![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sep 6, 7:19 am, "Wolfgang" wrote:
"Halfordian Golfer" wrote in message ups.com... From: http://www.9news.com/news/local/arti...?storyid=76773 DENVER (AP) - A study led by University of Colorado researchers says an effort to restore the endangered greenback cutthroat trout has been using the wrong fish for two decades. That a mistake like this is even possible invites the question of whether the distinction between the two varieties is large enough and important enough to get excited about. With ever more powerful and discriminating analytical tools and protocols becoming available at a bewildering pace, we are fast approaching.....in fact, we have already arrived at.....a point where arguing about the validity of these distinctions becomes impossibly complex......and inevitable. If the genome of the greenback cutthroat is worth saving, well then, why not the genome of the trout (of whatever species) of a particular watershed which, I can assure you, is different from that in the next one over? At what point does the difference become critical? Reductio ad absurdum.......the genetic makeup of each and every fish is unique and thus must be conserved. The trouble is that with today's technology there is nothing fundamentally absurd about the proposition of characterising the genome of each individual fish. That's the eternal prolem with reification. (snip) .sigh Get over yourself. Hard as it must be for everyone to believe, this really isn't about you. Wolfgang Let me be clear, Wolfman, the .sig is for you sweetums. OBROFF: I guess there's a lot of old history in the greenback recovery program including professors that could not be bothered with it at a time where it could have made a material difference in the recovery. It's really a fascinating story. That said, at about the same time, the current wisdom foisted upon flyfisherpeople in general was the notion that 'hatcheries were bad'. The flyfishing community in particular has been ignorant of the critical role they play and even the role of stocking catchable non-indigenous species that sell licenses and pay for research. The ignorance continues but issues such as this and the importance of research on other diseases such as WD and BKD and advancements in the role of the hatchery far outweigh any negative affects. My personal feeling is the anti-hatchery sentiment grew from magazine publishers and flyfishing equipment manufacturers and retailers that equated the issues of hatchery steelhead with the fisheries of Colorado. It is a fact that over 90% of still water in Colorado would be devoid of fish completely if it were not for the hatcheries. While catch and release contributes to the economy in some cases, the flagrant anti-conservation attitudes of some, under the false ruse of ecology, continue. The 7 castles mud slide and water release issues from the Pan come immediately to mind. If you're concerned about cutthroat trout in Colorado, come on out and bonk a brookie or a rainbow. These are the real threats. TBone A cash flow runs through it |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
you got the wrong fish | Halfordian Golfer | Fly Fishing | 18 | September 12th, 2007 01:49 PM |
Live bait to bass fish with. Right or Wrong? | Me[_2_] | Fishing Photos | 10 | April 9th, 2007 02:12 PM |
Bets Gone Wrong | Alwaysfishking | Bass Fishing | 6 | August 23rd, 2006 01:19 PM |
What's wrong with this picture? | Conan The Librarian | Fly Fishing | 32 | November 7th, 2005 12:57 PM |
what did i do wrong? | snakefiddler | Fly Fishing | 17 | July 31st, 2004 02:38 AM |