Slot limit

[WayneChristie]

Are you in favour of having a slot limit on game fish size in Alberta, and if you are, would you sign a petition to have this adopted by SRD ?

:party0051:

[npauls]

I am still up in the air at the best way to regulate our waters here in Alberta.

I have been told good points and bad points about a slot size.

I think the SRD has alot of research to be done before anything is change to drastically.

We have the highest fishermen/women per capita in Canada so our waters see quite a bit of pressure compared to many other places in the country.

Its a tough call to me on what should be done but I do think that something does have to change.

[gor]

keeping big spawning fish makes no sense, why is this so clear to a non educated person, but the guys in charge cant see it. can somebody explain why the guys keeping those big spawning mama's is good for our fishing future. not to mention the smaller fish taste better if you are after a feed. I have not kept a fish in years other than stocked trout or from our perch pond.
A picture last forever, a fillet about twelve hours.

[BeeGuy]

I didn't vote as I found the options a little too vague.

I like and support slot limits. I have seen many fisheries where this was a success.

The typical rules that I like for EXAMPLE on walleye:

keep 2 total between 40-45cm, and 1 over 75.

This allows larger reproductive fish (45-75cm) to breed and enables a high recruitment of juveniles. As well, it makes for a fun C&R fishery.

1 over 75cm enables trophy hunters to pick-off the elderly fish which have bred for many years.


I like these types of slots, and have witnessed many fisheries rebound during the late 90's and early 2000's with their introduction.


Part of my issue with the poll is that every fishery is unique. Species, productivity, habitat quality, fishing pressure etc.

All of these things and others need to be acknowledged when defining the slot limit. 2 fish retention may not be sustainable in some places etc

ca-ching $0.02

[MathewsArcher]

With the fishing pressure we see in Alberta how many fish would actually make it through the slot to reach maturity and spawn?

If all or most of the large fish are being caught now wouldn't they just be caught at a smaller size and never even make it to maturity and spawn.

No sure if a slot would work here given all the pressure most of our lake receive.

[BeeGuy]

With the fishing pressure we see in Alberta how many fish would actually make it through the slot to reach maturity and spawn?

If all or most of the large fish are being caught now wouldn't they just be caught at a smaller size and never even make it to maturity and spawn.

No sure if a slot would work here given all the pressure most of our lake receive.

Can you suggest an alternative?

We could definitely use more data. That is for sure.

[Justin.C]

With the fishing pressure we see in Alberta how many fish would actually make it through the slot to reach maturity and spawn?

If all or most of the large fish are being caught now wouldn't they just be caught at a smaller size and never even make it to maturity and spawn.

No sure if a slot would work here given all the pressure most of our lake receive.I think that this would work on some lake and not others.. But I would like to try it and see...

[MathewsArcher]

Can you suggest an alternative?

We could definitely use more data. That is for sure.

Wish I could, but I don't have a solution if we want to continue harvesting the resource. Unfortunately Alberta is blessed with a large population and a lack of water. Catch and Release and the tag system seem to be the way of the future for many waters.

[npauls]

I would support a tag system if the money from buying the tags went back into helping fisheries only. As of right now it doesn't as far as I know and that is part of the reason I won't buy a tag for any lakes.

[Gust]

This is from 98


The Province of Alberta began its new walleye management strategy in 1996. Waterbodies across the province were classified into one of four walleye management categories. In southern Alberta, all waterbodies were classified into one of two categories, which are collapsed/newly stocked or vulnerable. Reservoirs and lakes in the first category have a zero catch limit (catch and release) while waterbodies in the vulnerable category have a maximum possession of three walleye, all over 50 cm. The majority of southern Alberta reservoirs were stocked with walleye from 1990-1993. In response, an inventory and assessment of 11 reservoirs was undertaken in 1996, 1997, and 1998 to determine the effect of the regulation change and to evaluate the walleye stockings. A secondary purpose was to determine overall fish community structure in the reservoirs. The main sampling method was beach seining and the secondary method was gill netting.

In addition, three test-angling days were held at three reservoirs. The reservoirs were Milk River Ridge, Crawling Valley, and McGregor Lake. For Milk River Ridge, members of Lethbridge Fish and Game were invited to angle for walleye. Anglers caught the walleye and held them until Alberta Conservation Association staff arrived to transfer the fish to the ACA boat for sampling. Sampling involved taking the length, weight, and a pelvic fin for ageing.

There were 33 anglers from Lethbridge Fish and Game participating in the test-angling fishery. They caught 228 walleye and 17 northern pike in 169 hours of fishing. This resulted in an overall catch rate of 1.35 walleye per hour, and 0.10 northern pike per hour. The northern pike catch rate is misleading in that anglers were targeting walleye, and you catch walleye at different locations in the reservoir than you do pike. For comparison, the catch rate for walleye in Crawling Valley was 1.64 fish per hour and was 0.78 walleye per hour at McGregor Lake.

The majority (70%) of the measured walleye were age 4, which corresponds to the 1994 stocking of 2.5 million walleye fry. The next most common age class (22%) caught by anglers was age 7, which corresponded to the 1991 stocking of 100,000 walleye fry. Walleye fry were only stocked in 1994 and 1991, so the results show that 92% of the fish caught by angling were the result of stockings.

