Parker,

There is no bluff to call here. My point is simply the length of time it takes to replace sturgeon on any river, including the river you caught that fish on (which I am not sure of but was probably a puget sound river). The particular river is not what is relevant, but the time frame to replace the fish, ie how long it takes one of these fish to get to 4-5 feet in length. The exact reason we do not keep oversized fish is becuase they take so long to get there. You want proof of the damage, look up how long it takes a sturgeon to get to this size say it is 12 years to get to 50 inches, it then takes 12 years for that fish to be replaced in that river system, are you saying this is not true? And this, could be more damaging to sturgeon than keeping a big humpy male is to the humpy population. Even if there are ample sturgeon there now, enough harvest occurs and eventually the population will diminish. The reason for the reference to the particular rivers above.

Do you want proof of how long it takes sturgeon to get to certain sizes?

My intention was not to set you off, rather to make a point that what one sees as damaging the other may not, ie you see the humpie thing as damaging, i see the sturgeon thing as damaging. I did not mean to imply that i think you single handedly are depleting a strugeon population.

[ 10-19-2001: Message edited by: Stadle ]