Quote:
Originally Posted by SNAPFisher
Where is that emoji of a bicycle going in reverse 
So you are actually agreeing now with region and lake specific regs and even tags. Good stuff. If you really do believe this, then we are all talking the same thing and have been splitting hairs over nothing. Which is usually where these discussions keep going since we all really want the same thing.
I'm still pointing to the article as a great bigger picture on fisheries decline - streams, creeks, rivers, lakes...all linked. It certainly got me thinking about bigger problems and not just lake limits. Glad I found it. |
No, we don't really want the same thing.
I'm not interested in a sacrificial lamb as part of a solution, I'm not interested in a province full of stunted walleye, I want a healthy total fishery. Like having a healthy ungulate herd, predators play an important role. It's easy to shut down a fishery and cross your fingers, I want a more in depth solution, one that addresses a fishery not just a fish.
My suggestion of a one slot size fish for lakes across the province isn't far off what an increased tag system would be for average fishermen. Not all anglers go out every weekend, with the majority of anglers only getting out a handful of times in a season.
The only reason I choose not to buy include rivers and streams in this conversation is because it's specifically lake retention regulations we are talking about here. My thoughts on rivers and streams are polar opposites. Destruction of habitat starts to play a key roll in that fishery and is a way more in depth topic.