may or may not work with the resource? Was it even a “Judge” or simply a clerk of the court who passed a test that allowed them to hear traffic tickets? Maybe the “Judge” was actually a lawyer who sits on the bench once in a while and had received a ticket for a barbed hook and didn’t think he deserved it either? There is so much to each of these stories that we don’t know.

I must say however that I have no case to prove and have not made up my mind about anything… maybe Wulfespirit is right, maybe I don’t belong on here. I don’t seem to take what others say at face value… I don’t like to bitch and complain about how someone has not done their job properly and I don’t think that the officer is trying to ruin my day when I get checked fishing, even when I get a ticket for having a couple of beer on the ice (my fault and I paid the ticket thank you very much). And I appreciate when someone provides me a method of self checking my hooks (thank you Valve God for posting that). As for laws that I like or dislike??? I don’t have feelings one way or the other, if a law does not seem to meet the needs of the people it should be changed by the people. I understand that Alberta has recently had a cabinet change, perhaps a change to the regulations should be made… do you think that everyone would be legal then? Would 6 or 7 more years have to pass before the fishermen of Alberta start complying with that law?
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 01-18-2010, 04:13 PM
curious curious is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 29
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Okotokian View Post
Oh come on Wulfie. Don't spoil the fun. If we eliminated passive aggressive sarcasm how would we ever have any fun on this board? It still beats calling the other poster a "*&#^! moron" like some here favour.
Thanks for making me feel welcome!! :
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 01-18-2010, 04:22 PM
Wulfespirit's Avatar
Wulfespirit Wulfespirit is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Stony Plain
Posts: 654
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by curious View Post
Thanks for making me feel welcome!! :
Welcome!!

When you play devil's advocate, people sometimes see you as the devil. Not many anglers want to go through a 300 step techincal process to ensure they're legal before, during, and after hitting the water for an afternoon of some fishing fun. So when step number 234 resulted in a hook that was only 96.3% compliant to the rules and the person got ticketed for it, he was rightfully a bit unhappy about it.

Most people seem to think that the officer's actions in this thread were a bit questionable if we assume the OP's story to be accurate. Most people understand why too. You're smart enough to know that.
__________________
"It is no measure of health to be well-adjusted to a profoundly sick society." - Krishnamurti
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 01-18-2010, 04:30 PM
DarkAisling's Avatar
DarkAisling DarkAisling is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Calgary, AB
Posts: 4,970
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by curious View Post
HA HA HA... it seems I have stirred the pot a bit by not jumping on the bandwagon and agreeing with everyone else!! I don't know about you, but some may say that creating thought instead of negativity is a good thing.
I have an IQ of 138. I'm in engineering and am university educated. I'm well versed in literature, comparative religion, mathematics, physics, and a host of other things.

I've studied quantum mechanics, and what you are creating in my head is confusion: not thought. I'm left thinking "what the hell is this dude rambling on about?"

No one has said anything about hooks not needing to be barbless. I've never fished with anyone from this forum who doesn't flatten the barbs. The problem is that there is some ambiguity with the way the regulation is enforced. THAT'S IT.
__________________
Shelley

God promised men that good and obedient wives would be found in all corners of the world. Then he made the earth round . . . and laughed.
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 01-18-2010, 04:36 PM
curious curious is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 29
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wulfespirit View Post
Not many anglers want to go through a 300 step techincal process to ensure they're legal before, during, and after hitting the water for an afternoon of some fishing fun. So when step number 234 resulted in a hook that was only 96.3% compliant to the rules and the person got ticketed for it, he was rightfully a bit unhappy about it.

Most people seem to think that the officer's actions in this thread were a bit questionable if we assume the OP's story to be accurate. Most people understand why too. You're smart enough to know that.

Who the hell said I was smart??? I am just asking questions.... As for the 300 steps, well you are right, me included, but if we don't like a law find a way to change it. Kill all the fish, protect all the fish, shoot all the moose, protect all the moose, barbed / barbless I have my opinion, who cares, whatever the law is we need to be prepared to take all 300 steps or risk getting a ticket ($115.00 for a BEER!!) or simply don't go! Same goes for hunting, driving, owning a house, having kids, keeping a dog, farming etc... No sarcasm intended.
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 01-18-2010, 04:37 PM
Okotokian's Avatar
Okotokian Okotokian is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Uh, guess? :)
Posts: 26,739
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkAisling View Post
I have an IQ of 138. I'm in engineering and am university educated. I'm well versed in literature, comparative religion, mathematics, physics, and a host of other things. I've studied quantum mechanics...
You know, I bet some counselling could get you over that low self-esteem problem you have.

I'm kidding, KIDDING!
You're just a normal engineer.
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 01-18-2010, 04:43 PM
Okotokian's Avatar
Okotokian Okotokian is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Uh, guess? :)
Posts: 26,739
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by curious View Post
, maybe I don’t belong on here...
Now don't go all weepy on us. We just disagree with you and think you are wrong. No big deal. Happens to all of us from time to time. Buck up.
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 01-18-2010, 04:47 PM
curious curious is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 29
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkAisling View Post
I have an IQ of 138. I'm in engineering and am university educated. I'm well versed in literature, comparative religion, mathematics, physics, and a host of other things.

I've studied quantum mechanics, and what you are creating in my head is confusion: not thought. I'm left thinking "what the hell is this dude rambling on about?"

No one has said anything about hooks not needing to be barbless. I've never fished with anyone from this forum who doesn't flatten the barbs. The problem is that there is some ambiguity with the way the regulation is enforced. THAT'S IT.
WOW, I'm just a poor farmer, having my ramblings read by a God Like you makes me think that I am not worthy of having an opinion...

THIS ENTIRE THREAD IS BASED ON THE ASSUMPTION THAT ONE POOR FISHERMAN WAS PICKED ON BY A MEAN OLD FISH COP WITH A "CHIP ON HIS SHOULDER" WHO WAS TRYING TO BE A "DINK" ABOUT A LAW THAT HAS BEEN ON THE BOOKS FOR 7 YEARS!

I could call one of my lawyer friends and get him to write for me if I am talking at to low of a level...
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 01-18-2010, 04:48 PM
curious curious is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 29
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Okotokian View Post
Now don't go all weepy on us. We just disagree with you and think you are wrong. No big deal. Happens to all of us from time to time. Buck up.
Is this where some people start to use profanity and call each other &^%* morons?
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 01-18-2010, 04:52 PM
Crusty Crusty is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 259
Default

Curious, you are absolute pain in the butt and seem to be here just to annoy. Goodbye.
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 01-18-2010, 04:53 PM
Okotokian's Avatar
Okotokian Okotokian is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Uh, guess? :)
Posts: 26,739
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by curious View Post
Is this where some people start to use profanity and call each other &^%* morons?
Yes. Get with the program newbie.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:26 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.