What percentage of the walleye could have been kept if Ridge Reservoir was a vulnerable fishery, instead of a catch-and–release fishery? Our calculations show that only 12% would have been considered legal. Most of the walleye caught were between 33 – 38 cm (13 – 15 inches).

There is evidence of natural recruitment of walleye in Milk River Ridge Reservoir. The highest recruitment rates in southern Alberta were found at Crawling Valley and Keho reservoirs. Ridge Reservoir ranked 6th out of 11, which was similar to Sherburne and Travers reservoirs.

According to Alberta's Walleye Management and Recovery Plan, changes to the management status category (e.g., from collapsed to vulnerable) will be based on five biological characteristics. These are: age-class distribution, age-class stability, growth, age-at-maturity, and catch rate. Growth, age-at-maturity and catch rate meet the criteria for changing the status categories, however, the age-class distribution and age-class stability do not. The walleye stock in Milk River Ridge Reservoir is based almost exclusively on the stockings of the early 1990s. Harvesting these stocked fish before they have an opportunity to reproduce will lead to another collapse of the walleye fishery. The age 7 walleye are reproducing now (that is why we find young-of-the-year walleye) and the age 4 walleye will begin spawning over the next two years. In order to change the category we need to have biological evidence that the current young-of-the-year survive, reach sexual maturity, and spawn successfully.

All of the biological characteristics needed to change Ridge Reservoir from newly stocked to vulnerable category are not present now, and the evidence will likely not be present for the next few years. It takes time to build up a walleye stock, whereas over-harvesting can collapse a fishery within a year or two. If anglers wish a self-sustaining walleye fishery, then they must have patience to wait for the walleye population to recover.

If you wish more information on the walleye studies, please contact Trevor Council at 382-4354 or write to Alberta Conservation Association, 2nd Floor YPM Place, 530 – 8 Street S., Lethbridge, AB, T1J 2J8. For information on the management of walleye populations in southern Alberta, please contact the Natural Resources Services' offices in either Lethbridge (382-4358) or Brooks (362-1232).

December 1998

[Justin.C]

Wish I could, but I don't have a solution if we want to continue harvesting the resource. Unfortunately Alberta is blessed with a large population and a lack of water. Catch and Release and the tag system seem to be the way of the future for many waters.The problem is that tag system is a cash grab... We pay for a licence and then pay for a tag.... Why dont I go to safeway.... Way cheeper after you figure out all costs... How about we stop all comercial fishing....that will leave a whole bunch of fish for us....

[Stewie]

Rather see a slot limit size... I understand that some like to keep fish to eat and thats fine with me... I do it myself from time to time... but dont understand why in order to keep a fish it has to be over a certain length... they dont taste as good as a smaller fish and why keep a huge breeding female... for me, when I catch a big one a picture is all I want, let someone else have the same opportunity to catch a trohpy fish and let her breed so other generations can have the fun we all have now...

[HunterDave]

The way that I see it is that we already have a slot size limit in Alberta with the tag system. It does put a cap on the number of fish potentially removed however it also stipulates the size of the fish that can be taken out. Up this way they opened Isle Lake, Lac Ste Anne and Lac Lanonne this year to a slot size limit tag system. Unfortunately, Isle Lake winter killed so we have to start from scratch with that one again. However, Lac Ste Anne had a 0 - 43 cm and a 43 - 50 cm slot size limit and I believe that Lac Lanonne's was 0 - 43 cm.

To answer the OP's question......absolutely we should have a slot sized limit in Alberta waterways IF the bodies of water can support it.

[npauls]

The problem is that tag system is a cash grab... We pay for a licence and then pay for a tag.... Why dont I go to safeway.... Way cheeper after you figure out all costs... How about we stop all comercial fishing....that will leave a whole bunch of fish for us....

Like I mentioned earlier. It is a cash grab as of right now but would you support a tag system if you could get more tags to harvest fish through out the year and all the funds from buying the tags goes right back into supporting fisheries instead of lining the pockets of politicians?

It would be similar to the tag system for hunting but you could buy more tags then you can for hunting. It isn't ideal but I think it would help fisheries funding a ton and people could still keep some fish.

[brohymn2]

id support the slot size, does anyone know if its effective in calling lake?

[Justin.C]

Like I mentioned earlier. It is a cash grab as of right now but would you support a tag system if you could get more tags to harvest fish through out the year and all the funds from buying the tags goes right back into supporting fisheries instead of lining the pockets of politicians?

It would be similar to the tag system for hunting but you could buy more tags then you can for hunting. It isn't ideal but I think it would help fisheries funding a ton and people could still keep some fish.The problem is that is DOES NOT go back in to anything it goes in to a general revenue account and then the finace minister makes more cuts to our environment.... No thanks. If they had tags that did not cost extra over and above the $3 draw app I might be in on that but I think we need to be varey careful on this one as it is almost better to go to Sask or BC and pay way more to fish and have real fun and can keep something if we want as they have more water and way better managment to have a great fishery.


Hey by the way I am not knocking your Idea. I am just not willing to pay way more money to give more$$$ to a polititions pention... I like the fact you are trying to come up with a plan or some ideas to better it in AB...

[Black Stim]

I would sign a petition that bans people from asking questions like "Are you in favour of having a slot limit on game fish size in Alberta, and if you are, would you sign a petition to have this adopted by SRD?" based on no site specific context or information related to the fishery.

