View Full Version : Pigeon Lake Walleye 2007 ???

02-07-2007, 01:49 PM
I thought would light the fire for you who fish Pigeon Lake in the summer months.

Look forward to the possiblity of:
- If you are drawn you will recieve 3 tags. One 50cm + and Two 45cm -.
- Longer season May - Sept

This is not for sure, but I think you will see it happen.

02-07-2007, 03:18 PM
I for one am glad to hear that. A tag for a single fish is not exactly going to have a huge uptake going forwards. This new version sounds much better. Thanks for the info!

02-07-2007, 07:03 PM
Well i know last year i was drawn for the under 50 cm and when i went and bought the tag i got an over 50 cm, did this happen to anyone else??

02-07-2007, 10:53 PM
rocky, if you wouldn't mind, what's your source for this info? It sounds good, 'cause I 999'd mine last year (stupidly), but if its true, I know I'll be able to get one for sure

02-08-2007, 12:56 AM
I am fairly involved with the AFGA. One of my associates is on the AFGA executive. At one of last meetings with the SRD this topic came up.

02-08-2007, 01:02 AM
Last year if you applied for the tag and did not 999 your draw, you were drawn. There were approximately 5000 tags available and only about half that number of people applied for the draw.
This year they are looking and thinking about the idea of 15,000 total.

Remember this is still all on the table for now.

02-08-2007, 10:43 AM
you guys know you are setting the precedent for pay-as-you-fish in the future hey???
when THE PIGEON LAKE WALLEYE DRAW is a resounding hit, it'll spread to more and more lakes and one day you'll have to pay extra for any and all fish you keep all year.
it's a future cash-cow. mark my words. DON'T BUY WALLEYE TAGS!!!!!!

02-08-2007, 01:56 PM
Very interesting take on this topic wildman I never thought of it that way,,, I think you may be right on this one... I mean if there is enough Walleye in the lake then there are enough Walleye. Why not give the tags away say on a first come first serve basis why make people pay more don't we pay enough in this country already we should be aloud to eat a fresh fish from our waters once in a while no....

02-08-2007, 03:00 PM
Good point WM! I was thinking more quantity than price in my earlier post. Of course I am a greedy bastid :b

We do not need to pay for every fish. That would certainly end the art of angling for a lot of anglers.

Thanks for the post.

02-08-2007, 05:27 PM
Let me tell you guys this is not a cash cow. Last year this project was subsidized by the government. The $10.00 for a tag only covered half the cost. I do agree $10 is a pricey fish, but who is going to foot the bill for it. The government figured they would split it with the angler.

Without the tag system how do you regulate how many fish are caught per year? If you opened it up it would be mayhem. There would be no fish left.

Why would you boycott buying a tag?
Remember boys nothing is for free anymore.

02-08-2007, 06:06 PM
( I do agree $10 is a pricey fish, but who is going to foot the bill for it.)

Foot the bill for what,, a lake growing fish ????

(Without the tag system how do you regulate how many fish are caught per year?)

First come first serve basis hand out the tags accordingly.
as far as the price of the tags,,, what, you don't pay enough taxes already can't get something for you're money..

(Remember boys nothing is for free anymore.)

What,,,,, do you even live in this country,, 40% of my wages are all ready paid out to live in this free country...

02-08-2007, 06:08 PM
i'm with "walleyes".
it's the lame-***** joke of a gun registry all over...

02-08-2007, 06:35 PM
Something like an increase in the license fee (slightly) to help continue the walleye stocking program and even ramp it up would go one heck of a lot further with anglers than a per fish usage charge.....what a nightmare to maintain....the admin costs alone must be a huge waste of resources.

I will not participate in the walleye tag program.

02-09-2007, 09:24 AM
you know, if the gov would just put all the money they receive for f&w related things ( Licenses, tags, fines etc ) into the f&w dept. a rise in our license fees would not be nessesary. Money now goes to the gereral fund.


keeping fish
02-09-2007, 10:38 AM
I would like to see something like I believe Ontario has where there are two licences available.There is a catch and keep licence which is more money, and a catch and release only licence which is less. I do not know what the difference in costs are but it sounds like a good idea to me. Unfortunately fishing is going the way a lot of other things are these days with regard to user fees. Walleye tags, hunting tags, etc are all user fees not taxes.Taxes are something everyone pays, and of course user fees, you only pay if you use the resource. As far as the licence fees go, it is still the best deal in Alberta for a recreational activity. 25.00 per year, seniors and kids free.There is nothing even close to that cheap in the province, what does a kid/parent pay to play hockey for a few months. It always amazes me how anglers complain about a 25.00 licence, but do not complain about the 40k boat, 40k truck and 15k trailer they use while fishing. In my opinion your fish "limit" will never justify this cost, lets face it guys most of us are out there because we love to fish, regardless of what the limit is.

Rob Miskosky
02-09-2007, 10:45 AM
Actually Rattler, very little of licence and tag money goes into government coffers. I think about a buck and a half. Something like $7.50 goes to IBM for managing the system and the rest goes to the ACA.

