As a member in the mid-30's age group I, like JC, am of two minds.

I believe it is OK to have some areas, I guess I would prefer man made lakes, man made ponds and canals (that can be segregated so that the fish can't get out in the adjoining river), stocked with non-native fish for those who'd like to broaden their horizons, and I'd even go so far as to allow the "frankenfish" in those reservoirs (sp?).

When it comes to rivers and natural lakes and natrual ponds, I would say leave them natural and only stock those fish that would be native to those waters in the hopes of reviving them (along with enforcement of restrictions on size and number of fish caught).

On one hand, it would be great to catch wild fish. But then again, why should someone have to fly to the midwest, say, to catch a "red-spotted brook trout" (or insert any real fish in this spot)? Is it really a bad thing to have a local reservoir stock such a fish and allow you to fish there, for a nominal fee to pay for restocking? I would be against it if my state were to stock the local river or a natural lake with such a fish, but I don't see anything wrong with having places specifically meant for fishing for species that are non-native.

[This message has been edited by Gandalf (edited 26 July 2005).]