IRISHWATERDOGS | Kayak Fishing Forum | Veterans Kayak Fishing Forum | Kayaking Forum | Camping Forum | Hiking Forum | Photography Forum | Outdoor Forum.

Personally I think they should have left it alone... I'm sure there are a ton of guys who will be chomping at the bit on this. And knowing the wonderful government & governmental agencies that know what's best for all of us, I'm sure they'll say in a couple of years that the reds & trout are in danger... who knows?

Curious what everyone else's opinion is on this one?

Thanks for sharing the info Toney.

I think responsible people will be responsible no matter what. It's like every other law out there ... some follow, some don't. I haven't noticed a shortage of redfish in FL and the surrounding states all have limits higher than ours. I agree with you that it will probably change back at some point and that's ok with me too. Like every other animal out there, if it becomes endangered we should do what we can to protect it; however, if there is a surplus, shouldn't we be able to harvest to feed ourselves too. Personally, I don't always keep what I catch but having fish sometimes is good too. I see the good and bad in this new law but like in everything else in life, let your conscience be your guide. (Getting off the soap box!) LOL

I agree with Tony.

Many people will take FULL advantage of the new regs and the redfish and trout populations will dwindle, and probably quickly. I've been following this issue and the one BIG thing that they never take in account is the fact that inshore fishing, especially kayak fishing, is growing at an incredible rate. Redfish and trout are very easy to catch from our inshore waters. More fishermen will be keeping more fish. It's that simple.

One 24" redfish is quite a lot of meat for most people, and raising the bag limit of trout to 6... 5 isn't enough? How many dink trout and rat reds will people gut-hook trying to get that 6th keeper trout or that 2nd keeper red?

Popular places like Guana Lake and Brown's Creek will take the biggest hit. Lots of people have posted pics of limit catches from Guana Lake. I've fished the lake since I was a little kid and have seen it go through phases of one year of great fishing and then being over fished, followed by several very slow years of poor fishing. People will quit fishing it for a while and the fish population will slowly regain, but it takes quite a few years for the fish to get big.

Dig around a little and you will be shocked at the amount of money this is costing tax payers. The government agencies, lawyers, documentation, etc... all at tax payers expense. They're not doing us any favors. Wasteful and completely unnecessary.

But, I do like the pic of the blonde with the redfish in the Florida Sportsman article. Nice touch.

I was fine with things the way they were, besides i always caught my biggest trout in feburary, its like they knew i couldnt keep them The main thing that no one has even discussed yet is the commercial trout fisherman, you know the guys with the long nets, their catch limit has now been doubled, it is a crime against all of us. This is a good reason for everyone on this site that gives a crap about your rights as a fisherman, to be at the Dec. 6th Recreational Fishing Alliance meeting at Dicks wings on the corner of beach and san pablo, the meet and greet is at 6pm and the meeting starts at 7pm. I hope to see most of you there. Sorry about the rant......

melita, it's ok to get on a soapbox, it's people sharing their opinions that helps to come to better understandings. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, whether it is agreed upon by others or not. It's one of the things that allows us to live in the greatest country on this earth. I agree with your statement about responsible people will be responsible. BUT, unfortunately, most people aren't. While we haven't seen a shortage of redfish, it's still great to be able to go out and catch a slew of fish on just about every trip. My concern is that local places will get hammered by these new regulations, and I think it will only hurt our local fisheries. Me personally, I don't eat fish, I am simply catch & release, but I will keep the occasional flounder or redfish for my parents or in-laws if they ask. I, however, have absolutely no qualms with someone keeping fish to provide dinner for themselves or their family. I think Jim was correct in his assessment of a fat 24" red providing a couple of nice fillets, and 5 trout being plenty.

Charlie is right tho...The bigger issue here is allowing commercial trout fishermen to double their keep on spotted sea trout from 75lbs to 150lbs! That's a travesty in itself!!! What are these idiots thinking??? This is simply another case of those in power (our elected and state officials) being pushed by big business. I guess I suffer from that special disease (common sense-itus). Once again, I think the local recreational fisherman/woman, are getting the proverbial shaft.

Okay, now I'm off my soapbox...

Mudfish wrote:But, I do like the pic of the blonde with the redfish in the Florida Sportsman article. Nice touch.

gotta agree with ya there Jim! good eye!

They should have left it alone. I'm sure they got paid off somehow by big business to up the regs, and to make it seem like they were doing us a favor, they upped the red and trout by a grand total of 1.

But that gives them the opportunity to blame recreational fishermen\women when the comercial people overfish the Trout and accidentally catch and kill Reds in the process.

I think all the points made so far are good ones. I would have liked to see it left alone myself. If the higher stocks of fish are not hurting anything there is no reason in my mind to rise the limit on them. Its not like about 5 years ago when the snow geese where taking out farm field because there was a very tight limit on them for so long, only one per day. Next thing you know you have a limit being lifted.