Keith G. and all,
Obviously, we have alot of strong opinions on this. The fact that I said it is something that the Inland Fisheries Div. is "considering" and that we would not institute it before 2007 is not contradictory. The regulation process requires greater than one year to complete. Any regulation change needs to be evaluated, discussed, and then written up for internal and external review. It is a very lengthy process. However, in order to even begin the process the regulation change must first be written up and passed through numerous reviews by our agency, the Attorney General's office and Legislative review and then it goes to public hearings. All of this takes time. This regulation is by no means a "done deal". The earlier everyone knows about potential changes that we are considering, the better the opportunity for dialogue and an exchange of ideas.
One or two other points that I wanted to comment on. First, are there other changes occurring in these locations (weed tratments,reduced forage, introduced exotic species, i.e. zebra mussels in East Twin)? Absolutely, yes. Are they responsible for the lack of holdover trout? I don't believe so, but that is only my opinion. On mortality, Dusty makes a very valid point. The observed, immediate mortality in fish is only the tip of the iceberg. These are the "easy ones" to document, because they are most easily observed. However, for every fish that dies next to the boat, several swim away and die hours to days later. Most fish mortality is due to an accumulation of stress factors. Finding food,avoiding predators, high water temperatures, capture and release, disease etc. all cause stress. The more stress factors that fish are subjected to, over a shorter period of time,
the greater the mortality. Believe me that I am the last person that ever wants to reduce people's ability to go fishing (aside from not being in my best interest professionally, I am also an avid angler)! But, as a fisheries biologist I also consider it my obligation to help educate anglers. If we know stress kills fish and we know (at least in this case) when the greatest amout of stress occurs, than why not try to do something to reduce it? Does it hurt some anglers? Absolutely. It is better for the fish and does it have the potential to make fishing better for everyone...I believe it does. Are anglers willing to make the necessary sacrifices in order to potentially see better angling opportunity for big fish? That part is up to you!