Alberta regulation consultation

[Don Andersen]

From the looks of the views on the sticky posted at the top of this forum, a bunch of people may miss this opportunity to effect change.
See: http://www.outdoorsmenforum.ca/showthread.php?t=236419
One of the interesting things within the info is the species of fish illegal to import to Alberta.

Regards,

Don

[pikergolf]

Thanks for that Don.

[WayneChristie]

noticed that myself, everyone on the forum should do the survey, and pass it on to everyone else they know who fishes as well. there are some important ideas being considered and instead of griping on posts about changes they wish would happen or not having input, do the survey and help make changes! you can give your input about the wasting burbot issue, perch in stocked trout ponds, kids under 16 fish limits and a lot more issues members here like to bring up countless times. do the survey and maybe we can get some changes!

[Walleyedude]

I just went through it. Lots of good topics and questions. This is a great opportunity to have your voice heard, hopefully everyone will go through this short survey.

[Fishslayer99]

Thanks for the reminder guys, just finished the survey. What is everyone's take on the proposal of banning the possession of potential invasive species? For example housing a fish in an aquarium that has the potential to become an invasive species if released.

I find it interesting that they used the Northern Snakehead as an example of one such fish. I agree that fish that can survive in our ecosystem if released need to be addressed in some form or another with laws/ regulations.

That being said why use the snakehead as an example, this fish has an extremely bad reputation due to it taking over areas in the US....Florida for example. I believe it is illegal to possess in B.C and I think a few other parts of Canada. I am all for banning the snakehead in B.C because if an irresponsible owner of one of these fish released it they can survive due to the mild winter temperatures.

However what would be the point of banning this fish in any other part of Canada, they can not survive therefore the proposal to make them illegal is ridiculous in my opinion. So why use the snakehead as an example?

Because it's ugly?
Because it can breathe air?
Because it can move on land?
Because it has big teeth?
Or is it just because it has a bad reputation?

I think fish like the carp or pond fish that can live and reproduce are the real threat, it just does not make sense to me?

I may be biased because I have owned one for 3 years? Regardless I would like some honest opinions on the matter... Please don't bite your lips, shoot it to me straight, I can take it... Maybe I am the one that is out to lunch on this topic?

[WayneChristie]

I believe some species of snakehead have been known to survive in our climate. Ive heard there are some in Saskatchewan now which is pretty close to ours.
http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/science/publications/article/2009/01-06-09-eng.htm

[calgarygringo]

I have seen reports that the snakeheads are moving north and in fact are managing to change and adapt to colder water. Many fish or animals have adapted to changing conditions overtime so don't assume that they cannot.
I heard Prussian Carp probably wouldn't do very well around here either years ago and guess what, they are thriving already.

[Don Andersen]

What really got my attention is Alberta only bans one fish whereas every bordering Province or State bans many.
Wife put it in perspective "this is Alberta".

Don

[Walleyedude]

What really got my attention is Alberta only bans one fish whereas every bordering Province or State bans many.
Wife put it in perspective "this is Alberta".

Don

My thoughts too. AB is WAY behind on this and needs to get up to speed quick before it's too late. The new list looks a lot more appropriate.

[Walleyedude]

Thanks for the reminder guys, just finished the survey. What is everyone's take on the proposal of banning the possession of potential invasive species? For example housing a fish in an aquarium that has the potential to become an invasive species if released.

I find it interesting that they used the Northern Snakehead as an example of one such fish. I agree that fish that can survive in our ecosystem if released need to be addressed in some form or another with laws/ regulations.

That being said why use the snakehead as an example, this fish has an extremely bad reputation due to it taking over areas in the US....Florida for example. I believe it is illegal to possess in B.C and I think a few other parts of Canada. I am all for banning the snakehead in B.C because if an irresponsible owner of one of these fish released it they can survive due to the mild winter temperatures.

However what would be the point of banning this fish in any other part of Canada, they can not survive therefore the proposal to make them illegal is ridiculous in my opinion. So why use the snakehead as an example?

Because it's ugly?
Because it can breathe air?
Because it can move on land?
Because it has big teeth?
Or is it just because it has a bad reputation?

I think fish like the carp or pond fish that can live and reproduce are the real threat, it just does not make sense to me?

I may be biased because I have owned one for 3 years? Regardless I would like some honest opinions on the matter... Please don't bite your lips, shoot it to me straight, I can take it... Maybe I am the one that is out to lunch on this topic?

Let me ask a question, not just for you, but in general, because I just can't understand the desire to have a fish/animal like that when the potential dangers, however small, are well known.

As a sportsman and fisherman in AB, why would a person, legal or not, want to take ANY chance of having ANY invasive species, such as a snakehead, escape and get established in our fisheries? The ability of a species to adapt is something we don't have a great track record at predicting.

Why take that risk? Are there not 1000s of other fish species that a person could have in their aquarium at home that would provide just as much enjoyment without putting our environment at risk?

