Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurt505
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.
|
So now you just want to focus on walleye? Wasn't it you that said to think about "balance" and all species? Correct? I found a good research article about fisheries decline...thought that would help you out. I got me thinking for sure about the bigger picture. That is not a bad thing. If you can't take the time to read and understand it, I guess that is off the table for this discussion which is fine. Just don't bring up "balance" again and sit there and expect balance to be defined by you and your terms only.
And, now the 1 fish slot size limit is off the table too? Just trying to get back to some kind of understanding of what it is you are proposed because it changes from post to post. This is not an insult, I'm finding this genuinely hard to follow. If you still believe in a general 1 fish limit reg, then you are wrong and that will never / unlikely to happen.
If there are certain lakes where the walleye are abundant, sure. Some retention is good. Bring on the tags there too if there are none today. Or, some other retention that works for that particular lake, good too. That is not putting additional restrictions is it? Seems like we agree don't we?
BTW, there is no hate here. Maybe you are inventing something? Relax, okay.