Heck, it works in Saskatchewan, why not here? Definitely no immediate differences come to mind between their fisheries and ours. With their low angling pressure, they could make almost any regulation and say it works.

Obviously all of the SRD biologists are idiots, sitting in their offices all day long just dreaming up the next scheme to make anglers mad. Why would they know anything? They only study this stuff for a living. It's like a person offering up expertise to an electrician on a wiring schematic or principles of electricity because they have turned on thousands of light switches in their time.

[npauls]

The problem is that is DOES NOT go back in to anything it goes in to a general revenue account and then the finace minister makes more cuts to our environment.... No thanks. If they had tags that did not cost extra over and above the $3 draw app I might be in on that but I think we need to be varey careful on this one as it is almost better to go to Sask or BC and pay way more to fish and have real fun and can keep something if we want as they have more water and way better managment to have a great fishery.


Hey by the way I am not knocking your Idea. I am just not willing to pay way more money to give more$$$ to a polititions pention... I like the fact you are trying to come up with a plan or some ideas to better it in AB...

I am totally against the fact that the tag money is going to general rev. right now but if we could some how get a law passed stating that all the money from those tags has to be put back into the fisheries I think it could be a really good thing.

I totally agree with you right now about the tag system we have right now.

[Stewie]

I would sign a petition that bans people from asking questions like "Are you in favour of having a slot limit on game fish size in Alberta, and if you are, would you sign a petition to have this adopted by SRD?" based on no site specific context or information related to the fishery.

Heck, it works in Saskatchewan, why not here? Definitely no immediate differences come to mind between their fisheries and ours. With their low angling pressure, they could make almost any regulation and say it works.

Obviously all of the SRD biologists are idiots, sitting in their offices all day long just dreaming up the next scheme to make anglers mad. Why would they know anything? They only study this stuff for a living. It's like a person offering up expertise to an electrician on a wiring schematic or principles of electricity because they have turned on thousands of light switches in their time.


For one MAJOR difference... Saskatchewan lets you only keep one fish over a certain size... so the breeders are left to do what they do... BREED...

Where Alberta says you can only keep 3 fish OVER a certain limit...

[Justin.C]

I am totally against the fact that the tag money is going to general rev. right now but if we could some how get a law passed stating that all the money from those tags has to be put back into the fisheries I think it could be a really good thing.

I totally agree with you right now about the tag system we have right now.
Also licences.... I know for a fact that The amount of money brought in by nonres peole to our province is unreal (hunting included) so I still have no idea why our stupid government keeps trying to destroy our resorces so no one want to come here....

[Justin.C]

I would sign a petition that bans people from asking questions like "Are you in favour of having a slot limit on game fish size in Alberta, and if you are, would you sign a petition to have this adopted by SRD?" based on no site specific context or information related to the fishery.

Heck, it works in Saskatchewan, why not here? Definitely no immediate differences come to mind between their fisheries and ours. With their low angling pressure, they could make almost any regulation and say it works.

Obviously all of the SRD biologists are idiots, sitting in their offices all day long just dreaming up the next scheme to make anglers mad. Why would they know anything? They only study this stuff for a living. It's like a person offering up expertise to an electrician on a wiring schematic or principles of electricity because they have turned on thousands of light switches in their time.The problem is that as you called them..IDIOTS.... They have no proof to provide us that there ever is a problem. This is OUR provice and our resource so we have the right to ask questions and they need to provide facts... plain and simple. Not just say well this is how it is..

[Black Stim]

For one MAJOR difference... Saskatchewan lets you only keep one fish over a certain size... so the breeders are left to do what they do... BREED...

Where Alberta says you can only keep 3 fish OVER a certain limit...

A 3 fish limit in Alberta is exactly that- a limit, not a harvest recommendation. A little but of self restraint can't be that hard.

[Justin.C]

A 3 fish limit in Alberta is exactly that- a limit, not a harvest recommendation. A little but of self restraint can't be that hard.Do you think every albertan cares???? There are some cultures that take everything they canat every oppertunity... I hate to say it but it is true. We also have alot of immigrants that do not know anything about licences and stuff as they dont have anything like that were they are from... Also these guys get away with this as there is no money to have F&W officers checking things out...



This is the truth..I am not trying to be racist in any way...Also not everybody cares about anything but catching there limit just cause they love fish....They aint doing anything wrong in the governments eyes and it is legal... You and i may disagree though.

[Stewie]

A 3 fish limit in Alberta is exactly that- a limit, not a harvest recommendation. A little but of self restraint can't be that hard.

I agree... but why in Alberta do they make you ONLY keep fish over a certain size, where Saskatchewan says you can only keep one fish over and two under... a tight slot limit in my opinion is the way to go... I hardly keep any fish and enjoy catch and release more than anything...

[Black Stim]

The danger of a slot allowing fish smaller than a certain size is that with high enough angler pressure, fish are taken out of the population before they get to be spawning size. Then you are only counting on the older spawners to sustain the population, which will die out naturally over time and are removed with one over the slot size.

[BeeGuy]

Rather see a slot limit size... I understand that some like to keep fish to eat and thats fine with me... I do it myself from time to time... but dont understand why in order to keep a fish it has to be over a certain length... they dont taste as good as a smaller fish and why keep a huge breeding female... for me, when I catch a big one a picture is all I want, let someone else have the same opportunity to catch a trohpy fish and let her breed so other generations can have the fun we all have now...

