Driftless Trout Anglers

Welcome Guest Active Topics | Log In | Register

3 Pages <123
OMG Options
FryinPanDan
#21 Posted : Tuesday, March 03, 2015 7:28:14 PM
Rank: Dragon Fly


Joined: 4/9/2012
Posts: 1,173
Location: Sauk County
Pete wrote:
shebs wrote:
Interesting the response from the DNR folks in the chat today - the size structure will not improve if anglers aren't harvesting the small fish. Get out there and get some dinner!


And improve your health in the process. Trout are high in omega 3s and have a low contaminant burden. Maybe it's time to update the motto from "Don't kill your limit, limit your kill," to "Kill your limit," at least on select waters.


I'm prepared to do my part! Drool
"My position is, we should have a clean, healthy, diverse natural environment so I can go fishing. Because fishing makes me happy." - John Gierach
BRAUNTRUTTA
shebs
#22 Posted : Tuesday, March 03, 2015 10:05:06 PM
Rank: Stone Fly


Joined: 5/13/2014
Posts: 745
Location: Mpls
I wasn't sure whether to post in this thread or the DNR chat thread, but since we're on the topic of eating fish...
I searched for the Wild Trout Symposium that Scot from WIDNR mentioned he had presented in (warning: large PDF) and found an interesting study on pg 119 - it seems that brook trout that live in the same waters as browns tend to have higher mercury levels than the browns. This study was the first to specifically address co-habitating populations, which is interesting - the presence of both species ina stream seems to impact the diets of each.
If you needed another reason to release our native trout, this would be a good one.
A bad day of fishing is better than a good day of work. ~Author Unknown
Modern Translation, with respect for the Notorious B.I.G. : "Fuck Money, Get Fishes"
Woods&Water
#23 Posted : Tuesday, March 03, 2015 10:08:36 PM
Rank: Dragon Fly


Joined: 7/31/2012
Posts: 112
Location: La Crosse, WI
Its already been stated by many so I will just agree with their sentiments. I like the regulations that state all harvested fish must be below "X" inches. Better eaters at that size, helps the age structure of fish, lower numbers reduces comp and leads to bigger fish, and I won't keep a wall mounter anyway so I'm happy for the most part.
NBrevitz
#24 Posted : Tuesday, March 03, 2015 10:25:16 PM
Rank: Super Fly


Joined: 3/17/2013
Posts: 1,130
Location: Lake Elmo, Mn
Woods&Water wrote:
Its already been stated by many so I will just agree with their sentiments. I like the regulations that state all harvested fish must be below "X" inches. Better eaters at that size, helps the age structure of fish, lower numbers reduces comp and leads to bigger fish, and I won't keep a wall mounter anyway so I'm happy for the most part.

Agreed. No need to keep a big boy and the smaller Trout are far more abundant. Should lead to better genetics in the population and larger fishThumpUp
"I fish because I love to: Because only in the woods can I find solitude without loneliness."
rschmidt
#25 Posted : Wednesday, March 04, 2015 5:55:10 AM
Rank: May Fly


Joined: 1/16/2015
Posts: 327
Location: West WI
I'm with ya, the voice of the many wise has persuaded me my perspective needs adjustment. 9 10 11" are as good as a 12 13 or 14" on the table, so I'll do my part. If it's true that relatively few anglers catch the most of the trout then DTA will be helping the size structure in the process. Happy fishing on Sat. 3 days. R
Users browsing this topic
Guest
3 Pages <123
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

FlatEarth Theme by Jaben Cargman (Tiny Gecko)
Powered by YAF | YAF © 2003-2009, Yet Another Forum.NET
This page was generated in 0.084 seconds.