Where the money from fines goes, I'm not sure.

02-09-2007, 11:15 AM
- Someone has to foot the bill for the tags, draw system, the license issuers, printing of regulations, all the studies that are done each year, stocking programs, biologists wages, and most important the SRD officers wages. I know there is a lot of taxpayers out there who would hate to be paying for us to get free tags.

- I don't think handing out tags on a first come first serve basis would work. How is that fair to everyone? If you want it to be fair you need to have a draw system.

- The 40% of your wage you loose to the Government, how much of that actually goes to the Provincial government? The fish in our province are controlled by the Provincial government, not the Feds. You are wondering about what you get our your taxes? What about Health care, education, good roads to drive on, cleared hiways and streets in the winter, I could go on and on for hours.

- What about Sturgeon fishing prior to 2004? You had to pay for that for years? Nobody bitched about it? Why is this any different between sturgeon or walleye?

- I don't see anyone bitching about buying tags to go hunting? Heck the even made you pay for CWD tags or quota hunt tags. These were hunts were they wanted the animals killed. I did not see one person complain about that. Why are the fish any different than animals? I know if they started handing free tags on a first come first serve for moose there would be a rebellion.

02-09-2007, 11:21 AM
Good point BOBALONG
Most us are driving a $40,000, $20,000, and have $1000 worth of tackle and dont complain about that. But yet we freak out over a $10 tag.

02-09-2007, 04:42 PM
Well guys by all means if it does'nt bother you then go ahead and pay and pay,, myself I have never fished any of the lakes that are on the list anyways and prob never will but what does concern me is the fact that it might get to far spread into all lakes... And that does bother me.. We don't need a European style fishery were the lakes and ponds are held by clubs or groups that charge a fee to use them,, but if you are narrow minded enough to think that this is not what this is leading to then by all means don't question it and go ahead lead the way...

02-09-2007, 04:43 PM
And by the way I drive a $60,000 truck and run a $55,000 boat with fresh water and salt water tackle and I still give a crap were my money goes.........

02-09-2007, 08:43 PM
The ACA might as well be government. They spend the majority of our fishing and hunting licence money on leopard frogs and other interesting studies. These species are important but shouldn't hunters and fishermans money go towards preserving hunted species with issues first? It seems a lot of guys are out counting frogs while studies on species we hunt such as grizzlies and sheep are ignored. Thats one of my pet peeves. They also seem to compete with consultants on some projects and on the other hand seem heavily subsidized (again by hunters and fishers money). It could be organized a bit better. I have mixed feelings about the walleye draw for sure. I thought it was a money grab but someone was mentioning IBM taking a bunch. I have to look into it a bit more.

02-09-2007, 11:06 PM
I do agree that one day we probally will have to pay for fishing on lakes. The mis-management of our fisheries has already affected us. It sure the hell isnt going to get any better.

02-10-2007, 01:54 AM
Central and Southern Alberta do not have many lakes where one is able to catch and keep a walleye or two for supper. I like the adjustment they have made to the walleye draw, as many people complained that $10 for a walleye was too much. Now they have complied and offered 3. I got into walleye fishing 3 years ago. I went up north so that I could keep a few. I can now stay at home and fish and eat a few. I see nothing wrong with that. I don't think this will spread to encompass all lakes. Maybe certain species. To me it is similar to antelope hunting or even pheasants. You pay extra to get one and like me, you travel long distances to get one. Lots of money spent. I am from the south and enjoyed pheasant hunting when it was great and didn't like it when they closed it and later charged extra for the priviledge. How about moose hunting? I started hunting moose when you could buy 2 tags over the counter. You guys that won't do the walleye licenses, great, because I will get mine, and you will prevent this from getting too popular. The government is responding to what we as sportsmen wanted--a tag to keep walleye. Don't blame the F/W department for the decline, how about the MLA's and Premier who decide where our money goes. By the way I have a $20,000 truck and a $1000 cartopper and motor. BL

02-12-2007, 01:48 PM
nobody's blaming F&W for the decline, they're just saying that more money for them would result in better management of our resources, which is true. They used to get the license money, now ACA gets it and uses it for "studies." That said, they do undertake creel surveys, but a lot of the money is used for things like the piping plover, and leopard frogs, etc. Stuff a lot of us don't care about all that much. Here's the bottom line. License money should go to the government, who should then in turn properly fund the ACA, as well as increase money for F&W. This will require more than license money, it'll require extra funding, but for a province that gives away our oil at a ridiculous royalty rate, and who funds horseracing with 65 million a year (compared to the F&W budget, around 30million), it shouldn't be a problem. Now that I'm done ranting, I want to agree with snapfisher (i think it was him). The best thing I could see happening int he immediate future would be increasing the license fee to say, 30 dollars or even 40 dollars, and using that extra money for stocking programs, more specifically for walleye stocking. They're what everyone is after, so why not charge a little more from everyone and try and meet the demand?