Part of the reason based on the study above, would be that recruitment is very low and perhaps these water bodies do not provide quality spawning habitat.

[npauls]

The danger of a slot allowing fish smaller than a certain size is that with high enough angler pressure, fish are taken out of the population before they get to be spawning size. Then you are only counting on the older spawners to sustain the population, which will die out naturally over time and are removed with one over the slot size.

It was also stated somewhere that the sizes we have now were made that way so that the size of fish being taken home would at least have one spawning season to spawn before being kept by an angler.

I can't remember where I read or heard this and it could be totally wrong.

[huntsfurfish]

The danger of a slot allowing fish smaller than a certain size is that with high enough angler pressure, fish are taken out of the population before they get to be spawning size. Then you are only counting on the older spawners to sustain the population, which will die out naturally over time and are removed with one over the slot size.

Exactly.

Fish over 50 cm. Will spawn at least once, in some lakes multiple times, ensuring that the fish are self sustaining.

Start removing fish under spawning size and risk goes up dramatically! If people can keep them, they will.

[packhuntr]

I would sign a petition that bans people from asking questions like "Are you in favour of having a slot limit on game fish size in Alberta, and if you are, would you sign a petition to have this adopted by SRD?" based on no site specific context or information related to the fishery.

Heck, it works in Saskatchewan, why not here? Definitely no immediate differences come to mind between their fisheries and ours. With their low angling pressure, they could make almost any regulation and say it works.

Obviously all of the SRD biologists are idiots, sitting in their offices all day long just dreaming up the next scheme to make anglers mad. Why would they know anything? They only study this stuff for a living. It's like a person offering up expertise to an electrician on a wiring schematic or principles of electricity because they have turned on thousands of light switches in their time.


Hey smart guy,,, how have our fisheries ended up in the toilet? Must be someone elses job to assure these resources are HEALTHY and HERE tomorrow?

[packhuntr]

The whole problem is that people are constantly looking to find better ways to OVER HARVEST these lakes and fisheries. The outcome will remain the same no matter the recipe, stunted out and the farthest away from a healthy fishery imaginable. People need to stop worrying about thier stomach's, these little fisheries cannot handle continuous relentless sustenance harvest.

[BeeGuy]

Exactly.

Fish over 50 cm. Will spawn at least once, in some lakes multiple times, ensuring that the fish are self sustaining.

Start removing fish under spawning size and risk goes up dramatically! If people can keep them, they will.

It is quite easy to target large fish (>50cm) and the regulation you suggest ensures that only breeders are harvested.

In bodies where recruitment is low to begin with, allowing a fish the chance to spawn a single time may not enable a sustainable population.



A narrow slot limit means that even if you catch fish all day, you may not catch a fish in the slot, and allowing a single fish over say, 65cm would enable trophy hunters to harvest a fish that has spawned many times.

With enough data, it should be possible to set a slot size which only targets a single age class.

To the guy who felt the need to bring up ethnicity like it matters, crawl back into your cave. You might not be racist, but your comment was ignorant regardless.

[ADIDAFish]

The danger of a slot allowing fish smaller than a certain size is that with high enough angler pressure, fish are taken out of the population before they get to be spawning size. Then you are only counting on the older spawners to sustain the population, which will die out naturally over time and are removed with one over the slot size.

*2

A narrow slot range would be more effective with sustainability. To deal with Archer's concern about the fishing pressure you could raise or lower the number kept depending on the lake. 3 could be the normal and then if there is a lot of pressure maybe it is only 1 in the slot, if the fish are stunting then raise it to 5.

[aulrich]

I too have seen slot limits work so the concept is sound. If the population can handle the harvest.

I would also include tags catch x number of y fish province wide your done taking fish for the year for that spiecies.

I would limit it to the current possession limit

[0liver]

I don't think some of you realize that the reason its 'keep the bigger fish' is because the bigger fish have had a chance to spawn at least once or twice before being harvested, Harvesting the older fish will not deplete the "big fish gene pool" ... it will merely provide all fish a chance to spawn before being harvested. Introducing a slot size, for smaller fish, would only be working backwards..
I think this issue needs to be on the table of the next prov election, because with the way things are going, I don't see a bright future for our fragile lakes, let alone our wildlife in general.

*edit* I don't disagree with a limited harvest, a lot of Alberta's lakes [i.e pidgeon ] could do with a slot size, to start thinning out the ranks and providing more room for bigger fish to grow. For some lakes its the opposite, they need to have a chance to recover and repopulate.

[sco22]

I believe slot size harvest restrictions tend to work out well. Take a look at Spencer Lake. For years they had a tight slot size limit that was pretty well enforced. The slot size was removed a few years ago and now it handles the basic 1 over 50cm reasonably well. Now this is a remote lake and does not have the numbers of fishermen/women that a Slave or Calling Lake do. That said, you could see that changes in size of the catch each year.

Clearly it is not as simple as just throwing a slot size in, but really how does SRD win? We have too few lakes, with too many fishermen/women, with too many willing to break the rules (this is not a race specific issue - plenty of good old white people doing it too), with lots of technology. . .yet we expect we can drive one hour and fill the boat. Yes SRD does seem to be a bit slow to react or sometimes misguided, but isn't a big part of this an issue on the fisherman's expectations?

