Oh look, Heckle and Jeckle are talking to themselves again.
The thread is about the raising the minimum size of harvestable trout, not catch and release. But you don't care what the thread is about as long as you make it about brook trout.
Lol so a logical alternative to the minimum size not allowed to be mentioned. Thanks moderator, how many warnings to remember to censor my own speech relevant to threads do I have left. You make everything in threads about “trout “ its probably like 3/4rths of the discussion on this forum. Is the fact that I brong up one of two common species THAT surprisingly to you when it has the conservation priority. You would not be having a fit if I was crying out for protecting big invasive brown trout
Oh look, Heckle and Jeckle are talking to themselves again.
The thread is about the raising the minimum size of harvestable trout, not catch and release. But you don't care what the thread is about as long as you make it about brook trout.
"The vast majority of the wild brook trout in the state are under 9 inches.
“We’re going to look at data that supports an 8-inch limit and data that would inform a decision on 8 and 9 inches,” Kuhn said. If the minimum size is changed to 9, most wild brook would be catch and release."
🤷
People should read the article if they care to discuss it or what people are discussing because the article was posted.
"The vast majority of the wild brook trout in the state are under 9 inches.
“We’re going to look at data that supports an 8-inch limit and data that would inform a decision on 8 and 9 inches,” Kuhn said. If the minimum size is changed to 9, most wild brook would be catch and release."
🤷
People should read the article if they care to discuss it or what people are discussing because the article was posted.
If they did anything like that in PA it would be brown trout (or rainbows) and a whole lot of sensitive anglers would lose their collective minds over it. Good internet fodder to paint the species as being so resilient they’re not worth worrying about though.
This is called the invasive native paradox there is a whole paper on it. When you take something outside of its natural range where it evolved nothing there has evolved a defense specifically against it. You realize silverfox and I support invasive brook trout removal right? Like if were on Wyoming fly fish.com wed be having invasive brook trout fish fries (state would actually let us do it instead of protecting invasive trout like PA).
This is called the invasive native paradox there is a whole paper on it. When you take something outside of its natural range where it evolved nothing there has evolved a defense specifically against it. You realize silverfox and I support invasive brook trout removal right? Like if were on Wyoming fly fish.com wed be having invasive brook trout fish fries (state would actually let us do it instead of protecting invasive trout like PA).
I still think if we had a few areas in PA managed by the National Park Service things might be different in PA. I bet the state would approach these subjects completely differently if there was another gov entity leading the way. That seems to be the case in a few other states.
MFWP is helping USFWS and NPS on the buffalo creek reclamation. Or at least they’re promoting it as a good approach.
It's quite a stretch to assume you even have a brain. The way you post incessantly about the same thing tell me all you have is a soapbox and an atty-tude as they say in Philly.
It's quite a stretch to assume you even have a brain. The way you post incessantly about the same thing tell me all you have is a soapbox and an atty-tude as they say in Philly.
If this was something I was insecure about I would not be making jokes about crapping my brains out from chipotle while insults are continuing to be hurled.
