|
it causes genetic deterioration through the introduction of diseased, stressed, and genetically inferior fish that compete with healthier and more genetically diverse native populations. so its more important to NOT stock the native fish if there are in fact any left. the only environmentally sound approach is a total moratorium on fishing and stocking.
and, rob, all legal/administrative arguments are outcome based. so, given that the conclusions are fundamentally biased and drive the analysis, its no surprise that every portion of the analysis will be problematic. i wouldn't discourage your ad nauseum critique, but, the solution is political. as i've suggested here in the past its time to join forces with other user groups that have been discriminated against, and environmental organizations. systematically document the impact of fishermen (to begin with on the native brook trout population) and bring a citizen's suit against the NFS on the basis of these environmental impacts to fish stock, and other riparian flora and fauna. its intolerable to allow the user group that causes the greatest environmental impact to beat up other groups, with the complicity of the NFS, about their trivial environmental impact. trout fishing practices have destroyed native trout populations in every corner of the country. |
|
stocking is bad for wild fish populations New 
BoaterTalk 