Count me in as a supporter.

Cheers.

[pickrel pat]

I don't think some of you realize that the reason its 'keep the bigger fish' is because the bigger fish have had a chance to spawn at least once or twice before being harvested, Harvesting the older fish will not deplete the "big fish gene pool" ... it will merely provide all fish a chance to spawn before being harvested. Introducing a slot size, for smaller fish, would only be working backwards..

this ^ ^ ^ ^

[Jayhad]

Wayne,
by no means am I trying to rain on your parade, I support anyone that wants to make a positive difference in our fisheries. SRD pretty much files petitions under G in the round file cabinet.

I know a few buddies that have had regulation changes implemented by SRD, they only do this every two years now. To get a change made, you need tonnes of data and a university level proposal. I'm in the midst of a proposal that I will present in 2014.

Now to your question, I do support slot limits depending on the sizes. a fishery like upper K i think needs a slot size the bullies there ae all stunted at 22"-24". One season of whacking could produce some pigs out of there.

[huntsfurfish]

For starters, SRD would need a whole lot more funding to control and keep track of slot limits. We actually need a petition to get them more funding.

Slot limits are in use with tags. Slot limits would require individual lake accessments(need money). Slot limits below the spawn age are a big risk especially if there is little to no information or control.

It is not an easy fix. Our lakes/reservoirs are few our fisherpeople are many.

Until SRD gets the funding they need, self sustaining fisheries are likely gonna be the best we get. However, there may be slot limit exceptions on some lakes.

ps I am speaking with regard to walleye mainly.

[Gust]

For starters, SRD would need a whole lot more funding to control and keep track of slot limits. We actually need a petition to get them more funding.

Slot limits are in use with tags. Slot limits would require individual lake accessments(need money). Slot limits below the spawn age are a big risk especially if there is little to no information or control.

http://www.ab-conservation.com/go/default/index.cfm/about-us/revenue-sources/

[WayneChristie]

Wayne,
by no means am I trying to rain on your parade, I support anyone that wants to make a positive difference in our fisheries. SRD pretty much files petitions under G in the round file cabinet.

I know a few buddies that have had regulation changes implemented by SRD, they only do this every two years now. To get a change made, you need tonnes of data and a university level proposal. I'm in the midst of a proposal that I will present in 2014.

Now to your question, I do support slot limits depending on the sizes. a fishery like upper K i think needs a slot size the bullies there ae all stunted at 22"-24". One season of whacking could produce some pigs out of there.

Your proposal is exactly the kind of thing Id like to see, I know petitions are just noise, but at least it will catch their eye. An informed proposal just may
actually do some good, and Im thinking you could and would get a lot of backing from the forum members, which is pretty much the reason for this poll and post. I know slot limits would have to be varied depending on species and waterbody, but I think it beats the way the regs are set up now. I do like the idea of being able to keep a trophy fish if someone wants to, maybe make that a tag with a fee, thats the only tag Id be willing to buy, I already spend enough on my favourite addiction. :sHa_shakeshout:
And just for the record, I hope SRD never allows a sturgeon harvest again. :fighting0074:

[pike_king780]

Do you think every albertan cares???? There are some cultures that take everything they canat every oppertunity... I hate to say it but it is true. We also have alot of immigrants that do not know anything about licences and stuff as they dont have anything like that were they are from... Also these guys get away with this as there is no money to have F&W officers checking things out...



This is the truth..I am not trying to be racist in any way...Also not everybody cares about anything but catching there limit just cause they love fish....They aint doing anything wrong in the governments eyes and it is legal... You and i may disagree though.

Agreed!!

[slivers86]

I think it would be a good idea. Could produce a few trophy lakes in alberta, which from what I read, we are in desperate need of.

[0liver]

I believe that each lake needs separate regulations, instead of a blanket slot-size for the whole of Alberta. There needs to be a comprehensive study of the lakes that are struggling, and the ones that need a slot size, [ie the over populated and stunted walleye lakes], and the ones that need a 0 Limit [ie some of the pike lakes like coal] should be evaluated and the proper measures taken.

There is no 'perfect' solution to our problems, and I think these issues will require everyone to change there perspectives completely on the dire situation that we are indeed facing.

[ericlin0122]

catch and release is the only solution to get trophy fishery in alberta.

look at what happens to beaver lake.

[0liver]

catch and release is the only solution to get trophy fishery in alberta.

look at what happens to beaver lake.

Look at what happened to pidgeon with catch-and-release only. Its a slippery slope both ways, not enough harvest, stunted pathetic fish, too much harvest and its a ghost town.

[BBJTKLE&FISHINGADVENTURES]

Alberta Doesn't have enough lakes to have a slot limit . It wouldn't work here even if they attempted it . Best way to make fishing any better close it down for 5 , 8 , 10 years , and then re open it . But that wont happy , have fun catching stocked fish :D ....

[C Taylor]

I think with more money for management a slot size could work but we may need a alternating season like 0 limit one year then slot size the next. For walleye I don't think many males get over 50 cm and keeping all the big females is obviously not working.
More money and maybe we could see walleye being stocked in a few more places.

