Sorry, after reading what I wrote, I wanted to make some changes.
This is what I wrote:

"So, what you are really saying is that you only target the larger species of fish because you can get "more bang for your buck." I do realize that you have a miniscule impact on the local fisheries but what you are doing is selectively targeting "larger" fish species, whatever they may be. This is not an ecologically sound method of fishing either. Fish size should not be an indicator of whether to eat a fish or not, with size limits applicable of course."

This is what I meant to say:

So, what you are really saying is that you only target the larger species of fish (when you want to eat, not for sport) because you can get "more bang for your buck." I do realize that you have a miniscule impact on the local fisheries but what you are doing is selectively targeting "larger" fish species, whatever they may be. This is not an ecologically sound method of fishing either. Average species size should not be an indicator of whether to eat a fish or not, with size limits applicable of course (I'm not saying we should keep large calico bass, I'm referring to "larger" species like yellowtail, white seabass, tuna, etc.)