05-11-2007, 06:58 PM
PBH, trust me I do understand this. The cutthroat is the ONLY native trout to the entire state of Wyoming just not Labarge Creek. I have spent 200 plus days a year for the last 32 years fishing these waters we are talking about in Wyoming. One thing I have noticed in these waters is that the cutthroat has not only come to low numbers from predidation, but it also was extremely overharvested in the 80's and early 90's. This has allowed all other species to become dominant in these waters.
There is still high mountain waters around here that do not get fished hardly at all because people don't want to put in the effort in to get to them that still have equal numbers of cuts, brooks, and browns without intervention of the Game and Fish. I would be more than willing to take you to these waters someday I think you might be impressed. I do understand your point and I appreciate the discussion. I do think the Game and Fish would have a hard time in finding many people that agree with their philosophy though, at least in the areas that are affected by these management ideas.
Wyoming is most likely doing the only thing they can by being proactive and killing waters and restocking, I won't deny that, but it doesn't mean I have to agree. We got his way by mismanaging the waters many years ago. I also will never be convinced that killing waters to plant fish and then allow a creel limit on those species shortly after is a good thing. I see no difference between killing a fish by keeping it or letting it be prey to another species. Both ways will take fish away from the natural reproduction of the species, and if a species is as close to endangerment as the Cuts are I would want more fish reproducing.
One thing about Wyoming is they seem to manage everything to extremes, and have a hard time finding a happy medium. But this is not always their fault. One thing I hate about living in Wyoming is we have some of the best hunting and fishing areas in the country and at times we have no control of our own resources. Just look at the Wolf reintroduction and the explosion of the Grizzly population both endangered species.
Good conversation PBH it's been enjoyable.
Wyobraz
[signature]
There is still high mountain waters around here that do not get fished hardly at all because people don't want to put in the effort in to get to them that still have equal numbers of cuts, brooks, and browns without intervention of the Game and Fish. I would be more than willing to take you to these waters someday I think you might be impressed. I do understand your point and I appreciate the discussion. I do think the Game and Fish would have a hard time in finding many people that agree with their philosophy though, at least in the areas that are affected by these management ideas.
Wyoming is most likely doing the only thing they can by being proactive and killing waters and restocking, I won't deny that, but it doesn't mean I have to agree. We got his way by mismanaging the waters many years ago. I also will never be convinced that killing waters to plant fish and then allow a creel limit on those species shortly after is a good thing. I see no difference between killing a fish by keeping it or letting it be prey to another species. Both ways will take fish away from the natural reproduction of the species, and if a species is as close to endangerment as the Cuts are I would want more fish reproducing.
One thing about Wyoming is they seem to manage everything to extremes, and have a hard time finding a happy medium. But this is not always their fault. One thing I hate about living in Wyoming is we have some of the best hunting and fishing areas in the country and at times we have no control of our own resources. Just look at the Wolf reintroduction and the explosion of the Grizzly population both endangered species.
Good conversation PBH it's been enjoyable.
Wyobraz
[signature]