Frustration with 20 year "drought"
In the St. Paul area lakes have been closed as long as 20 years, yet Bios still think the lake is collapsed for walleye? How many generations of fish are needed before a lake can be opened on any basis? According to the Bios, the lakes up there can never be opened. That is the obvious conclusion from their actions.
The Wild Rose MLA for the area did an open house last year and invited the bios to explain themselves. MANY people asked the same question.
Either there were no walleye in the lakes to start with, or some other group was removing all the walleye so the sport fishing closure was irrelevant.
If some other group is removing all the walleye, then what difference will it make if the sport fishermen be allowed to harvest as well?
As such, the reality that there is some other group that continually removes the walleye from these closed lakes means that the resource depletion is occurring regardless of sport fishing regulation, making such sport fishing closures meaningless.
In other words, after 100 years of sport fishing closure on these lakes, there still will be no walleye.
If that is the case, what difference will it make to allow harvest by sport fishermen on these lakes that have been closed for 20 years?
Simply put, the slot size system in Calling Lake is a shining example of allowing initial recruitment, and for the fish that make it past the slot size, continued recruitment. This will spread the sport fishing pressure across more water bodies, and reduce the catch and release hooking mortality that is killing far more fish than any retention of fish ever did.
Drewski
|