Silver,

The numbers of large trout will always decrease fastest, regardless of the reason for any mortality. Even if the cause of death is spread evenly across all age ranges, the larger fish will show more decline simply because to become a larger fish, you have to be a smaller one first.

We all know that some fish die as a result of catch and release. The real question is whether or not catch and release is a sustainable practice, or if limited catch and kill would better benefit the populations. There is division here, simply because anglers have grown more skilled, and catch rates can reach the level where a 5% mortality rate would exceed a daily creel limit.

So, would it be better to require anglers to kill and keep the first two or three fish they catch, then stop fishing, or allow them to catch and release all the fish they want?

In areas of high angler pressure, I beleive that catch and release is the only viable option, but there is debate about it. It really dosn't matter on areas of low angler pressure.

Poaching, on the other hand, is something we'll have to live with unless anglers are willing to get involved with enforcement. Budget constraints at every level of of public service are shrinking the ranks of our wildlife regulations enforcement personnel. You seldom see an officer on lakes or streams anymore.


Buddy