|
|
Post by williegunn on May 26, 2007 19:54:34 GMT
Guys,interesting reading...but you could make it easier to read by not using the full width of page  Blame Jock, his lovely photos expand the page and the text expands to fill the available space. |
|
|
|
Post by splash on May 26, 2007 20:03:37 GMT
Guys,interesting reading...but you could make it easier to read by not using the full width of page Blame Jock, his lovely photos expand the page and the text expands to fill the available space. FYI before you post to Photobucket etc, you might find the following from a digital photography and fishing addict of interest www.capnfishy.co.uk/resources/digiphot.htm |
|
|
|
Post by altmor on Jun 3, 2007 11:47:10 GMT
That is the Spey as a whole, some beats are better than others and I am not suggesting that the association waters are any worse or better than the private beats. Thanks WG, I noticed the website quotes 71% salmon and 49% sea trout returned for the river in 2006 although in glass half empty mode you could argue that based on these 2006 returns its circa 4000 salmon and 1800 seat trout chapped which kinda makes you wonder how much things would improve with 100% C&R? cheers Splash If the stats I've heard on the number of returning fish between 3 - 5 yrs from original spawning, and assuming half of the 4000 salmon are hens (bold and unsubstantiated assumption perhaps), that could mean an additional 6000 fish entering the river to spawn again. 5 years of this compound effect with C&R would surely help sustainability. |
|
