File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
Hey /an/,
My father and I just went fishing for fluke. The standard nowadays for "keepers" is ridiculously high. Its like, 16 inches. Almost none of the people on the boat got to keep any of their catch because they were a few inches or half inches off. Probably the worst fishing trip ever. To put it in perspective, out of the 30 or 40 people who went fishing on our boat, only 6 actually brought home 1 fish each. Pretty sad, right? Also, the fish were hardly biting either. I personally only caught three or four fish while out there for eight hours. Is anybody else having such problems with their fishing? And also, I pose a question:

If this happens on a regular basis, will the size for the fluke you can keep decrease?
>> Anonymous
Wouldn't that kind of defeat the purpose?
>> Anonymous
>>142813
Well, if you view it in my perspective...if people don't get to keep anything when they go out fishing, they're not going to want to go because its a waste of say 50 or 60 bucks. And if nobody goes, business goes down. So what option is left?
>> Anonymous
And business will be booming once the young population is all fished out before it can breed.
>> Anonymous
>>142815
Point taken.
>> Anonymous
it's not about an industry, it's about keeping the lake's ecosystem intact. i would go fishing all the time as a kid and it was just for fun, we never kept anything, even when we caught huge rainbow trout, we didn't actually like eating fish so we'd let them go. it's a bonding experience and it's nice to be out on the water...

if you want a big fish then buy a big fish.
>> Anonymous
The problem is that in heavily populated areas the rivers/lakes tend to be overfished.
In fact, around here where I live the fishing clubs have to put IN young fish every year to keep the ecosystem somewhat intact.
That's expensive, since they have to buy these from breeders.
>> Anonymous
Depending on the vigilance of the rangers and such, you could get away with poaching a handful of specimens a little off.
>> Anonymous
>>142812
To address your actual question:
Suppose that we get to keep any fish that we catch that's over 16 inches, and this practice goes on consistantly and regularly for hundreds of years. The truth is that after such long period of time there will be NO fishes over 16 inches at all, because all the fish with the gene that allow them to gro to 16 inches are taken out of the gene pool. All that's left are fish who's genetically unable to grow to 16 inches.
>> Anonymous
>>142836
That's not true, Evolution is a lie
>> Core !JD2r9bRTlg
>>142824

Same here, except it's the state I believe that does it..

Although in my opinion it doesn't do any good.

The only time I have had luck when fishing, is when I avoid going to a lake, and instead go to a private pond. By private I mean one of those ponds..where you have to go through a lot of weeds, briar's and poison oak.
>> Anonymous
>>142836
thats not really how the genetics in fish growth work. plus the fact that fish growth is more continuous throughout their life time and depends more on available nutrition and other environmental factors. size restrictions are not made on a whim, lots of research goes into it.
>> Anonymous
>>143647
Actually, it is. Fishing for a certain size of fish has already changed populations of fish, including Atlantic cod, so that they mature at a smaller size, while other fishes don't even reach the catch limit anymore. It's (un)natural selection at it's purest and simplest.