On Mar 12, 7:40 pm, Willi wrote:
Halfordian Golfer wrote:
Do you have any studies that show that harvest increases the quality of
a trout fishery?

Willi

Yes.

I love to flyfish every place that allows it but can hardly stomach
the places that don't allow it.

Think about it. Would you rather fish:
the X Fork of the You Know....or the Frying Pan?
The Roaring Fork, or the Frying Pan?
The Elk or the Taylor Reservior Tail Water?
A Wyoming Beaver pond or Cheesman Canyon?

I say that tongue in cheek but, it's also intended to ring somewhat
true, but you must define quality for it to make any sense at all and
quality for me includes isolation and fish that act wild.

Don't take it from me, though, take it from John Gierach who talks
about when the St. Vrain became famous for a short period of time when
it became C&R. The parking lot filled up with cars but the fishing
was, more or less, as it always had been. When it was made normal
again, the cars left and it stayed the fair to middling creek that it
is.

This is with a 4 fish limit now: the fishing can be excellent. If it
were to get crummy, or if we wanted to tweak it, we could make it 2.
This is with no size restrictions, we could add one. Also, these are
browns. Very wary.

Your pal,

Halfordian Golfer

I agree that in Colorado, the designation of C&R (or most special regs
INCLUDING your "selective" harvest with its slot limits) often leads to
over crowding and I tend not to fish those waters for that reason.

But that DOESN'T answer my question. In some of your posts you assert or
at least imply that "selective" harvest will improve the quality of a
fishery (those large fish eaters etc). Can you show ANY study that
showed that harvest of any type improved the quality of a self
sustaining trout fishery? I can show you study after study that
demonstrate that reducing harvest can improve a fishery.

Willi

Willi you just said that reducing harvest can improve a fishery. So
can increasing harvest. This is as old as the hills. Don't make me
spell out "S-T-U-N-T-E-D" again. There is no question about it.

Putting two and two together, I think the question you really mean to
ask is: Do pure C&R regulations increase the quality of angling in a
self-sustaining trout fishery:

I think this can be a great thread but, before I can even begin to
answer that WIlli, we will have to describe "quality".

Does the definition: Large numbers of eager and aggressive large
rainbow trout satisfy you?

If so than fishing in a hatchery raceway or texas stock pond is a
quality experience.

Does the definition include: Fishing involves solitude, scenery and a
few fish for dinner?
Does the definition include: Fish caught are unscarred from previous
human encounters?
Does the definition include: Fish caught are free from disease and
free from dangerous chemicals?
Does the definition include: Fish caught have firm colored tasty
flesh?
Does the definition include: Fish caught are appropriate for the area
and do not threaten the ecosystem of that area?
Does the definition include: Fish can be caught using lures in
addition to flies?

Please define quality and give me some comparisons. If you want make a
list of places we both know and we'll rank them with an overall
quality score?

This is going to be hard, so get ready. For example any fishery that
does not allow harvest has, by definition, very little quality to an
angler but might be extremely high quality to a sportsman.

Thanks,

Halfordian Golfer