Trophy fish

[RIROCKHOUND]

First off, BD.
Science is objective, not subjective. When we get subjective, we become advocates, not scientists. If you knew Dr. Sugihara is a card carrying PETA member, then you could MAYBE, MAYBE make an issue out of this. For all you know he is an avid fisherman.

The 'good doctor' is a former dept. chair at one of the worlds premier oceanographic institutions, with 35 years of white (peer reviewed) literature. Does that make him infallible? Of course not. But BEST AVAILABLE SCIENCE is what runs our fishery management plans, cutting edge medical fields, space travel etc. etc. etc. questioning that is a good thing. blindly questioning it without reason smacks of the creationist zealots, who rip on the evolutionary theory without knowing what it means to actually get vetted through the scientific process to become a theory... This was a study, by a respected scientist, who submitted it to a journal, which then sends it out to other experts to review. Then and only then it is accepted. All that, and like numbskull said, I guess they should have dropped a draft in your mailbox too.


That was a long tangent, I am absolutely a carnivore, I keep fish, I eat fish, some are large, some are tasty 'MoSax' in the 30" range.

I went and read the article in the library. Do I understand any (most) of it? No, but I understood enough to know that on this study, on these 50yr of data, it seems to hold true. Will it change my habits? maybe not, but we'll cross that bridge when I have a big girl in the wash...


Thanks for posting numbskull. Interesting read.

[Goose]

Don't waste your time on here. Make a difference, stand in front of the fish houses, hand out pamphlets with statistics. Maybe bring a generator so you can show a video. I luv kicking horses

[fishaholic18]

Originally Posted by Goose

Don't waste your time on here. Make a difference, stand in front of the fish houses, hand out pamphlets with statistics. Maybe bring a generator so you can show a video. I luv kicking horses

[Sea Dangles]

Kill the old ones they have lived a long and healthy life.
The bass under 20 should be let go to breed for generations to come.
Take one bass at 40 rather than two at 20 to show real conservation.
The filet from a 40 provides better yield at the table in comparison.
Restaurants and markets alike prefer the larger representatives for fare.
All fish are trophies, take only pictures, leave only footprints......

[SAUERKRAUT]

I will stand on the soap box of the Numbskull, any time. Science, and the lessons of history tell us uncomfortable lessons, that even a Numbskull can understand if you have a mind to be objective.

Here is a history: In the early 1800's, the disastrous harvest and kill "recreational" fishery (along with dam building) forever wiped out the gene pool of northern New England and Maine 10 pound squaretails (brook trout), and 25 pound landlocked salmon. Gone. No amount of subsequent great fisheries management can recover this. Would you like some 11 inch brookies, no problem says our fisheries managers. How about a "trophy" four pound Lake Winnie landlock? You might have to troll all year for that one. Are you happy? Not if you lived through "back then".

Are you happy with the present status of our "fully recovered" striped bass fishery? Not if you are as old as Daignault, or myself. Are you impressed by the shear numbers of all these baby bass running around, while your gene pool access to... or chance for... a dozen or so 40's plus beach bass per season...just sinks. Now it seems pure luck to blunder across even an occasiuonal 30.

So, IF you are so fortunate or expert to be looking into that angry eye of your trophy bass this coming season, remember that you are looking at the gene pool. It is not all gone yet. This is what the Numbskull said in words a little more docile than mine. But then again, he isn't as old as I am. He does not know that he missed.