Quote:
Originally Posted by SNAPFisher
This is a good comment. We already have waters in our national parks that have fly fishing only.
I disagree that it doesn't limit fishing pressure, it really does. More people are comfortable with casting a lure than a line. If that were to change and more people are brought up on fly fishing, then it wouldn't make a difference like you have said. In this light, I understand why it is done but agree that it is better left as fishing is fishing.
I also agree with you that it sends a poor message and they should be using other measure to level the playing field. E.g. no bait, lures of a certain size, no weight on the line or whatever it is they are trying to limit in a particular area.
|
I was thinking more along the lines that fly fishing only waters would attract more people that are already fly fishing specifically. I guess it depends on the water body. For example I bet all the quality stocked trout waters in the central alberta could go fly fishing only and it wouldn't do much at all to cut down on fishing pressure.
Either way as you mentioned there are better measures to tweek impact like bait bans etc. I have nothing against bait fishing, use bait a lot for walleye fishing but if a few more waters had a bait ban that wouldn't be all bad imho.
Getting back to windrifts original comment that fell more along the lines of limiting numbers in general at waterbodies no I don't want to go down that road either, and I have a sneaky suspicion that those folks that support that kind of intervention assume they aren't the ones that are going to be shut out...
It's been said, but again be careful what you wish for.