Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456
Results 51 to 56 of 56

Thread: Goloden Trout

  1. #51
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    the Lost Sierra
    Posts
    750

    Default

    Curtis applied for the new position as R-3 Fisheries Program Manager. He hit the ground running and gave a whiz bang Powerpoint presentation asking ranchers to donate some water during the coho run. He' never been afraid of walking into hornet's nest!

    http://www.siskiyoudaily.com/feature...andowners-help

  2. #52
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Benicia, Ca
    Posts
    134

  3. #53
    Mike O Guest

    Default

    gotta say...9 day backpack trip...I would eat a few freshies if legal.

  4. #54
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Sacramento
    Posts
    8

    Exclamation CDFG vs NPS re: trout removal

    Anglers should be aware that CDFG is currently conducting very few trout removal efforts in the high country. Most of these are based in relation to historical and ongoing frog restoration efforts in concert with directed fishery managment to allow fishing.

    The National Park Service on the other hand is currently removing trout at a much larger scale in the various parks. Each park is different in the scale and approach, however anglers should know the "policy" of the NPS is not to support planting of trout or wild trout fisheries above app. 6000 feet and are activly removing/eradicating HML wild trout fisheries regardless of the direct benefit to recovering the frogs.

  5. #55
    Mike O Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Native Trout View Post
    Anglers should be aware that CDFG is currently conducting very few trout removal efforts in the high country. Most of these are based in relation to historical and ongoing frog restoration efforts in concert with directed fishery managment to allow fishing.

    The National Park Service on the other hand is currently removing trout at a much larger scale in the various parks. Each park is different in the scale and approach, however anglers should know the "policy" of the NPS is not to support planting of trout or wild trout fisheries above app. 6000 feet and are activly removing/eradicating HML wild trout fisheries regardless of the direct benefit to recovering the frogs.
    Is this a problem? "Wild" fisheries shouldn't need plants and those not wild shouldn't be there anyway, right? So, for any environmentally conscious person...what's the problem?

  6. #56
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Sacramento
    Posts
    8

    Default Is there a problem houston?

    I guess if you don't mind the concept of zero wild trout fisheries above 6000 feet elevation in the National Parks of California, there probably isn't a problem....not sure if everyone feels the same way....balancing all types of recreational use in the parks and how it may impact conservation of the landscape/ecosystem and longstanding beneficial uses is the challenge.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •