wrote:
Hello Tim,

1) What specifically would you do in Colorado to begin this
methodology?

How would the Best Practice Angling Method concept guide further tackle
restrictions, if any, in Colorado? I know Colorado angling by
reputation only so bear that in mind.

Public salmonid fisheries facing overharvesting and/or congestion
problems would likely benefit from a bait ban, but would unlikely
benefit from a fly fishing only restriction.

In the case of privately owned salmonid fisheries. a flyfishing only
restriction would make the owner the most money. I would probably
suggest to an owner that the fishery be posted and advertised as fly
fishing only but that paying artificial lure anglers be allowed to ply
the waters, space and reputation issues permitting.
[snip]

Colorado, AFAIK, has no "Flyfishing Only" sections but has "flies and
lures only" regulations on many waters. Its interesting that you noted
the 'reputation' issues of a private fishery because I think it's clear
that there are no sound reasons for flyfishing only regulations based
biology alone. This was a very hot topic in Oregon a few years back and
was heavily debated here, including several members of the Oregon
commission. This speaks to the social aspects affecting these
regulations more than the critical health of the fisheries, as you
mention in your report. During these discussions the flyfishermen cited
such issues as quality of experience being ruined by the presence of
spin fishermen and other, stereotypical, issues such as the feeling
that flyfishermen were cleaner and left trash astream (yes, that was
stated). I think the Colorado regulations speak to the latest data on
mortality of these tackle choices, make more sense and are more 'fair'
than limiting tackle choices (exclusive of bait) on public waters. I am
speaking to physical and financial constraints on some fishermen that
would be otherwise excluded, but also to a personal preference (it
takes a great deal of skill to fish a lure properly, is fun and is a
great education segue to other imitative angling methods) as well as to
exposing the class bias that exists for what it is.

[continues]

2) Have you ever considered mandatory kill-then-quit regulations?

Not formally as in a written piece, but I have fished under those
regulations in Quebec Atlantic salmon streams. *Mandatory*
kill-then-quit regulations are feasible in a tightly managed situation
like the ZECs, provincial parks and state-managed wildlife reserves of
Quebec. Otherwise, they promise difficulties in typically
passively-managed North American public fisheries due to monitoring and
enforcement issues. I believe *voluntary* harvest-then-quit and/or
*voluntary* catch-and-release limits would be more cost effective and
ultimately more effective. Anglers have proven themselves enormously
successful in supporting self-enforcing conventions in not all but many
situations.
[snip]

The one area of fisheries management you do not discuss in your report
is the ethos of catch and release fishing and the impact this has on
recreational sport fishing. It is my personal feeling that managing
fisheries more akin to hunting will result in better and more
sustainable regulations over time. Your comment below is spot on, in my
estimation, yet I feel that it is the pure catch and release crowd is
not, generally, accepting of voluntarily limiting catch and release
resulting in significantly more mortality in some cases than areas
where subsistence harvest is allowed. This is especially true when
water temperatures are warmer or when fishing from a drift boat in
swift water. It does not cease to amaze me the moral high ground
claimed by catch and release flyfishermen that generally do not show a
great deal self restraint limiting the hours astream (which affects the
availability and quality of angling for everyone).

If cherry-picking the catch for harvest by holding fish in live wells
and releasing them as larger fish show up, for example, is your driving
concern, then I'm not sure what to propose though I can clearly
understand why one would want to discourage that kind of behaviour. In
a similar vein, catching and releasing hundreds of trout in one day is
something else we might want to effectively discourage.
[snip]

Stringly agree. Have you had a chance to read the report from the
Norwegian Fisheries council found at:

http://org.nlh.no/etikkutvalget/English/catch.htm

I'm curious if you think applying BPAM with a sound biological 'ethic'
might be the watershed, definitive, overall management strategy
cornerstone.

Thank you very, very much for your time and for your generative
discussion on this important subject.

Sincerely,

Halfordian Golfer
It is impossible to catch and release a wild trout.