[WayneChristie]

Im surprised with all the walleye addicts in Alberta, the groups and individuals havent gotten together to raise funds to pay for a stocking program

[chubbdarter]

Managing slot limits requires in depth studies prior to the inacting the regulation and requires very labour intensive studies to maintain its workings. Each lake being so different in its makeup, it would require a custom slot.
I dont believe SRD has the manpower or funding to do either.

[huntsfurfish]

Managing slot limits requires in depth studies prior to the inacting the regulation and requires very labour intensive studies to maintain its workings. Each lake being so different in its makeup, it would require a custom slot.
I dont believe SRD has the manpower or funding to do either.

I agree

[slivers86]

Managing slot limits requires in depth studies prior to the inacting the regulation and requires very labour intensive studies to maintain its workings. Each lake being so different in its makeup, it would require a custom slot.
I dont believe SRD has the manpower or funding to do either.

I agree

I agree as well. Mind you, if we are all willing to pay an extra 10-20$ for our license, at lets say 150000 licenses across the province, thats 2.25M. Average sallary of a Peace Officer for SRD I'd estimate is around $65000-$75000 per year.

according to my calculations, that could employ roughly 25 new officers for per season, with around 150000 in a pool to cover benefits, pension, etc for the company. If this were proposed, would everyone go for it? I know 25 officers isn't a lot, however its a start in the right direction.

Think about the criminal code, if there wasn't a police presence, would that book of rules mean anything? I think people see the fishing regulations the same way, and don't ever see anyone around checking licenses, barbless hooks, baiting, etc. I was probably out close to 20-30 times this year, and was checked up on 3 times. 10% isn't bad, and keeps it under harassment levels.

What I'm getting at thought, is enforcement is possible of a 'slot limit' approach, if we are willing to pay for it though? I know I would pay an extra 20$ a year.

[BeeGuy]

Do you think more enforcement would have a measurable or noticeable impact?

I do not think so.

Yes, I think that book of rules would mean something without police presence.

That book isn't what stops me from killing a man, or putting drugs up my nose, and the threat of being caught by a CO isn't what makes me follow the fishing reg's.

As far as I can tell, the people who fish the most, and catch the most, follow the reg's the most closely.

[Jayhad]

We also have alot of immigrants that do not know anything about licences and stuff as they dont have anything like that were they are from... Also these guys get away with this as there is no money to have F&W officers checking things out...



This is the truth..I am not trying to be racist in any way....

I would have to disagree within the region I fish, I am on the Bow a lot and this season the majority (87.5%) of poachers I witnessed and called RAPP on were white males, on top of that of all the white males the majority were FOB Eastcoasters. I know this as I chum it up with most poachers, it gives me an opportunity to keep the video camera on them. Like the guy I caught long lining with bait, who told me to keep my eyes out for his stringer of 5 browns and a bunch of whites that drifted down stream.

[Lefty-Canuck]

The danger of a slot allowing fish smaller than a certain size is that with high enough angler pressure, fish are taken out of the population before they get to be spawning size. Then you are only counting on the older spawners to sustain the population, which will die out naturally over time and are removed with one over the slot size.

I can totally see and understand this side of the coin....what about a tiered season on certain lakes?....such and such a date is all C&R.....such and such a date with a slot size that makes sense?

The biggest draw back would be getting the anglers to read, understand, and follow the regulations.....although thats no different than the way things are now.

LC

[Lefty-Canuck]

As far as I can tell, the people who fish the most, and catch the most, follow the reg's the most closely.

Generalizing is never a good thing :)...without elaborating and the likliness I will be called a rascist (not necessarily talking about visible minorities either, so the usuals who jump all over me for my comments can chill out)....I respectfully disagree with this comment.

LC

[BeeGuy]

Generalizing is never a good thing :)...without elaborating and the likliness I will be called a rascist (not necessarily talking about visible minorities either, so the usuals who jump all over me for my comments can chill out)....I respectfully disagree with this comment.

LC

Fair enough, I think I get your point. And yes, there are exceptions to generalizations, that's a given.

[Eddy62]

As far as I can tell, the people who fish the most, and catch the most, follow the reg's the most closely.

I totally agree on that statement. No Doubt. would i like to see a slot limit? Yes i would and would i be willing to pay an extra 20 dollars per year to help out are fisheries? Yes in a heartbeat.

I bought 2 out off province license this year and it was pricey. and then tags on top off licencing fees.Albertas licencing fees are pretty reasonable if you ask me.

Are fishing resources here in are province need help.I would like a survey page to be included in are fishing regs that we could tear out and mail back ( every year )with are opinions and suggestions off slot limits.increasing fees,c and r.barbless,and many more questions and suggestions, ask away and let us fisherman/woman answer some . give us the right to be part off the over all decision. just my opinion.....later:thinking-006:

[BeeGuy]

As far as I can tell, the people who fish the most, and catch the most, follow the reg's the most closely.

I totally agree on that statement. No Doubt. would i like to see a slot limit? Yes i would and would i be willing to pay an extra 20 dollars per year to help out are fisheries? Yes in a heartbeat.

I bought 2 out off province license this year and it was pricey. and then tags on top off licencing fees.Albertas licencing fees are pretty reasonable if you ask me.

Are fishing resources here in are province need help.I would like a survey page to be included in are fishing regs that we could tear out and mail back ( every year )with are opinions and suggestions off slot limits.increasing fees,c and r.barbless,and many more questions and suggestions, ask away and let us fisherman/woman answer some . give us the right to be part off the over all decision. just my opinion.....later:thinking-006:

Great ideas. A machine readable survey would be a good way to go.

