NGTO Message Board
Welcome to NGTO!
Home ] [ Membership ] [ Donations ] [ Feedback ] [ Stream Reviews ] [ Stream Reports ] [ Maps ] [ Events ] [ Articles ] [ Rules and Regulations ] [ Archives ] Message Board ] FAQ ] [ Hall of Fame ] Sponsors & Supporters ] About ] [ Witticisms ] [ Distinguished Members ]
Welcome to NGTO!

Go Back   NGTO Message Board > Environmental / DNR > Environmental Issues / Conservation
Register Blogs FAQ Members List Calendar Photo Gallery Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-15-15, 08:12 PM   #1
dlcoach77
Native
 
dlcoach77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Sonoraville, GA
Posts: 77
Default interesting article

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/04/11...?_r=1&referrer
__________________
"Three-fourths of the Earth's surface is water, and one-fourth is land. It is quite clear that the good Lord intended us to spend triple the amount of time fishing as taking care of the lawn."

Chuck Clark
dlcoach77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-15, 11:36 PM   #2
The Ole Man
Past Director, Past CFO,
 
The Ole Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: N Georgia
Posts: 9,038
Cool

All I can say is never accept aquatic science findings from a geology professor. Back to your rocks Mr and go catch some wild bluegill if it will make you feel better.
The Ole Man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-15, 09:00 AM   #3
dlcoach77
Native
 
dlcoach77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Sonoraville, GA
Posts: 77
Default interesting article

I'm not agreeing with him, but I never want to dismiss something right from the start. It did make me think about keeping stockers though. I had bought into the idea of catch and release as the primary way to fish and to only keep a few fish a year. This has at least got me interested in learning more and may lead to a change in my approach. I would assume that he is very close to people who would know a great deal about this subject.
__________________
"Three-fourths of the Earth's surface is water, and one-fourth is land. It is quite clear that the good Lord intended us to spend triple the amount of time fishing as taking care of the lawn."

Chuck Clark
dlcoach77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-15, 09:44 AM   #4
JOHNKIES
Hall of Fame Member
 
Join Date: Nov 1998
Location: Laurel Park, NC USA
Posts: 6,122
Default Green Eye Shade On

Let me put my green eye shade on (old time newspaper editors wore those) and take another look at the article. From the standpoint of credentials the author has an advanced degree, but not in fishery science. This does not discount him from knowing a lot about fish and hatcheries, but neither does it qualify him. The author should have told us what the qualifications are to make a very scientific statement. There are a lot of numbers mentioned and while none sound unreasonable, there is no reference to source material. Also, the terms "about" and "I think" rotate this to editorial status, not news or information.

That said, it is something to consider. It would be wonderful to have our fisheries in an all natural state and managed for a sustainable harvest. It's a micro environment, but that is what is going on in GSMNP after years of studies. Is this feasible on a national basis? It could be but too many water ways are interstate so the regulations in one state may not line up with those in next state up or down river. Consider west coast steelhead. If the state of Washington had no steelhead regs and Idaho had all C&R regulations it would be pointless as few if any steelhead would get that far. And yes, commercial fisheries have to be considered in this.

So our author's piece would not make it past me as an editor, certainly not as a news article and marginal at best as editorial. Ask yourself, could you write the same piece with equal credibility?

Eye Shade off and that's -30-
JOHNKIES is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-15, 11:58 AM   #5
fishinbub
Hall of Fame Member
 
fishinbub's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Jefferson, Ga
Posts: 5,194
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Ole Man View Post
All I can say is never accept aquatic science findings from a geology professor. Back to your rocks Mr and go catch some wild bluegill if it will make you feel better.
x2. He should stick with rocks...aquatic ecology is not his cup of tea.
__________________
The first thing scripture tells us about man is that we're made in the image of God. The second thing it says is that man should have dominion over the fishes of the sea.

