silverfox
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2006
- Messages
- 1,928
in 1983. Since then?If the PFBC does not give "two wet f*cks about brook trout" as you say, why is it that in 1983 they increased the minimum size limit for creeling native brook trout from 6" to 7" after their biologists learned that the fastest growing native brookies were reaching 6" just about the same time as when fishing pressure was highest on native brookie streams; and therefore the fastest growers were getting cropped off in favor of the slow growers? This change was done expressly and specifically to protect native brook trout. Any intelligent angler who fishes for native brookies will tell you that this regulation change made a huge difference in the size of native brookies. I have my fishing data to prove it.
If you don't think the PFBC cares about native brook trout, would you be in favor of changing the minimum size back to 6"?
I do believe there are some folks at PFBC who do care. The stocking authorization should help brook trout. However, just like the 1983 size limit change, it also benefits brown trout and rainbow trout. So it's hardly a brook trout regulation. I liked the analogy someone posted on Facebook. A vehicle code that applies to all vehicles can't be considered an antique vehicle code just because antique vehicles are vehicles.
They may increase the size limit again, and again, it might benefit brook trout more than other species. However, yet again (reinforcing what I said in post #159) they'll apply it to all species. So the only people who realize it's primarily for brook trout are people who understand trout length differences between species and put 2 and 2 together. They just can't quite seem to do anything specifically for brook trout. They don't seem to have any problem doing things explicitly for brown trout though. Their bias keeps getting more and more obvious by the day.