I don't particularly like the idea of increasing fees. Maybe tax-refundable donations and a free decal for those that are willing. I can't stand the licensing cost in BC. It drives me nuts. I was stoked when I came to Alberta the first time and found the cost to be reasonable.:bad_boys_20:

I can recall fishing on the NW coast with several hundred $$ worth of licenses and tags and realizing that I still wasn't legal.:angry3:

Slot-limits are awesome.

[Gust]

I agree as well. Mind you, if we are all willing to pay an extra 10-20$ for our license, at lets say 150000 licenses across the province, thats 2.25M. Average sallary of a Peace Officer for SRD I'd estimate is around $65000-$75000 per year.

according to my calculations, that could employ roughly 25 new officers for per season, with around 150000 in a pool to cover benefits, pension, etc for the company. If this were proposed, would everyone go for it? I know 25 officers isn't a lot, however its a start in the right direction.

Think about the criminal code, if there wasn't a police presence, would that book of rules mean anything? I think people see the fishing regulations the same way, and don't ever see anyone around checking licenses, barbless hooks, baiting, etc. I was probably out close to 20-30 times this year, and was checked up on 3 times. 10% isn't bad, and keeps it under harassment levels.

What I'm getting at thought, is enforcement is possible of a 'slot limit' approach, if we are willing to pay for it though? I know I would pay an extra 20$ a year.

There are 11 vacancies to be filled right now and the number of licenses this year is approx 225,000,,, when vacancies can't be filled it becomes easier to negotiate a higher wage or benefit package.

And the random checking of fish size on your stringer is just the same as it is now, as it's just a few numbers between two numbers as opposed to making sure it's above 1 number on a tape measure.

And I don't target Walleye either,,, but I'd love to see a slot size for pike, they are in serious decline,,, and I'd love to see winter closures on some put & take trout lakes and then a slot or limit change but that argument will be saved for the thread that must not be named.

[Gust]

Im surprised with all the walleye addicts in Alberta, the groups and individuals havent gotten together to raise funds to pay for a stocking program

just need to rename them walleyed trout

[Jayhad]

I can recall fishing on the NW coast with several hundred $$ worth of licenses and tags and realizing that I still wasn't legal.:angry3:



:snapoutofit:
BC License fee for resident $36, non-resident $55
Steelhead tag : $25, $30
Salmon Tag: $10, $20
Sturgeon Tag $8, $15

Canadian Tidal for resident $21
Salmon Tag, $6

Now I'm no mathmatican but you must of been buying multiple licenses and tags to be at several hundred, maybe that's why you weren't legal?

If license fees went directly to the resource in Alberta I would be happy paying $500 a year..... for me that would still be under $3 a day, its super cheap entertainment.

[Jayhad]

.I would like a survey page to be included in are fishing regs that we could tear out and mail back ( every year )with are opinions and suggestions off slot limits.increasing fees,c and r.barbless,and many more questions and suggestions, ask away and let us fisherman/woman answer some . give us the right to be part off the over all decision. just my opinion.....later:thinking-006:

That's a really solid idea

[slivers86]

There are 11 vacancies to be filled right now and the number of licenses this year is approx 225,000,,, when vacancies can't be filled it becomes easier to negotiate a higher wage or benefit package.

And the random checking of fish size on your stringer is just the same as it is now, as it's just a few numbers between two numbers as opposed to making sure it's above 1 number on a tape measure.

And I don't target Walleye either,,, but I'd love to see a slot size for pike, they are in serious decline,,, and I'd love to see winter closures on some put & take trout lakes and then a slot or limit change but that argument will be saved for the thread that must not be named.

11 vacancies. That just shows you the wages are not competitive enough with other peace officer jobs in the province.


Beeguy, I see what your saying and yes that does make sense. More officers wont mean people will stop because you are right, its about morals and ethics.

A bad apple will never ripen, it will just continue to rot.

[BeeGuy]

:snapoutofit:
BC License fee for resident $36, non-resident $55
Steelhead tag : $25, $30
Salmon Tag: $10, $20
Sturgeon Tag $8, $15

Canadian Tidal for resident $21
Salmon Tag, $6

Now I'm no mathmatican but you must of been buying multiple licenses and tags to be at several hundred, maybe that's why you weren't legal?

If license fees went directly to the resource in Alberta I would be happy paying $500 a year..... for me that would still be under $3 a day, its super cheap entertainment.


As a non-resident:
annual license (freshwater) $55
steelhead $60
salmon $30
Class I $40/DAY
Class II $20/DAY

Tidal $21
Salmon $6

That's about $200 after tax

Plus $20 or $40 PER DAY for classified waters.

Several hundred bucks? yep

:love0025:

[slivers86]

:snapoutofit:
BC License fee for resident $36, non-resident $55
Steelhead tag : $25, $30
Salmon Tag: $10, $20
Sturgeon Tag $8, $15

Canadian Tidal for resident $21
Salmon Tag, $6

Now I'm no mathmatican but you must of been buying multiple licenses and tags to be at several hundred, maybe that's why you weren't legal?

If license fees went directly to the resource in Alberta I would be happy paying $500 a year..... for me that would still be under $3 a day, its super cheap entertainment.

