Quote:
Originally Posted by MathGeek
"Generally speaking, you'll see fewer big fish at first," he said. "It takes four years to grow a big (speckled trout). If we're cropping more fish at a smaller size, then obviously fewer of them will have the chance to get big."
This is the biggest lie in wildlife management today. Fast growth rates are more essential to producing big speckled trout than protecting younger fish. In most Gulf coast estuaries, plenty of speckled trout survive to 4, 5, and 6 years of age. FL and TX produce more fish over 10 lbs, not because of higher survival rates to the older ages, but because of higher growth rates in the estuaries that produce a lot of trophy trout.
If you want more trophy trout, it is more essential to protect their forage base.
|
This article is old first off but MG this is getting real old and I can't bite my tongue much longer. You never had a shred of credibility in my mind but I think u just lost a little more.
Jerald Horst has forgotten more than most of us will ever know about fish, he has written numerous textbooks and other field guides for fishes. This is what he did and still does for a living. I think most people would take the word of a leading
fisheries biologist on any subject regarding fish populations over a physicist pretending to be one. It would behoove you to read a book on principles of ecology (not Wikipedia). Wildlife and fisheries and the mgmt of them is far from an exact science and it's often not just one thing that is the causal agent but a multitude of factors working together. So the use of the word 'proof' or 'proven' or any phrase containing those words are rarely used when dealing with wild animals (although you have used those words repeatedly in your rants). This isn't an exact science like physics.
"This is the biggest lie in wildlife management today". Lord have mercy :*****:
A physicist with all the answers to our fisheries issues. Knows more than the people who wrote the textbooks on the subject haha