Originally Posted by
bandchaser
Rees, I agree with you.....mostly! But, think about it this way. Say, a fisherman keeps 5 unders, and let's say they are all 10". And the current minimum size is 11".
Now, those 5 unders, if you could not legally keep them, would be returned to the lake. These fish will and have a better opportunity to be in their prime longer than say legal size crappie. These age classes are the bulk of the lakes future population. If you continue to short live your future population, then eventually the overall population is going to decline.
With Lake Washington, this is sadly where we are at. I am not nor claim to be a biologist, but have had several lengthy conversations with our regions state biologist Paul Rister about the topic of increasing KY Lake and Lake Barkley size from 10 to 11". We don't have the growing season that Mississippi has, but we don't keep unders either. The key is balancing regulation with mortality, either natural or thru fishing, and having the wardens there to enforce.
I completely agree with protecting the resource, but it comes a moment in time where all people have to be held accountable including the states DNR. If they are not out doing their end of the bargain, it's not the position of the sportsman to carry on two-fold without being compensated.
Just an outside view looking in. And we all need to get back on the water before be explode this site up with bickering!!
Tight lines guys!!
Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
Likes: 
Thanks: 
HaHa: 
