The turkeys have voted for Christmas
And cut off their noses to spite
The glowering look on their faces
When they stare in the mirror at night
Yes, the turkeys have voted for Christmas
They hate every man with a beard
‘Cos the tabloids have told them to do so
And Santa in red is so weird.
So Santa is truly a lefty
He doesn’t bring presents – that’s lies
The turkeys have voted for Christmas
And soon will end up in mince pies.
Like too many natural assets in this country, chalk stream fishing is heavily privatised, and owners of the best fishing rights can generate a substantial rentier income. Inevitably a class of middlemen have piggybacked this business, such as Simon Cooper and his company Fishing Breaks. Through his company you can buy yourself a day on rivers like the Test in return for a substantial sum (£400 plus in mayfly time). Given the investment, customers, the more mercantile ones anyway, expect to catch fish, preferably a lot of fish. So Cooper’s piece on catch and release in November’s Trout & Salmon magazine was not that surprising.
Under the magazine’s rather crass byline, dogma of do-gooders, he criticises the current preference for releasing trout instead of knocking them on the head. He rashly overstates his case by describing catch and release as an “Orwellian mantra” (perhaps he hasn’t read Orwell). His reasons have been put before and were never convincing then. The first concerns the attitudes of hostile forces, the old argument that killing fish justifies the angling, whereas putting them back doesn’t. It’s a feeble point, if only because those who hate fishing don’t much care either way — it’s people fishing they can’t abide.
The second argument is commercial and therefore more understandable from his position. Fish caught and returned become more skilled at avoiding artificial flies, they become much harder to catch. This is certainly true, although I think fishing pressure has a similar effect, whether or not a fish is caught. Difficult fish make for unhappy clients, which is bad for business. Since the waters on Fishing Break’s inventory cannot be rested unless income is sacrificed, the implication is that Cooper would prefer to kill and restock. He extends the argument to wild trout fisheries by suggesting that taking 12-inch fish will not reduce the population because the trout won’t live much beyond that sort of age. This might be valid if the replacement rate were higher or at least equal to the harvest rate, but on the hammered waters that comprise his inventory this would be most unlikely.
Wild trout are under great pressure in the South through environmental damage as well as daily angling. At one time the welfare of trout populations was barely considered. Now at least we are aware of the value of the wild brown trout and we balk at killing them. Even if on certain blessed rivers this is not strictly necessary, it is better than the old philosophy of making a good basket. Commercial imperatives should have no bearing. Decades of stocking have completely changed the famous chalk rivers where the extant wild trout are swamped by the money-making interlopers. Wild fish need all the care we can give them.
The Secret Angler 