Fish populations exploited by Man have been traditionally managed via fishing zones or seasons established within the confines and constraints of jurisdictional boundaries. Unfortunately, for some odd reason, fish pay scant attention to maps... Sub-populations within a given species that have seperate and distinct spawning sites and consequent genetics are classified as demes;they may individually possess altered growth and reproductive capacities, as well as numeric abundance, but mix and move as an amalgam of the total fish stock during the interval where they are exposed to exploitation via a commercial or sport fishery. Obviously, this increases the risk of overexploitation of those demes that are under represented in the total stock, since their removal rate as a fishery catch component may be disproportionately high relative to total stock numbers. Sadly, since many of the fishery catch statistics(stock recruitment models, catch at age stock composition models, etc.) assessment models employ data gathered within these arbitrarilly designated assessment zones, which in many cases have somewhere between limited and zero relavance to what is actually happening to the fish stock within a vast water body like Chesapeake Bay...or an individual Great Lake. Sadly, many fish and game management agencies are very "hidebound" preferring to cling to a invalid paradigm. You have to scratch your head when you consider that Man is one of the most highly adaptive critters on this planet, yet he is also one of the most resistant to change...
Last edited: