Catch and Release Hurts our Quality of Life

Halfordian Golfer wrote:

What is the species? Brook trout in Colorado? This is clearly a
species that would benefit from harvest, as the CDOW has shown in its
increased bag limit.




Actually according to the CDOW, the increased bag limits in these
situations has been ineffective in having any significant impact on
these "stunted" populations or in reducing the number of Brook
Trout in streams where they are trying to reduce their numbers.
(Although it also hasn't hurt)



Willi

Willi wrote:
Halfordian Golfer wrote:

What is the species? Brook trout in Colorado? This is clearly a
species that would benefit from harvest, as the CDOW has shown in its
increased bag limit.




Actually according to the CDOW, the increased bag limits in these
situations has been ineffective in having any significant impact on
these "stunted" populations or in reducing the number of Brook
Trout in streams where they are trying to reduce their numbers.
(Although it also hasn't hurt)



Willi


Not to answer my own question, but what the Colorado DOW found was what
has been found in most places where this was tried. Brook Trout are VERY
prolific breeders in these streams. However, I did find a situation in a
stream in Canada where this strategy had some limited success. In Quirk
Creek they had a concerted effort between Fish and Wildlife and TUC to
target Brook Trout in order to increase the number of native Cutt and
Bull trout. TUC sponsored supervised outings for angler removal of Brook
Trout. In the small area with easy road access, the angling effort over
6? years did reduce the number of big Brook Trout which resulted in some
increase in Cutts and Bull trout. Electroshock removal was also used in
the areas where there wasn't easy road access. It took artificially high
angler hours over 15 times "normal" to have this impact.

Willi

On Mar 24, 8:53 am, Willi wrote:
Willi wrote:
Halfordian Golfer wrote:

What is the species? Brook trout in Colorado? This is clearly a
species that would benefit from harvest, as the CDOW has shown in its
increased bag limit.

Actually according to the CDOW, the increased bag limits in these
situations has been ineffective in having any significant impact on
these "stunted" populations or in reducing the number of Brook
Trout in streams where they are trying to reduce their numbers.
(Although it also hasn't hurt)

Willi

Not to answer my own question, but what the Colorado DOW found was what
has been found in most places where this was tried. Brook Trout are VERY
prolific breeders in these streams. However, I did find a situation in a
stream in Canada where this strategy had some limited success. In Quirk
Creek they had a concerted effort between Fish and Wildlife and TUC to
target Brook Trout in order to increase the number of native Cutt and
Bull trout. TUC sponsored supervised outings for angler removal of Brook
Trout. In the small area with easy road access, the angling effort over
6? years did reduce the number of big Brook Trout which resulted in some
increase in Cutts and Bull trout. Electroshock removal was also used in
the areas where there wasn't easy road access. It took artificially high
angler hours over 15 times "normal" to have this impact.

Willi

What is normal? Pure C&R --- No bag limits?

Tim