Fair Chase

[Don Andersen]

Folks,

Is targeting fish who are either actively spawning or seeking spawning water "fair chase" and should it be encouraged by the Govt?


regards,


Don

[Kokanee9]

No, of course not.

Please explain the "encouraged" part. Did you mean to write something like "allowed"?

The inclusion of a regulation specifically mentioning no harassment of pre spawn, spawning, or post spawn fish I believe would be a very hard one to put in the regulations. Specific boundaries and dates would work better.

[1/2 oz Bucktail]

If it isn't fair chase, we should then close fluvial waterbody containing bull trout to fishing as this species essentially begins its spawning run as soon as the rivers clear-up. Bulls are typically always on the move in the summer making the migration from large home waters into the tributary networks. The same would have to go for rocky whites as well since they usually migrate through river systems in the summer.

[Okotokian]

"Fair chase" is an ethical issue government should not concern itself with. Government should be concerned with conservation, safety, and game management.

[sheephunter]

I didn't know the term "fair chase" even applied to fishing.

[Okotokian]

I didn't know the term "fair chase" even applied to fishing.

Heyyyyyy isn't a stocked pond with no inlet or outlet really exactly the same as a canned hunt farm??? ;)

[ak-71]

I didn't know the term "fair chase" even applied to fishing.

x2

[Kokanee9]

I didn't know the term "fair chase" even applied to fishing.

Perhaps a better term than "fair game".

:)

[sheephunter]

Heyyyyyy isn't a stocked pond with no inlet or outlet really exactly the same as a canned hunt farm??? ;)

Depends on the size on the pond ;)

[aulrich]

The timing of the removal of the fishout of a system is irrelavant, given the system can loose that fish, Your always within 365 days of a spawn.

The case could be made for fishing on spawning beds, but then lots of fish get extra active and more concentrated pre spawn do you shut down fishing then too.

And with the Bow do you shut down fishing in the fall when the browns and rockies are spawning and spring when the rainbows are?

[Dan Foss]

The timing of the removal of the fishout of a system is irrelavant, given the system can loose that fish, Your always within 365 days of a spawn.

The case could be made for fishing on spawning beds, but then lots of fish get extra active and more concentrated pre spawn do you shut down fishing then too.

And with the Bow do you shut down fishing in the fall when the browns and rockies are spawning and spring when the rainbows are?

The bow is a unique beast and should not be used in comparison in this situation. The bow is what it is because it is OVER protected which is a good thing. This is not the case for 96% of the lakes in alberta. And even still to answer your question directly:
a) whites are extremely successful spawners. (like mice if you will) That doesnt mean It doesnt matter we should go after them at those times. But they are less sensitive to pressure. (fish species differ in their spawning success and growth rates which are all factors. IE. bulls take longer to reach spawning maturity and have difficulty spawning unless conditions are perfect. Whites and perch reach maturity alot quicker and are more adaptive in terms of spawning conditions)
b) Certain sections of the bow is shut down during spawning season. the upper bow has lots of little areas where water flow slows around little island and such. the entire upper bow is closed for parts of the year.
c) lower bow is different than upper bow, and someone can correct me if I am wrong, but I believe most of the rainbows and browns in the bow go up its tribituaries to spawn (ie. sheep, highwood, etc.). not all but probably quite a few because of the slower shallower water, or whatever they seek for spawning grounds.



If we start talking about lake fish like walleye.... the regs in alberta are very different for species(not just in fishing times but with catch limits and such). trout get special treatment. SRD can sometimes even caught admitting that....(not going to give examples for sake of its already been said in other threads)

[Fisher_man#1]

Folks,

Is targeting fish who are either actively spawning or seeking spawning water "fair chase" and should it be encouraged by the Govt?


regards,


Don

Don would you support the closing of Stealhead and Salmon fishing in rivers then?

Cheers,

[Don Andersen]

Don would you support the closing of Stealhead and Salmon fishing in rivers then?

Cheers,

Fish...

Short answer - nope.

