To stock or not to stock a wild trout stream. That is the question.
Conan The Librarian wrote in
:
So because it's possible they made a mistake in stocking browns,
you
think they should compound that mistake by stocking another non-native
species.
Talk about yer irony.
Chuck Vance
I don't seem to be drawing much criticism for saying much the same
thing, so I'll just keep going.
I think Vermont has come up with a very interesting way to try to keep
the meat fishermen happy while trying to protect a wild population. I'd
venture that its worth a shot, so long as the mechanisms are in place to
figure out relatively quickly that its not working out, and kill the
program.
A thousand fish aren't a heck of a lot for a resource that size.
They'll likely be stocked AWAY from the good cover, and be pulled out of
the water almost as soon as they're put in. In fact, the die hards for
wild management would probably find it easier-- and maybe more fun -- to
organize an event to MAKE SURE these fish are pulled out quickly than to
try to keep it from happening.
Personally, even if I wanted to keep it from happening, I'd still take
the approach of making sure the stops are in place, and then when it
became perfectly clear that Vermont doesn't have the resources to make
sure the program isn't causing damage, you'll have very compelling ammo
to kill the program before it starts. You'll garner much more support
this way, as you'll sound a whole bunch more reasonable.
--
Scott
Reverse name to reply
|