The right flies at the right time: Monthly Fly
fishinbub is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-15, 01:55 PM   #6
fishinbub
Hall of Fame Member
 
fishinbub's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Jefferson, Ga
Posts: 5,194
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason View Post
I'd love for either of you to go point by point and explain where he is wrong.
I would, but I simply can't refute the indisputable truth that the Burton Trout Hatchery is causing "dead zones" that are "choking estuaries and coastal ecosystems downstream." You got me...
__________________
The first thing scripture tells us about man is that we're made in the image of God. The second thing it says is that man should have dominion over the fishes of the sea.

The right flies at the right time: Monthly Fly
fishinbub is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-15, 02:12 PM   #7
fishinbub
Hall of Fame Member
 
fishinbub's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Jefferson, Ga
Posts: 5,194
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason View Post
So as a sophomore at a North Georgia junior college you're pretty sure he's wrong because you say so?
Yes, that is exactly why he is wrong...
__________________
The first thing scripture tells us about man is that we're made in the image of God. The second thing it says is that man should have dominion over the fishes of the sea.

The right flies at the right time: Monthly Fly
fishinbub is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-15, 02:28 PM   #8
Trout8myfly
Past Director, Hall of Fame Member
 
Trout8myfly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Johns Creek, GA
Posts: 6,980
Default

Made me think his theory could be tested at the local hatcheries. Examine oxygen concentrations, conduct chemical analysis of downstream waters, etc. and assess if the hatcheries impact the local ecosystem. Or does the state do this already? Would like to see some hard data from this fellow. Or something peer-reviewed.
__________________
"What's his offense?"
"Groping for trouts in a peculiar river."
― William Shakespeare, Measure for Measure
Trout8myfly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-15, 03:15 PM   #9
Speck
Hall of Fame Member, Moderator
 
Speck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1998
Location: Brockton (Jackson County), GA
Posts: 2,496
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason View Post
So as a sophomore at a North Georgia junior college you're pretty sure he's wrong because you say so?
Actually he's a senior environmental science major at a private 4-year college who just recently presented a great capstone project which studied the benefits of in-stream structures for native brook trout.

And yes, I'm biased but that doesn't prove my statement false.
__________________
Speck

Follower of Christ
Pursuer of trout
-------------------------------------------------
"Your genuine action will explain itself and will explain your other genuine actions. Your conformity explains nothing." -- Emerson
Speck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-15, 04:03 PM   #10
The Ole Man
Past Director, Past CFO,
 
The Ole Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: N Georgia
Posts: 9,038
Default

This fellows use of "may", "I estimate", "about" and "I think" belies a deficient foundational scientific basis. He begins by defining 8 million trout and salmon anglers in a nation of 330 million people as "immense" fishing pressure. Then he tries to blame the unsustainable use of small ocean fish on the production of trout pellets. I estimate (he did it) that the use of fish oil and fish meal for stocker-trout pellet production is a miniscule amount compared to the amount used for liquid fish fertilizer (which organic farmers have discovered); for catfish, tilapia and other edible fish aquaculture and for the biggie--chicken/turkey/poultry and other animal feeds. He calls trout pellet production "devastating marine species to support a hobby". His notion of waste having uneaten pellets in a hatchery is laughable. From my observation no pellet goes uneaten and if anything there is barely enough to go around. The dead and dying fish going into the waste water dump would be illegal. Georgia and I imagine most states have laws and regs regarding disposal of dead animals including fish. Buford Hatchery used to compost dead fish and probably still do so. I believe the fish pond at Buford is a settling pond for waste prior to a river dump--not sure. All hatchery fish trace their ancestry to wild brood stock so how are they born poorly adapted to life in the wild ? Are animals and humans born of artificial insemination born poorly adapted to life on earth? Do they have undesirable traits that they pass on to the natural born? If studies show that 75 to 80% of stocked fish (as he says) are gone soon after stocking then one could surmise that close to 100% are also gone shortly after that. So how do they hang around to harm the native species? I could go on but I tire of hunt and peck typing. I will leave the rest for fishnbub. I don't know about other states but without hatchery support trout fishing would be a small niche pastime conducted in the high hills of North Georgia.
The Ole Man is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:48 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vB.Sponsors
Copyright 2010 - North Georgia Trout Online - All Rights Reserved