Others have described the issues really well. the Bull trout vs cuts, the whites vs everything but some waters are closed during spawning. Walleye in Red Deer River or Prairie Creek in the fall to protect Brown Trout
Seems like there is no "blanket" reasoning. Some areas and some fish yes - others no.
Good thing or bad.
Depends on your point of view.
But Govt does seem to relax regulations to target spawners. Bait for river Whitefish is but one example.

Am not sure of the right answer or even if there is one.

Hunting is much the same. Some get all hot and bothered to hunt elk, moose & deer when they are rutting whereas we don't do that with ducks/geese/upland bird. Curious - just a tad.

So is targeting fish, bird, beasts while they are "busy" fair game?

I haven't a clue. I do know that by in large, outdoorsmen are most successful when their prey is "getting it on".

regards,

Don

[Jayhad]

The bow is a unique beast and should not be used in comparison in this situation. The bow is what it is because it is OVER protected which is a good thing.
How do you figure the Bow is OVER protected..... Alberta's management of this Blue Ribbon fishery is pathetic. No where else in the world would you be allowed to fish bait, multiple trebles or retain fish in such a trophy fishery, I am not argueing these things are wrong, but they don't follow in line with a trophy fishery, let alone one of the top 5 in the world.


c) lower bow is different than upper bow, and someone can correct me if I am wrong, but I believe most of the rainbows and browns in the bow go up its tribituaries to spawn (ie. sheep, highwood, etc.). not all but probably quite a few because of the slower shallower water, or whatever they seek for spawning grounds.


There aren't many tributaries from the wier down. fish creek and the highwood. These do see the majority of rainbows (est 60-65%) the rest spawn in main stream. the majority of brown trout on the other hand spawn in side channels and the mainstem.

[BeeGuy]

How do you figure the Bow is OVER protected..... Alberta's management of this Blue Ribbon fishery is pathetic. No where else in the world would you be allowed to fish bait, multiple trebles or retain fish in such a trophy fishery, I am not argueing these things are wrong, but they don't follow in line with a trophy fishery, let alone one of the top 5 in the world.

I think your 3 points there have little or no impact on the fishery. You are arguing that they are wrong by stating that the management is pathetic and then providing those 3 reasons as proof of your statement. Fair enough though, I think 6x tippets are wrong and playing 20" fish on a 4 weight rod is wrong. each to their own.

Not sure how a didymo scum coated river with safeway jellyfish (grocery bags) floating downstream makes it into the top 5, but I'm sure it helps for marketing.

Only river I've had a diaper hit my nymph.

The whole, "blue ribbon" thing always gives me a chuckle. Always makes me think of some mid-wester's prize cow.

Anywho,

Slot limits are a great management tool which have proven themselves in many lakes and rivers over the last 20 years, and which would likely manage albertan fisheries well.

The poll seems to support this view too.

[Dan Foss]

How do you figure the Bow is OVER protected..... Alberta's management of this Blue Ribbon fishery is pathetic. No where else in the world would you be allowed to fish bait, multiple trebles or retain fish in such a trophy fishery, I am not argueing these things are wrong, but they don't follow in line with a trophy fishery, let alone one of the top 5 in the world.

??? you are not allowed to fish bait in the Bow?? in the upper section (above WHD) you can but that section is not the part that is considered "trophy". out of the 100 fish I have caught in the bow last year I think 1 might have been legal size to keep. So as far as people harvesting from the bow..... the actual harvest numbers are going to be very very minimal. As I stated I have no problem that the bow is protected the way it is. But when you look at it, and especially compare it to every other waterbody in alberta, It is over protected. If it wasn't, it wouldnt be a top 5 fishery. So I am not sure how that management is pathetic.


There aren't many tributaries from the wier down. fish creek and the highwood. These do see the majority of rainbows (est 60-65%) the rest spawn in main stream. the majority of brown trout on the other hand spawn in side channels and the mainstem.

This is what I thought so. for the most part it is protected.

