|Date: March 9, 2007
To: PFIC Message Board
Subject: New classification of fisherpeople...
Recently, I've been thinking that none of the existing classifications of fisherpeople accurately describe why I fish. The common words used to describe types of fishermen are: Commercial, Recreational, and Subsistence. By the standard definition, I'm a recreational fisherman. I don't fish as a livelihood, and don't do it to subsist. But somehow, the word does not provide the correct shade of meaning that I'm seeking.
I fish largely out of a belief that it is an important activity in order to be a complete person. First, the fresh and natural product that my family and I consume is an important supplement for our health. Second, it is important for a person to be in tune with taking and providing sustenance. Each time we eat, a life (animal or plant) is sacrificed (perhaps with the exception of milk and honey products) - and understanding this concept is important for existing in this universe, I believe.
Somehow, the word “recreational” does not quite encompass the “mystical” aspects that I'm getting at. I don't fish “for fun”, per-se. I fish because it's just one of the things that human beings, as I understand them, *should* do.
Can anyone help me find a word to express this thought? I'd like to be able to elegantly express the following classifications of fisherfolk:
Commercial Fisherman: An individual or business that harvests fish and other aquatic life for a livelihood or profit.
Recreational Fisherman: An individual who participates in the activity of fishing or angling for self-actualization reasons, such as relaxation, exercise, meditation, "thrill of the hunt", etc. This is the category of people that was defined by Isaac Walton.
Fisherman: One who fishes because fishing is an activity that humans do. This is the group of people that Isaac Walton defined himself as *not* being.
Subsistence Fisherman: One for whom fishing is a requirement to provide adequate nutrition.
It's possible that “recreational” does encompass both types of fishermen. And it's possible that I'm actually a subsistence fisherman. But it would be great if I could use a different word that more elegantly describes how and why I fish. Thanks in advance for any thoughts and ideas!
Posted by Crust
Participational. A fisherman who wants to participate in the taking of his food so that he doesn't loose touch with the fact that he is taking an organism’s life when eating fish. He wants to appreciate nature and the environment, (Shrink-wrapped meat and fish in the supermarket is too “sanitized” for him.)
Posted by v6v6v6
Posted by mel
Stone cold killahs. Kind of harsh but it's what we do, no?
Posted by johnp
Does “killah” apply to one who takes any life? To animals? To humans only? I like to tell people, “I wanted to be a vegetarian, but couldn't stand hearing the tomatoes scream when I chopped them up...” For me, the work “killah” applies exclusively to one who does the deed on other humans.
Posted by Sebastes2
Words are over rated but I like Mel’s thought. I just do what I do, the names come from other people who try to classify me to understand who I am.
Posted by johnp
The three ideas I had were: “Traditional,” “Proletarian,” and “Just regular.”
Posted by Scooterfish
Primal or perhaps better... “Innate” “Something that is innate seems essential to the nature, character, or constitution” Scooterfish
Posted by johnp
Posted by Clayman
Classification = overrated. Being an individual is awesome, especially when it confuses all your friends.
Posted by dompfa ben
I am an Ontological Angler. Which is somewhat confusing and circular in logic...sort of like, “I fish; therefore, I am.”
In the metacognitive sense--that is, in the sense of thinking about thinking, I am an angler if I believe myself to be one.
In a larger sense, my CHOICE to be an angler is the driving factor--by choosing to follow the path, I inherently must learn and come to know the path. Thus and thus, the question becomes:
Do I exist in order to truly fish, or do I fish in order to truly exist?
And really... isn't that the same thing in some Leonard Nimoyan “cosmic dance” sort of way?
Posted by TheEmptyBucket
Ha. . . and I just thought it was fun.
Posted by jeffbradford
You could be classified as a “Compulsory Fisherman”, defined as one for whom fishing is imperative (you are compelled to fish). I, personally, am strictly a recreational fisherman in that I participate in the sport of fishing often, but I almost never catch anything, and what I do catch, I release or use for bait. However, my ultimate goal is to perfect the skills necessary for procuring fish so when my commercial food supply chain fails, I have my own backup. My wife also keeps a very nice “Victory Garden” out back. It is good to know where your next meal will come from. Praying that the “Big One” doesn't hit until I perfect the fishing thing,..... Jeff B.
Posted by drllama
Wouldn't that be “Compulsive”?
Support UPSAC! Preserve pier and shore angling in California.