This is absolute nonsense. There's a saying "when your only tool is a hammer, all your problems start to look like nails." AE has no ability to change habitat destruction due to floods or flood mitigation structures, chemical additives from the city, power generation flow fluctuations, sewage treatment facilities, and any other number of major factors which are causing the decline in fish populations. The only and easiest tool they have is to restrict angler effort (hours). Changing the sport fishing regulations to be more restrictive is a trivial process requiring no effort or forethought by AE. So that's what they do, analyzing and changing the other major factors is just too hard.
I used to fish the CIL hole pre 2013, that stretch of water must have held hundreds if not a thousand fish. I caught lots there. Now that prime habitat is gone, and the fish density with it. My catch rate dropped off dramatically. Changing the regulations for fishing that hole will not increase catch rates, but if AE were to study that section they would decide that the reason fish populations are down at that locale is because of too high a catch rate, and therefore the regulations need to be changed. Knee jerk reaction when your easiest tool can be applied like a hammer.
|