![The_Sasquatch](/data/avatars/m/5/5329.jpg?1701910553)
The_Sasquatch
Well-known member
mt_flyfisher wrote:
I am a PA resident, but I have spent the past 16 summers in MT. I am located on the banks of the Yellowstone River in Paradise Valley, 35 miles north of Yellowstone National Park, and I fish many, if not most, of the better known rivers in this part of the world, including ones in Wyoming and Idaho, in addition to MT.
Over my years of being here, I have gained much respect for Montana's Fish, Wildlife and Park's organization in taking a proactive stance to protect and enhance the state's fisheries, and other natural resources, not just for those of us who are here today, but to ensure they will be here for future generations as well.
After reading this PFBC article on stream closures, in context with my experiences here in Montana, I believe PA have really missed the mark.
"...PFBC staff believe this may result in angler frustration with trying to determine when and where they may go fishing..."
C'mon guys. People aren't that stupid. You develop a policy that is aimed at protecting the fishery. You communicate that policy. When stream flows get too low, and/or temperatures get too high, you shut down the fishing. You communicate the shutdowns, and the vast majority of people will understand, RESPECT the reasons for the shutdown, and comply with it.
Worrying about how to enforce a policy should be way down on the list, if on the list at all, in the decision process of when actions should be taken to protect the fishery.
Incidentally, I'm sure most of you know by now that nearly 180 miles of the Yellowstone River, including all of its tributaries here in MT has recently been closed to all recreation, including fishing, because of a massive kill of whitefish by a parasite. This action is unprecedented in the state's history, has a MAJOR economic impact on hundreds, and perhaps thousands, of people whose income is derived from this river.
Earlier this past week, i attended a meeting in Livingston, MT, with state FWP personnel, and 300 others to discuss this shutdown. Many people at this meeting are now unemployed as a result of this shutdown, and some of them will loose their entire businesses as a result. However, I have not heard a single person disagree with the river closure, and other than questions regarding when the river might reopen (which is unknown at this time), I don't have any sense that this action has resulted in "angler frustration with trying to determine when and where they might go fishing."
Let's try to do what's right for the fish. In the long run, that's what will be right for the fishermen.
John
Well said, John. No doubt, it'll be met w/ the geographically obvious statement, "PA is not Montana..." as if what's right for trout is somehow different due to geography. Stocking over wild trout populations was detrimental to wild trout in Montana, but PA wild trout can handle it! Fishing for trout in low, warm conditions is bad for trout in Montana, but not for wild trout in PA!
you're right. Most of the angling community will respect the law and comply. And such closers will 1-educate the public who may be unaware that such conditions are bad for trout and 2-communicate that the Fish Commission actually does respect and care about wild trout populations, even at the expense of the "angler's experience".
Come on Fish Commission. RESOURCE FIRST! Why are you kicking against your own mission statement?