View Single Post
Old 09-13-2005, 09:02 PM   #8
madscientist
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,906
The only argument I can see for the "wait till they breed once" idea is preservation of genetic diversity, which is only likely to be an issue with species that really stay put (perhaps like calico). Otherwise, the issue is total breeding versus meat taken. Since I think most fish breed exponentially more the older they get, a big old heavy fish is worth many times its equivalent weight in dinks, thus the notion of a slot limit to preserve the big fish. The rationale for the lower end of the size limit is typically to keep total tonnage killed down. For instance, back east I could catch schoolie stripers like crazy, but in the bays a keeper (28") was more rare. If the size limit had been 24" I could have kept probably 7 times the number of fish that I could at 28", thus reducing the potential fish kill dramatically. However, if I was going to take one fish per week and had a roughly equal chance of catching at least one 28" as one 24", then it would seem to be better to keep the little guy.

Is this a weird year for the YT, in that most of the fish have been on the bigger side? If I/we could consistently go out and hammer rats, then I could see a concern, but my experience has been quite the opposite, and as such I don't feel bad taking those sweet little hamachi home for dinner (even if Ken makes fun of me). Heck, it's better than having to eat my bait :P .
madscientist is offline   Reply With Quote