[Dan Foss]

Slot limits are a great management tool which have proven themselves in many lakes and rivers over the last 20 years, and which would likely manage albertan fisheries well.

The poll seems to support this view too.

Slots do not work everywhere though. And IMO they would not work in many places in alberta. I would never Support intro of a slot limit unless there was good research to prove it would benefit the fishery. Slot limites work in sask and Ont because of the number of lakes they have. Sadly we dont have that benefit. In a lake like travers, I think all a slot limit would do s wipe out year classes once they get to that slot size. maybe not though. It depends on the lake, the slot, the pressure at the lake, etc.

[BeeGuy]

Slots do not work everywhere though. And IMO they would not work in many places in alberta. I would never Support intro of a slot limit unless there was good research to prove it would benefit the fishery. Slot limites work in sask and Ont because of the number of lakes they have. Sadly we dont have that benefit. In a lake like travers, I think all a slot limit would do s wipe out year classes once they get to that slot size. maybe not though. It depends on the lake, the slot, the pressure at the lake, etc.

Haha, ya, I forgot which thread I was in. Spawning thread, not slot thread. My bad.

I agree, there are several factors which need to be weighed.

Here's some commentary on this issue.

Anywho,

As far as what is sporting, targeting fish during and around spawning time isn't really. However, fishing isn't always intended to be sporting, and sometimes the purpose is harvest, not game.

So, I think yes, depending on the situation, spawning fish should be vulnerable to harvest and sport. Of course this should occur under management guidelines which ensure a sustainable resource.

Finally, what someone finds to be sporting is really an individual perception.

I don't find brown trout to be very 'sporting' because they are foolish and very aggressive, and poor fighters. Others consider them trophies and a 'blue ribbon' fishery. To each their own.

[Jayhad]

I think your 3 points there have little or no impact on the fishery.

You're right, 2 points that have been proven to increase mortality in fish stocks and 1 point that actually removes fish from the system have no impact on the fishery...... there's some solid logic

[Jayhad]

??? you are not allowed to fish bait in the Bow?? in the upper section (above WHD) you can but that section is not the part that is considered "trophy"..
Is this because we have never given the fishery the opportunity to be better? I don't know

out of the 100 fish I have caught in the bow last year I think 1 might have been legal size to keep.
This should be troubling, harvest is for fish under 35cm, I will agree that this size fish is rarely caught, where are they? these are future fish.

But when you look at it, and especially compare it to every other waterbody in alberta, It is over protected. If it wasn't, it wouldnt be a top 5 fishery. I agree

So I am not sure how that management is pathetic. look at how other trophy fisheries are managed world wide, the managers here do what they can and do a great job with the resources they are provided but our Bow fishery could be managed much more progessively, there are numberous examples of trophy fisheries that could be replicated here.




for the most part it is protected.I would have to disagree the rainbows stack up and stage in the mainstem prior to spawn they are very exposed to high catch rates and the browns are completely exposed in the mainstem. If you know how to spot them the browns are easy to catch in their sexy time with aggrevating lures/flys

[Dan Foss]

All very good points. And for the discussion comparing the bow to other trophy waterways. I have never actually look at other ones but I might now that you have my interest piqued. You may be right. Maybe we could learn from others and make a great fishery better. I probably still wont fish it. I used to fish the bow lots. Not I have lost interest in it.

[BeeGuy]

You're right, 2 points that have been proven to increase mortality in fish stocks and 1 point that actually removes fish from the system have no impact on the fishery...... there's some solid logic

Fishing with maggots in the bow has no impact on trout whatsoever.

Trebles increase mortality on small trout.

I cannot imagine there are enough trout under 35cm harvested to have any impact.

As for where the trout under 35cm are? They are in the bellies of the million18-24" browns.


If SRD adopted 'those' management practices that other countries have, how much do you think it would improve the fishery?

Perhaps we should be more concerned with tourists introducing invasive microbes via felt soles than locals catching whites on maggots?

[Jayhad]

Fishing with maggots in the bow has no impact on trout whatsoever.

