Very interesting p.o.v. here on this volatile subject! Just an idea, only thought about this while reading Don Anderson's last post. Let's just say that we made sure that several stocky ponds close to major populations stayed put & take while several less "accessable" lakes/ponds were deemed minimal stock, special C & R regulation fisheries. The amount of money going toward stocking would theoretically stay the same as is now. Could this not mean that by maintaining the same level of funding into the stocking program but reducing the # of waterbodies to stock, we could effectively increase the # of fish dumped into these remaining put & take fisheries thereby increasing the opportunity for people's kids to have high catch rates at a nearby location all season while giving us trophy hunters more water to ply our trade on?
Obviously I realise that any given waterbody can only sustain so many fish at a time but maybe having the money & hatchery fish available could mean 2 or possibly 3 stockings per put & take waterbody per year instead of just in the spring?
Just my 2 cents
