Quote:
Originally Posted by Duck Butter
dang W, I think you just stumbled up and found your scientific evidence of why a limit reduction may have been warranted  SPR was below the threshold. |
Until we get current SPR or any other approximation of the speckled trout biomass specifically in Big Lake, we won't know.
My GUESS and prediction is that we are not unlike our neighboring states (Tx. and Fla.). I hope I am wrong but habitat loss and degradation (like the feverish oyster reef debate) - which are historical problems in every state will point to less trout numbers - again I hope I am wrong, and this is by no means a scientific opinion based on data.
Since all the data in Louisiana - especially in Big Lake - points to speckled trout being an estuary-specific fishery - then we will have no choice but to expect lower limits - probably statewide. Of course, I expect vehement disagreement. The data is clear regarding Big Lake although someone here may argue there wasn't a large enough "n". There is not a significant number of trout that move into the lake from the Gulf (Tide-runner theory). That inference comes from the electronic tracking studies, previous tagging studies statewide, and research in other states.
If one however can easily and quickly restore habitat and limit degradation - we may have a chance. But remember - - more and more development is expected in Big Lake with the more LNG and other industries. This is good for the area and us humans, but bad for the habitat and resource. Can't have it both ways.
Unfortunately, I foresee the day (I'll probably be dead because I have some years on me) when we'll have "catch and release" practices like Florida and Texas.
In the 500s BC, Heraclitus was the philosopher who said, "You can't step into the same river twice." In this case, substitute "inland saltwater lake."
If anything at all is permanent on this earth - it is change.