Fishing regulations = negative evolution

[Agu]

A couple of researchers feel they have evidence that current fishing regulations are having a negative effect on fish populations. In a nutshell, by keeping the big fish and releasing the smaller ones we're depleting the gene pool of the best breeding stock.

Here's the info,

Shrinking Fish



BTW, a long time RC member is in the video .

[GreshamH]

Glad to see others voicing what I've been on about for YEARS. The whole "prize" mentality that DF&G/DNR typically uses, will be the downfall of all our fisheries.

Case and point, Abalone. The prize seekers are the ones taking the ones that produce the most gammets. Me, myself, I take what tastes best, ~8"-9" w/ a deep shell.

Thanks for posting that Agu

[spawner]

Fishing regulations in general, commercial fishing regulations for sure, are not made by scientist, but by the commercial fisherman with a pinch of fisheries research. 90% smoke and mirrors. I guess you like your abalone like I like my Conch, no need to kill anything with tough flesh. Leave the old girls out there to keep it going.

[GreshamH]

[Agu]

Leave the old girls out there to keep it going.

I won't even bring up the world record hammerhead shark caught locally with 52 pups in it............ they just removed the best breeding stock.



ooops, I just brought it up.

[HippieSmell]

I know in some areas of Canada (maybe the entire country) they allow you to keep one large fish if you are going to mount it, otherwise you can only keep fish under a certain size. I have no idea why this isn't more common.

[cewalcott]

AS an avid fisherman as well as nooby aquarist i uderstand the need for harsh laws. being from maryland i have seen a once grand fishery go to the brink and now begin to return. years ago you could see pictures of three guys standing infront of several stringers of rock fish (striped bass). they would be from the size of monsters to fingerlings and number in the hundreds. now they have rules like slot limits,nothing oer this or under that.the same with blue crabs and oysters. my opinion they should shut down the fishery fo a couple years.not sure it would realy help. talk to a bass fisherman big strong fish have big stong babies. catch and relese works. i have seen this done for billfish also.heck you can take a photo and have a mounting made from that.............oh boy am i rambling...sorry

[birdfish]

Marine fishery reserves work. In SoCal the Channel Islands were set aside as a breeding zone with very very strict regulations AND enforcement. IN a short while, it is now being suggested by those studying it that it is restocking all of socal, and maybe parts of norcal too. Making 10% of the RIGHT habitat a preserve will provide fish to catch in the other 90%. Conversely the worldwide filling of wetlands and estuaries that are baby fish growing grounds will be just as critical as the loss of the breeders in the long term survival of species. I thought everyone knew the smaller fish taste best, and have less accumulations of things we don't want to ingest lots of..... I am glad to see the great growth in catch and release fishing, for many species, to keep breeders at it!

But let's face it. Based on mostly industry based figures we fished out the George's Banks off Newfoundland, once considered the endless forests of fishing grounds. Current estimates are that Chilean Sea Bass will be commercially extinct in 3-5 years,
and that poached tonnage is double leagally claimed weight.
Where and what will the industry to/take next? I think all the scientific eveidence is overwhelming that the commercial food fishery operates at an unsustainable level.

There was a recent work published "History of the American Fishery" I think by Mike Weber which showed the decline in plain figures, the industries own figures. It is very interesting, compelling, and frightening. A similar work is "History of the American Whale Fishery", which is painful to read as one who has studied them.

happy fish huntin'!
birdfish

[GreshamH]

"Chilean Sea Bass". I always get a chuckle out that name use, sorry. Doesn't sound as sexy as Toothfish, now does it

No joke about it's commercial extinction though, that's all to true.

[birdfish]

Yeah, Patagonian Toothfish just didn't sell enough of 'em!

But only real fish heads know what your're talking 'bout!

Seems we should know now "DON'T EAT YOUR BREEDERS"
Wasn't there something about a goose that laid golden eggs?


birdfish

[birdfish]

And one more thing.... I just saw this interesting article
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14572158/

which hopefully will work....its about fisheries sustainablility here and now in the U.S.....

birdfish

[GreshamH]

Originally posted by birdfish
Yeah, Patagonian Toothfish just didn't sell enough of 'em!

But only real fish heads know what your're talking 'bout!

Seems we should know now "DON'T EAT YOUR BREEDERS"
Wasn't there something about a goose that laid golden eggs?


birdfish

I dunno, P.T. sounds kinda exotic to me But hey, I like anglers and the likes

"Breeders just taste bad", gotta start the campaign

[Galilean]

Reptile reproduction is the same way. But the laws are backwards because they treat everything like it was a deer. A turtle will keep increasing in reproduction potential at 40, 50, 60 years (maybe indefinitely but the longest studies are only 60 years). Nonetheless it’s legal to take the adults, but illegal to take the baby turtles which are almost certain to die from natural predation before they reach adulthood anyway. If people captured baby turtles and grew them up before releasing them it would help! But the law prevents it.

[Aidos]

A similar situation is occuring in Kangaroo populations in Australia. part of the culling (lowering populations) regulations is to kill the dominate males, allowing younger males to take their position. some scientist argue that this affecting the gene pool, but no studies have been completed on this.
So this studie is excellent and will have wider implications.