fog on the mountain

invicta

went fly fishing up a mountain yesterday.Perfect morning took off at 10 got up, when fog came from nowhere--straight down. The plus part of it was the fishing was excellent, kept 8 trout all over 14 inches and as fat as snails but could have taken at least 20 more.But man,when it came time to come home (about a 2 mile walk) you could not see 20 ft.The river from the lakes flows in opposite direction to my approach, so had to rely on sense of direction plus compass app.on phone. Know the place fairly well, but in fog is very confusing.So be very wary of it if going up a mountain for any reason this beautiful June f----ng weather.

bayliner

why would you kill 8 fish?? unless your one of the waltons:) (mouths to feed etc), come to think of it, they lived on a mountain too:D

invicta

bayliner wrote: »

why would you kill 8 fish?? unless your one of the waltons:) (mouths to fee), come to think of it, they live on a mountain too:D

Now see here Mr Bayliner, I go fishing (like most people I know)to catch fish.I believe in "catch an release " as much as the next man. The mountain in question is about 6 miles away by road an a 3 mile walk to lake __so I dont live on a f---ing mountain.These are some of the finest pink-fleshed eating trout in the country an I make no apology for eating them.
Yes, I come from a large family and by 8 o clock last night no evidence of fish would have been found.If you have a problem with that, thats your problem. :mad:Also remember sarcasm is the lowest form of wit.

Snowc

I cant believe the amount of bitching that goes on in angling forums :mad:.Nearly every time someone post a picture there is always one prick who says isn't that to small to keep ,have you a licence etc..There was a thread a few days ago on a salmon and sea trout website where a person asked when to use worms for sea trout and nearly all the responses where giving out to for using a worm and telling to use a proper method like fly fishing......

peterk675

Yes but the bitching and the asking questions , is all for the safety of the fish , if every angler took an excissive amount of fish there would be none left .

You see we are not trying to annoy anyone only looking out for generations of fishermen to come, and i do believe that to take 8 trout would be a bit much , obviously just an opinon dough.

wgsten

Is there a bag limit for this particular lake?

invicta

wgsten wrote: »

Is there a bag limit for this particular lake?

this lake is probably fished a few times a year, by a few anglers.Its a wild lake with no bag limit.Believe me,the mink an cormorants would take more trout in 1 day than all the anglers would for the season.

bribren2001

whats the name of the lake?

karlram

ok lads its a wild lake so whats the problem?if he wants to take a net out then theres nothing can be said. he didnt break any laws and seems to know its barely fished so i dont think any harm was done. pity you didnt get a few photos of the fish of every one to look and and make bitchy comments out of pure jealousy. and thanks for the reminder about the dangers of bein in the mountains.

bribren2001

karlram wrote: »

ok lads its a wild lake so whats the problem?

:eek:

invicta

Cheers Karlram , At least you got the point of the post in the first place(i.e safety first. ) As for naming the lake ye must be joking. As for permits, licence, etc.paid up club member, salmon/seatrout, licence holder also paid up stockie season permit.
How come I feel as if im on trial here ?????

Daroxtar

I'm originally from the mountains. Flatlanders lost in the fog are a delicacy. Some folk up there could have taken a real shine to you

slowburner

invicta wrote: »

went fly fishing up a mountain yesterday.Perfect morning took off at 10 got up, when fog came from nowhere--straight down. The plus part of it was the fishing was excellent, kept 8 trout all over 14 inches and as fat as snails but could have taken at least 20 more.But man,when it came time to come home (about a 2 mile walk) you could not see 20 ft.The river from the lakes flows in opposite direction to my approach, so had to rely on sense of direction plus compass app.on phone. Know the place fairly well, but in fog is very confusing.So be very wary of it if going up a mountain for any reason this beautiful June f----ng weather.

8 fish over 14 inches - they must have been a pound and a half each at least. And fat......maybe even heavier.
That is the best trout fishing I have heard of in any mountain lake - tell me more............GPS co-ordinates for example, I want to get there ASAP

invicta

Come to think about it, there is quiet a good banjo picker on the way up there!!! But Id say at this stage they would want to be very fond of soup.Cos thats all they would have. Use by date on everything else practically up.As the man said : you cant play pool with a rope;:p:p:p:p

slowburner

I don't want to take this thread off topic, but as the issue has surfaced here, I feel it is necessary to state my opinion that: catch & release is not always the best policy
and here's why:

Angling is a blood sport.
There are those who would like to see an end to all blood sports.
If an angler catches a fish and then releases it, the anti-blood sports brigade could argue that the only reason the fish was caught was to 'take pleasure' in the fish's efforts to escape. In effect, they could argue that the angler is torturing the fish.
If an angler's purpose is to catch and kill a reasonable quantity of fish for the table and others are caught and released as a by-catch - then there can be no argument that the pursuit is a cruel one.

