O’fieldstream Outdoor Journal

Here is WHERE and HOW O’fieldstream DIFFERS from the Herd”

O’fieldstream takes a very dim view of today’s excessive focus on sport for the sake of, so-called-sport. It is a hypocritical position and only exists to defend excessive pressure on the resources, with purposes ranging from personal satisfaction to market development in everything from international to local economies. Many of these pressures are well beyond what the resource can naturally bear.

O’fieldstream is not opposed to economic development or ‘use’ of the natural resources. Many years of success have shown how local economies, can continue to enjoy both economic returns from the same outdoor recreational activities and experience a healthy, natural state within the resources in use.

There is no need for excessive hype or misapplication of well-intended conservation measures while offering a reduced impact on the resource. The integrity of the users of a resource is directly proportionate to the resulting health and well-being the natual resource resources being exploited, affording years of continual service to the community in both economics and esthetics.

It is especially disgusting, when media and business attempt to disguise these excesses with the use of credible conservation methods - such as Catch-and-Release. The promotion of user-excitement (aka, spending $$$ in a given quality resource area) through “multiple-fish-per-fishermen-per-day” on a given body of water, while claiming ‘no harm’ to the resource, for the sole purpose of building a market for local economies, is wrong. Very wrong!

This type of hype-marketing also builds a false sense of responsible action; ultimately destructive to the activity, the resource and those involved. Unfortunately nearly every business associated with outdoor recreation has been, and still is, guilty of this malady. Some of the offenders attempt to dilute their complicity in this error by being involved in various real, or so-called, environmental projects or by making some other token gesture toward resource responsibility. But the fact remains, they DO IT .. and they PROMOTE IT to their customers through their actions .

The result is the resource suffers and everyone wonders why. It’s insane and is ludicrous. Most disturbing, it is unnecessary and completely avoidable. Why not promote what is an already in-place, proven, self-imposed regulation system? It’s what we’ve called ETHICS for centuries.

Today, ethics - the very mention of it is considered outmoded and intolerable. Taking in a wide-angle view of our society and the requirements of ethics, it’s easy to see why ethics is so out-of-favor.

Because ETHICS presumes a knowledge of what is right and wrong, knowing the difference between them, and making a conscious and willing decision to, “do the right thing at the right time”.

“Ethics is what you do in the dark, before the Game Warden shows up”.
Paul Quinnett, Pavlov’s Trout

Unfortunately,in place of a simple, straight-forward, ethic, as a society we have slipped into it’s slot a wishy-washy counterfit, known as: situation ethics. Meaning…

..it is the situation that determines our system of ethics and not our ethic which determines the actions taken in any situation we encounter.

The O’fieldstream FISHING ETHIC, seeks to maintain - NOT merely sustain - a vibrant fishery, through minimal impact of the fishing process by minimizing the angler-to-fish interactions on a given body of water.

The over-used, misapplied and highly abused, Catch-and-Release system, is a system promoting the promise of multiple angler-fish-contacts, based on the promotion that C&R sustains higher levels of fish in a given body of water for greater ’sporting opportunities’ - limited only by the time, energy and ability of the fisherperson. The promotion succeeds through the doctrine that C&R affords such multiple ’sporting opportunities’ without consequential negative outcomes to the resource.

Stated simply: C&R allows you to ‘have your cake and eat it, too’. Unfortunately this mythical belief is on the same shelf as: “when pigs fly”, “no free lunch” and “if it sounds too good to be true, it is.”

O’fieldstream submits the fisheries, fishing and supportive economics, would all be better served - in the long run - if the fishing limits were to be administered by the following guidelines of, Selective Harvest Limits:

‘Selective Harvest Limits (take, release or madetory release) will apply - insert local slot limit in number of fish] - for all species of game fish. Once the legally stated ’slot limit’ - number - has been reached, the fisherperson is FINISHED for the day on that (designated by distance or local) water - by body, division or acreage - of lentic (still) water; and stretch -determined by linear measurement - of lotic (flowing) water.”

EXAMPLE: Say you’re on a body of water that allows 6, 12″ rainbow trout harvested per day. Once you catch and release or harvest (Selective Harvest), 6 fish (regardless of size), you break-down the rod and go to another:

• LENTIC (Still Water)
  - lake, pond, reservoir, bay, inlet, estuary, shoal, acreage (based on section and seperation)
• LOTIC (Flowing Water)
  - a new stream or a new section (designation by length of fishables and seperations)

… of water to continue fishing - or you quit for the day.

Self-restraint such as this will insure the impact on the resource -fish, water, bottom structure and surrounding environment- will be kept to minimum. This will stand in stark contrast to the excessive
human-use pressure, greedily promoted and resultant from today’s mentality of ‘catch until you drop’.

Sure this concept will meet with severe opposition. Why wouldn’t it? It means a definite monetary loss for guides, shops, product manufactures, travel, and more. Yes, it would mean losses in the millions of $$; initially. But as in every long-term fiscal action, the pay-off comes over time. But to realize the pay-off, we must first make the investment.

So, we really must ask ourselves: “Which do we want to see happen?”

Interim losses: money, jobs, culture - but retain the resource and develop a new natural resource economic model ?

or

Loss of the whole enchilada: the money, the jobs, the culture and the resource ?

It’s not a matter of either, or … it’s a matter of WHICH. One WILL happen. The choice is ours. The choice is now.

Losses due to changing cultural shifts in how we approach all outdoor heritage activities will result in the beginning of a healthy, self-perpetuating model for economic productivity while insuring our resources will remain available to us and future generations. Development of personally-responsible actions such as this would seed valuable harvests far beyond just sustaining populations of fish.

The development of a resource ethic, in concert with the Leopoldian Land Ethic, would go long distances toward stemming the growing tide of ignorance that has led to a subliminal and calloused disregard for the fragility of the resource. It is truly unfortunate, but these conditions exist in all areas of today’s “Outdoor Sporting” activities.

Here are only a few samples:

Hunting

• trophy fixation
• exotic
• species importation
• pay-hunts
• “feed-lot” hunting

Fishing

• disdain for selective harvest
• abusive Catch-n-Release promotions
• tournaments
• equipment mania
• excessive pressure of sensitive resources

Camping

• over-pressure due to hype-marketing
• misguided education
• image
• marketing

Canoe/Kayaking

• resource-use arrogance
• misguided and deceptive marketing
• market influenced tradition

Hiking

• trail abuse
• misguided education
• image marketing

Because these conditions do exist, the growing tide of agendas focusing on the obliteration of the practice of the Outdoor Heritage Traditions gain momentum; becoming fuel for their agendas.

Unwittingly, today’s - so-called, “Outdoor Sportsmen” have become an accomplice to the causes that are targeting the very extirpation of what they say they love and hold so dearly:

The freedom to practice of our Outdoor Heritage Activities.

O’fieldstream
Heritagekeeper of the Outdoor Heritage Activies