re: Would a 10 fish limit on specks be so bad?

quote:

---

stopped fishing for a limit over 15 years ago. 25 just seemed excessive for one person

---

guess it depends on how often you can get to the coast...

quote:

---

man-made climate change science.

---

quote:

---

fake

---

Maybe you're not so bad afterall....

As an aside, you commented previously about trolling cranks for slabs that you didnt think it was applicable for you since you primarily caught blacks. And I'll be dammed if I didnt catch a single black on cranks this summer amidst the whites, op cats, channels, sand bass, saugeye and bass that I did catch on cranks. So I think you're right there. /hijack

quote:

---

noted a decrease in size since the limit was reduced.

---

Sometimes I wonder if I’d catch bigger trout if there weren’t so many small ones there to take my hook. Hmm.

I haven't kept a fish in years. I put em all back....

Agree, but you have too many that think 25 isn't enough

I hear ya, but most of the fisheries I fish are substantial different than the ones you're speaking about. 99.9% of what I fish are coldwater fisheries.

I'm not opposed to keeping/eating fish in the right situations. I just don’t get fish places when keeping enough fish to feed the whole family is an option.

In my job I get to interface pretty closely with the Wildlife guys here. They know their stuff and if they have a reg in place, it's for the good of the resource. I would imagine it's the same everywhere. If the fish cops say 25 fish is ok, then you have to trust them.

Da chucks wrong with you cuz? Lol

You don't believe scientific studies? frick you. You're stupid.

quote:

---

Ok? I know guys that have done similar research on Big Lake, with the same results. I know guides who keep dilligent records of their catch that have noted a decrease in size since the limit was reduced.

Those same guys talk about the trout they used to pull out of Big Lake before the limit was reduced, and how it's rare to see big ones like that anymore.

---

So when I think about this, the only conclusion I can come to is that they waited too long to reduce the number of big fish that can be kept. There's no way a reduced limit is going to reduce the number of big fish.

Guides running trips that target big fish, along with the increased knowledge of how to target big fish by everyday fishermen, has reduced the numbers of big fish. Plain and simple.

I was fishing Big Lake before most of today's fishermen were a twinkle in their daddy's eye. In the late 60's and early 70's, I was taught to get away from a cork and shrimp and throw big fish lures. Most of the lures were freshwater lures back then. You could take 3 to 6 lb trout almost anytime you wanted to put out the effort. Occasionally you caught a 7 or even an 8 in the mix.

At that time, there was a hand full of guys that might be hired as a "guide", so to speak, but there wasn't a full blown guide service on Big Lake. Then Terry Shaunessy opened HR&G and the number of guides and guide services exploded from there, including the Texas guides running trips to BL out of Texas. They caught and kept big fish after big fish, eventually bring about the 2 fish over 25" rule. Too little, too late.

You can still catch some big fish, but the stock has been greatly reduced as your guides records indicate. Not faulting anyone for taking advantage of a great opportunity, just saying it put a hurt on the numbers of big fish.

quote:

---

There's no way a reduced limit is going to reduce the number of big fish.

---

More competition for food is one possible reason that comes to mind, but sure, there is no possible way that leaving more fish would result in smaller fish.