500$ would be extreme, but I'd pay $50-100, that seems fair. I'd say I use the license so far this year about 30-35 times, hopefully 20-30 more this winter!

[BeeGuy]

11 vacancies. That just shows you the wages are not competitive enough with other peace officer jobs in the province.


Beeguy, I see what your saying and yes that does make sense. More officers wont mean people will stop because you are right, its about morals and ethics.

A bad apple will never ripen, it will just continue to rot.

Not too mention that old habits die hard.

Just look to our Canadian Sportfishing guru's Henry and Italo.

Obviously, getting caught isn't enough of a deterrent for some.

I like slot limits, and I don't worry too much about poachers.

God bless,

Beeguy

[Jayhad]

As a non-resident:
annual license (freshwater) $55
steelhead $60
salmon $30
Class I $40/DAY
Class II $20/DAY

Tidal $21
Salmon $6

That's about $200 after tax

Plus $20 or $40 PER DAY for classified waters.

Several hundred bucks? yep

:love0025:
fair enough I misunderstood when you stated you were fishing on the coast, so I didn't factor classified waters

[BeeGuy]

fair enough I misunderstood when you stated you were fishing on the coast, so I didn't factor classified waters

Hence my frustration,

camped out in the middle of nowhere, with several hundy in permits and an expired Class I ticket. Day 9 is a #$%^@

FML

Slot size limits have great potential but are not a solution in and of themselves.

[chubbdarter]

Its fair and fine that you have a budget plan to hire more enforcement.
Now.............find the millions or get the millions allocated to the research and maintaining of the lake.
Finding monies for enforcement puts the cart before the horse. Data collection and research is very expensive

[WayneChristie]

500$ would be extreme, but I'd pay $50-100, that seems fair. I'd say I use the license so far this year about 30-35 times, hopefully 20-30 more this winter!

I wouldnt mind paying more for a license, but if Im paying 100 or 200 or more a year, Im not going to be releasing all nearly as many of my fish, they would be going into the grocery budget.

[WayneChristie]

Our fishing resources here in are province need help.I would like a survey page to be included in are fishing regs that we could tear out and mail back ( every year )with are opinions and suggestions off slot limits.increasing fees,c and r.barbless,and many more questions and suggestions, ask away and let us fisherman/woman answer some . give us the right to be part off the over all decision. just my opinion.....later:thinking-006:

I also like that idea, even if it did nothing productive, at least it would give SRD an idea of what fishermen and women have to say, and be a cheap way for them to do some research. Put the same survey online on their site as well.

[huntsfurfish]

Its fair and fine that you have a budget plan to hire more enforcement.
Now.............find the millions or get the millions allocated to the research and maintaining of the lake.
Finding monies for enforcement puts the cart before the horse. Data collection and research is very expensive



I agree once again:):scared:

[chubbdarter]

500$ would be extreme, but I'd pay $50-100, that seems fair. I'd say I use the license so far this year about 30-35 times, hopefully 20-30 more this winter!

Can fore see 2 things happening
1- general licence sales falling drastically
2- the fee would give birth to more poachers

Many people who fish 1-2 times a year, would just quit. Yes there is 20 thousand dedicated fisherman on this site who will accept the doubling or tripling of fees. I believe this is a small group compared to the 1-2 day fisherman who make up the vast majority of the total revenue.

If the Res licence was 100 dollars the general public would push to have non Res licences be 200 dollars. Which in principle isnt un fair......but the average tourist wont be buying a licence to soak a worm for 1 day on their 1 week vacation. I believe alot of licences from this portion of fisherman make a significant dollar value to over all combined revenue. I also believe this group has little or no effect on our fish populations.

Do I agree its too cheap...yes. But the general public doesnt believe that.

[chubbdarter]

I also like that idea, even if it did nothing productive, at least it would give SRD an idea of what fishermen and women have to say, and be a cheap way for them to do some research. Put the same survey online on their site as well.

Once again great idea....BUT...we have a Fish and Fur system that cant afford to do field research or field enforcement right now. Yes angler input is important but input from the field must be backed or explained with science. I dont want my Bio reading angler surveys over doing his research.
A angler survey will present the problem
A Bio's research will present the cure.
Sadly I think the survey would have to be compiled by a non SRD group..eg TU, WU or fish and game club. This may cure alot of transperancy issues also, as the public would be advised at the same time SRD would get the survey info.

[greylynx]

Walleye people like to eat them.

Trout people like to release them.

Which fish is easier to manage?

[pickrel pat]

Walleye people like to eat them.

Trout people like to release them.

Which fish is easier to manage?

lol..... so true, so true.

[HunterDave]

Can fore see 2 things happening
1- general licence sales falling drastically
2- the fee would give birth to more poachers

You bet, and I agree with your explanation of the 2 points above! I'll add one more:

3. Only the financially well off would be able to afford to fish.

[npauls]

Walleye people like to eat them.

Trout people like to release them.

Which fish is easier to manage?

I keep way more trout then I do walleyes.

I know that trout are stocked yearly in all these pothole lakes and the walleyes won't be stocked due to self sustaining spawning and most of the funding is focused on trout.

I also don't eat fish so anything I keep is given to family and friends who like fish but aren't healthy enough to go fishing themselves or just don't enjoy it at all.