|
Of course I can't find them now, but I've read several articles that were pushing the idea that we are changing the biology (making the adult size smaller due to un-natural selection) of some groundfish that have been agressively fished over the years.
So, the concept of eliminating the biggest breeding fish resulting in smaller adult sized fish isn't foreign by any means.
Also, BassBabe's info is interesting. Her post is implying that a 50# fish's eggs aren't any less viable then a 30# fish, just that her reproductive potential is lower. This by itself contradicts "common knowledge" of striper reproductive nature. While we're questioning things, what is a natural end to a stripers growth? Just because 60's aren't common does that mean they're old? Or are they just uncommon because of all the fishing pressure?
This is good, some real info. I think there is a LOT of misinformation and misconception out there. We should have real facts about the resource so we can be happy with the call to keep a fish or send it back when we're fortunate enough to have a large fish at our feet.
I don't like the idea of some groups making us feel guilty for taking a large fish if there is no reason too, nor that others push the idea that taking them all won't effect the resource. Reality would be good and probably it's a combo of the two.
|
Threaded Mode