I don't propose for one minute that all fish should be killed - that would be lunacy. Nor do I have any problem with c & r. Nor can I see how coarse fishing can survive the onslaught of the anti-blood sports lobby - unless they eat the odd fish :eek:. (Mind you, I think pike is as nice as cod).
Then again, the ABSL have been quiet for a while......touch wood.

bayliner

invicta wrote: »

Now see here Mr Bayliner, I go fishing (like most people I know)to catch fish.I believe in "catch an release " as much as the next man. The mountain in question is about 6 miles away by road an a 3 mile walk to lake __so I dont live on a f---ing mountain.These are some of the finest pink-fleshed eating trout in the country an I make no apology for eating them.
Yes, I come from a large family and by 8 o clock last night no evidence of fish would have been found.If you have a problem with that, thats your problem. :mad:Also remember sarcasm is the lowest form of wit.

:D:Dgood man i was hoping for an interesting response:D, i have no problem with fish being taken for the table at all, i love trout! lemon juice, sea salt, an onion YUM!!!!!!
had one last week actually, lovely it was!
i thought the smilie face at the end of the post wouldve made you realise it was a post in good humour and not a whinge,
but in saying that i wouldnt kill 8 trout no matter where the water is, thats about 6 too many for me, but thats just my opinion, each to their own.

ironbluedun

invicta wrote: »

kept 8 trout all over 14 inches and as fat as snails but could have taken at least 20 more.

at least 20 more!!........so thats about 28+ trout over 14 inches then.........jezzz son thats some mountain lake.....ah well at least you returned 20 fish that's not a bad C&R rate.
what methods were you using, as a matter of interest?

bribren2001

ironbluedun wrote: »

at least 20 more!!........so thats about 28+ trout jezzz son thats some mountain lake

Daroxtar

slowburner wrote: »

8 fish over 14 inches - they must have been a pound and a half each at least. And fat......maybe even heavier.
That is the best trout fishing I have heard of in any mountain lake - tell me more............GPS co-ordinates for example, I want to get there ASAP

You do realise that there are 100 "Inches" in a metre?

slowburner

Daroxtar wrote: »

You do realise that there are 100 "Inches" in a metre?

Or 100 mm in an inch?

ironbluedun

slowburner wrote: »

Or 100 mm in an inch?

100mm in an inch....is there?....FFS some trout at 1400mm long so.......

8k2q1gfcz9s5d4

Daroxtar wrote: »

You do realise that there are 100 "Inches" in a metre?

100 cm in a metre
39.3 inches in a metre

Daroxtar

Ella Hundreds Grasshopper wrote: »

100 cm in a metre
39.3 inches in a metre

jett

The antis and the authorities have a devisive field day.
I have been amazed by the clan like behaviour between clubs when we should all stick together.
I put my Browns back, thats my choice but older anglers in the area tell me of days of catching 30 every night, they wonder where they have all gone!
However I am fed up with feeling guilty about catching and taking a salmon ( a rare occurance) when they are being commercially netted in the river.

dbrock

love this catch and release stuff , just shows how anglers as a group will never be united and its a pitty

how can you presume your better cause you release your fish,
is it not bad to torture something for your pleasure, at least the guy was eating the fish , fair play,
for the record i fish and also hunt, i do keep some fish and do release some and see no problem with the guy keeping a few for the table, seen this on other forums to where people including myself just couldn be arsed putting up a report on fish caught anymore,

jett

I did not say I was better, I made a statement of fact. I have done no river trout fishing this year as I prefer to take a couple of rainbows for food.
After 40 years of fishing I get no pleasure from playing a fish and exhausting it for fun.
The greeny types have little problem with killing fish, its using them for fun that they are against.
I would rather fish for salmon, take up to 3 per year and stop fishing for the rest of the season because its all I need.
My choice.

ironbluedun

dbrock wrote: »

how can you presume your better cause you release your fish,

personally i support C&R for wild trout, and i do not think i am 'better' than anyone else for doing so.
often we hear the anti C&R brigade playing the good old ' ah your only jealous' card.
well that's total nonsense, it has nothing to do with jealousy. anglers who are conservation minded are acting for the good of their chosen sport for the future. it is as simple as that.

ironbluedun

jett wrote: »

However I am fed up with feeling guilty about catching and taking a salmon ( a rare occurance) when they are being commercially netted in the river.

i wouldn't be at all guilty about taking a salmon, in fact i take about the 10 a year, but never any more, any more is too many for my personal use and i don't kill wild salmon just to give them away to people who do not appreciate the effort involved in catching them in the first place.

you pay a €120 a season license, including a €60 conservation stamp, so cant see the problem with taking a few FRESH fish.

dbrock

wouldnt it be great if we could all get on as anglers and not have to see things like the C&R brigade and the Anti C&R brigade, think of the lobbying group anglers could be, id love to see a size limit system put in place where every species has a limited size you can keep like bass, and even bag limits all over ireland.

slowburner

dbrock wrote: »

wouldnt it be great if we could all get on as anglers and not have to see things like the C&R brigade and the Anti C&R brigade, think of the lobbying group anglers could be, id love to see a size limit system put in place where every species has a limited size you can keep like bass, and even bag limits all over ireland.

Why can't anglers get together as a single lobby group? Too many reasons.
Over the course of a lifetime involved with fisheries I have never seen a significant alliance of anglers - and I expect I never will.
The concept of national bag limits is a very good one. But there is no question or doubt that it would drive another wedge into the anglers' ability to act in unison.