Trebles increase mortality on small trout.

I cannot imagine there are enough trout under 35cm harvested to have any impact.

As for where the trout under 35cm are? They are in the bellies of the million18-24" browns.


If SRD adopted 'those' management practices that other countries have, how much do you think it would improve the fishery?

Perhaps we should be more concerned with tourists introducing invasive microbes via felt soles than locals catching whites on maggots?


Trout don't eat maggots? you admit to catching trout on maggots, are you so dumb that you don't understand catching fish increases mortality? and bait is proven to increase mortalityI was fishing maggots on size 12 beadheads a lot in Sept. Mostly still fished them on a dropper.

I hooked and I witnessed others hook into browns, rainbows, and suckers as bycatch.

Rainbows will hit them when they are fished actively. Browns will hit them when they start to get active at dark. These are incidental catches and occured 50/50, but this could be influenced by changing technique or timing.


There's a lot more to worry about than felt soles.... like animal fur, waders, synthetic wader boot uppers, shoe laces, gravel guards, fly line backing, anchor ropes, live wells, cloth nets, ect.

Your posts lately have shown that you drink to much of the Koolaid or you are just ignorant to the facts.
The attack on felt soles was pushed by wader boot manufacturers world wide to sell more boots & waders not to combat didymo, it has been blindly accepted by those who can't think for themselves. Why do you think the companies that "would never promote felt products anymore" have all released felt sole models for 2012..... because their crusade bit them in the pocket book.

If SRD adopted 'those' management practices that other countries have, how much do you think it would improve the fishery? does it matter how much if it is improved? Wouldn't any improvement be better? I can't tell you how much but when we can scientificly quantify other management practices as more benefital to fisherys aren't those practices worth exploring?
What's the harm in making the Bow C&R, bait ban for 2 years? the section below the wier is considered blue ribbon, could the rest of the system get the same desigantion if it was closed to retention and bait ban, perhaps.

[BeeGuy]

You and your aggression need to sit down and have a heart to heart.

All 3 incidental trout we hooked on maggots were lip hooked on a barbless #12.

There is no increase in mortality there beyond what would occur while fishing a maggot-less #12 fly.

Maggots are not minnows or worms.

Perhaps you should not make assumptions about things with which you have no experience.

I'm not ignorant of the facts. As I suggested, we should concern ourselves with actions that have the potential to inflict huge damage on the fishery, not those which have a negligible impact.

Proximate and ultimate.

I wonder who guided the fly fishermen that introduced the algae in the first place?

[Dan Foss]

the section below the wier is considered blue ribbon, could the rest of the system get the same desigantion if it was closed to retention and bait ban, perhaps.


I honestly dont think so. I believe water test have been done that suggest the water nutrient content of the upper bow is nothing close to what it is below the weir. more specifically below the water treatment plant. I will look for these studies and link them if I find them Also extra nutrients are probably brought in from the tribes in the lower section as well.


If any one knows where these studies are or fish pop studies above and below that would save me some time

PS. Jay, no need to be so agressive and on the offence. name calling makes it personal. stick to the discussion. regardless of how true or not you may be right about the person you are attacking, you only make your self look just as bad or worse.

[Jayhad]

I honestly dont think so. I believe water test have been done that suggest the water nutrient content of the upper bow is nothing close to what it is below the weir. more specifically below the water treatment plant. I will look for these studies and link them if I find them Also extra nutrients are probably brought in from the tribes in the lower section as well.
I think you are right about this, but we do have treatment plants on the Bow upstream of Calgary.




PS. Jay, no need to be so agressive and on the offence. name calling makes it personal. stick to the discussion. regardless of how true or not you may be right about the person you are attacking, you only make your self look just as bad or worse

I am sorry you guys think I was beeing aggresive that was not my intention, nor did I ever call anyone names, if I said Beeguy you are dumb, I would understand you thinking I was name calling.... I questioned intellegence. Telling someone they are ignorant is not name calling it is an observation http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ignorant I am ignorant about so much but I strive to learn and educate myself on topics I feel important to myself.
That's the thing with internet discussions tone and inference can't be translated into 1001011101010101010101s. Typically people take offence when the truth hurts.

