Stockies vs. Wild

[Stone_Fly]

Ok so I'm going to guess again, sorry I have to guess at this because I have no statistics to back it up, I'm going to say that about half of the guys on the board fish stocked streams of the rest nearly half fish wild and stocked streams, but a few die hards fish only wild streams.
i'm guessing again becuase as I said I don't have the stats. But I'll say this, it seems we're fairly close to agreeing that wild trout need more protection then they are currently receiving from PFBC. I like the idea of a petition, I don't know if it will go anywhere, but if you like I'll get it up on the web too.
SF

 

[Mike]

OK, I'll bite. Could you be more specific? What concept is it that you really want people to sign onto? Please define protection in the context in which you have used the word.

 

[Stone_Fly]

Protection as used here and elsewhere by me = lower harvest on wild trout streams. When used in conjunction with good conservation practices the 2 could have a significant positive impact on wild trout populations. Protection could mean protection of the riparian zone also, but not in this case. Various forms of protection could be integrated into a sound conservation plan for instance. Though one could argue that the 2 terms mean the same thing when I use the 2 terms they are not the same.

 

[Mike]

I have to tell you that I agree with you regarding your use of the term protection on this board, and I appreciate that you are willing to admit it. Protection on this board has become a euphemism for no-kill, extremely low-kill, or perhaps even "preservation." Conservation, with respect to fish harvest, is generally more liberal and leans toward sustainable yield. When organizations use the term "protect, conserve, and enhance" they don't chose to do so because the first two words mean the same thing. Word smiths in any organization would have a field day with that.

 

[Stone_Fly]

Mike I think you're a member of TU, and they must have seen a difference in the 2 word meanings, because they use the words in ther slogan, To Protect, Conserve and Enhance Wild Trout.....
But TU did make a distinction so I for one maintain the distinction for better or worse.
Look at it this way, There is a little trout stream in your region that we talked about on a few occasions that flows off of Blue Mt. in Berks County, you know the one. It was included in a survey for a few year to determine where the larger fish were. You calculated that there were 85 legal brookies per mile during the summer, but in the early spring they were nearly absent. This is a completely forested drainage on public land, so the conservation is there, but anglers may keep 5 fish a day.
Suppose 2 guys find the stream to their liking and went in there 5 days in a row and kept a limit each time. Now those 85 legal brookies are down to 35 in less then a week. Those fish can't grow bigger now because at 7 inches they became food for a couple of greedy anglers.
Now let's say they tell 1 other angler and he harvest 5 a day for 3 days. This is a stream that can't be saved by itself now it needs protection of some kind.
I hope this explains the diference in how I use the 2 words.