Quote:
Originally Posted by SNAPFisher
So water quality and habitat destruction can't be discussed at the same time? Too much for you?? 
So without addressing the bigger issue and focus just on increasing fish limits, which is all you have, slot or otherwise, my stance is that it is not going to work to add yet another general regulation of a retention of 1 across Alberta. You even admitted that a few posts back but have apparently changed your mind again??
My thinking is, you have to manage each water body for limits, tags for more populated lakes, slot as in the case of Calling but tags if that fails to sustain there too...
In summary, let them continue making progress  |
You have a hard time keeping respectful hey? I'll bring it on if you insist, but I'd rather keep things respectful.
Tell me how having a one slot size walleye limit will effect the grayling populations on the peace river watershed? Or how commercial netting in the early 1900's on lac la biche has effected the size of the walleye on buck lake? Or how having a zero walleye retention limit on beaver lake affected the goldeye in Manitoba?
I'll help you better understand the basis of my suggestion so you can get past how smart you are and focus your hate to the topic at hand.
There are a bunch of lakes in central Alberta with high walleye to pike to perch ratios that still have zero or extremely low retention numbers, and the ratio is getting worse every year. How is placing further restrictions going to help? I was suggesting opening these lakes up to retention, or even allotting 10 tags rather than three on these lakes to take some of the angling pressure off of the lakes that currently allow retention before those lakes get closed down.
If you can get past the self righteousness attitude and address my position with arguments that are RELATIVE to what I'm suggesting while leaving out the insults I'll be more than happy to continue the discussion, if not then we're done here.