[Don Andersen]

Should we be targeting burbot & whitefish on lakes and not targeting walleye when all are spawning?

How about targeting brookies while spawning?

Are the above fair chase or should be wait till the spawn if over?

regards,


Don

[Ronbill]

I honestly dont think so. I believe water test have been done that suggest the water nutrient content of the upper bow is nothing close to what it is below the weir. more specifically below the water treatment plant. I will look for these studies and link them if I find them Also extra nutrients are probably brought in from the tribes in the lower section as well.


If any one knows where these studies are or fish pop studies above and below that would save me some time

The City just released it's watershed report for 2007-2009 which can be found here: http://www.erwp.org/index.php/component/docman/doc_download/44-city-of-calgary-watershed-report

It is well recognized that the City of Calgary is the largest single contributor of nutrients to the Bow River, however recent studies suggest that non-point (diffuse) sources - primarily agriculture - may contribute up uo 50% of the total phosphorus load to the river.
Now yer lernin' :test:

[BeeGuy]

Should we be targeting burbot & whitefish on lakes and not targeting walleye when all are spawning?

How about targeting brookies while spawning?

Are the above fair chase or should be wait till the spawn if over?

regards,


Don

I think there are 2 separate issues in your questions, as I don't think your qualifier of "fair chase" is meant to strictly mean 'sporting'.

1. I don't really think targeting fish while they're spawning is ever as sporting as targeting them while they are dispersed in their habitat. Some fish are indeed so difficult to target while dispersed that no one does. For example sea run fish while they are at sea. Try targeting west coast cutthroat on the open water.

2. Whether it is fair chase to target spawning fish should be a matter of the impact that fishing pressure has on the population. This can also be separated into C&R fishing, and harvest oriented fishing. In a C&R fishery, or when harvest is closed for a particular species, it is not fair chase to harass fish on the spawn. However, in a harvest oriented fishery, such as burbot, and whitefish where populations are healthy and can support harvest, I would say yes, it is fair chase.

[BeeGuy]

As far as your question about brookies, I don't think that they should be harassed while spawning.

That said, I would be happy if brookies and browns were eradicated from the province.

[BGSH]

As far as your question about brookies, I don't think that they should be harassed while spawning.

That said, I would be happy if brookies and browns were eradicated from the province.

you can fish most small creeks until oct 31st which is when most brookies are spawning and yet in the regs you can still fish in these streams and creeks.

[Dan Foss]

The City just released it's watershed report for 2007-2009 which can be found here: http://www.erwp.org/index.php/component/docman/doc_download/44-city-of-calgary-watershed-report

It is well recognized that the City of Calgary is the largest single contributor of nutrients to the Bow River, however recent studies suggest that non-point (diffuse) sources - primarily agriculture - may contribute up uo 50% of the total phosphorus load to the river.
Now yer lernin' :test:

Thanks Ronbill!!!! The place where you obtained this document, is it an srd site or was it a city of calgary site. I have been searching for other reports on different watersheds in alberta.

I have been fishing the river when these guys have come along and sampled the water and took flow measurements. Pretty cool to watch the data collection process

[Ronbill]

Thanks Ronbill!!!! The place where you obtained this document, is it an srd site or was it a city of calgary site. I have been searching for other reports on different watersheds in alberta.

I have been fishing the river when these guys have come along and sampled the water and took flow measurements. Pretty cool to watch the data collection process

Neither SRD or City of Calgary - you'd think the CoC website would be the obvious place. I originally obtained it through my work, but also found it posted on the Elbow River Watershed Partnership website: http://www.erwp.org

What you have to understand is that the Government of Alberta is attempting to manage it's water resources through regional stakeholder groups called Watershed Protection and Advisory Councils (WPACs). The majority of information on the status of Alberta's surface waters will be obtained through those groups.