I'm a "to each their own" kinda guy, I'm not one to ban things just because I don't like them, but when it comes to these known invasive species, I'm all for a complete ban. It's not worth the risk to me.

[huntsfurfish]

Let me ask a question, not just for you, but in general, because I just can't understand the desire to have a fish/animal like that when the potential dangers, however small, are well known.

As a sportsman and fisherman in AB, why would a person, legal or not, want to take ANY chance of having ANY invasive species, such as a snakehead, escape and get established in our fisheries? The ability of a species to adapt is something we don't have a great track record at predicting.

Why take that risk? Are there not 1000s of other fish species that a person could have in their aquarium at home that would provide just as much enjoyment without putting our environment at risk?

I'm a "to each their own" kinda guy, I'm not one to ban things just because I don't like them, but when it comes to these known invasive species, I'm all for a complete ban. It's not worth the risk to me.

Well said!

[Don Andersen]

Good god....

We can't have them lefties telling me what I can or can't do.
Screw this nanny state stuff!!!

Don

[fish gunner]

The northern snake head can survive well in our lake and rivers, its the giant snake head that can't . I for one support the ban .

[Fishslayer99]

Let me ask a question, not just for you, but in general, because I just can't understand the desire to have a fish/animal like that when the potential dangers, however small, are well known.

As a sportsman and fisherman in AB, why would a person, legal or not, want to take ANY chance of having ANY invasive species, such as a snakehead, escape and get established in our fisheries? The ability of a species to adapt is something we don't have a great track record at predicting.

Why take that risk? Are there not 1000s of other fish species that a person could have in their aquarium at home that would provide just as much enjoyment without putting our environment at risk?

I'm a "to each their own" kinda guy, I'm not one to ban things just because I don't like them, but when it comes to these known invasive species, I'm all for a complete ban. It's not worth the risk to me.

First off Wayne thank you for the link, an interesting read to say the least. I must say it was ignorant of me to assume they could not adapt and survive in Alberta, This will certainly change my outlook on the topic.

Walleyedude,
As a sportsman and fisherman in Alberta, I own a snakehead because I think they are an amazing fish. I however am not risking the environment by having such a fish because... I am not a negligent owner and there is 100% chance that it will NEVER make it into one of our fantastic fisheries.

Now that that is out of the way, considering these fish can possibly survive in our climate and are in fact a threatening invasive species. I am on board 100% to make them illegal, because not everyone is a responsible pet owner (the one bad apple ruins it for the bunch).:snapoutofit:

an invasive species does not take over an area because it wants too, it does so because of some uneducated individuals(to put it very nicely) actions. Really its not much different than saying pit bulls are bad dogs, the onus inevitably falls on the owner...sad really.

I asked for everyone's honest opinions and I appreciate the honest replies, as usual the comments from the forum members have educated me and opened my eyes.

When and if the axe comes down and they are in fact illegal to own, I will throw out an invitation on the forum...come on over for a snakehead dinner!

[WayneChristie]

If you did have to kill it it would be a ahame to eat it. Personally Id get it mounted if you like it that much!

[Fishslayer99]

If you did have to kill it it would be a ahame to eat it. Personally Id get it mounted if you like it that much!

Wayne,

That's not a bad idea...:thinking-006:recommend any good taxidermists?

[CritterCommander]

How did you guys answer the part about kids fishing? I for one think young kids, say kids under 10 should be able to keep 1 fish - whatever they catch. That way they have accomplished something other than winching in a fish - which most kids that age do with gusto by the way - but the pride in bringing that home, cleaning and help cook it is awesome to see in the little ones. Anything we can do to instill a love of fishing and the outdoors and get these wee ones off the internet and game boxes or whatever other diversion they have has to be a good thing? Kids 10-16 follow the same rules as the rest of us because know they are old enough to understand conservation.

Thoughts?

[Pikebreath]

How did you guys answer the part about kids fishing? I for one think young kids, say kids under 10 should be able to keep 1 fish - whatever they catch. That way they have accomplished something other than winching in a fish - which most kids that age do with gusto by the way - but the pride in bringing that home, cleaning and help cook it is awesome to see in the little ones. Anything we can do to instill a love of fishing and the outdoors and get these wee ones off the internet and game boxes or whatever other diversion they have has to be a good thing? Kids 10-16 follow the same rules as the rest of us because know they are old enough to understand conservation.

Thoughts?

I hear where you are coming from,,, but that would be a way for dad, grampa, uncle, next door neighbour etc. to get around size limit restrictions,,, just take a 1/2 dozen kids with and you can now keep 6 undersize walleye in your boat.

The goal should be to save some fish stocks for these future moms and dads and their kids fishing enjoyment!!

[WayneChristie]

if they want to keep a limit I think they should be able to buy a license, even if they are under 16 and then keep what the rest of us are allowed to as well. if they dont retain fish then no license required. JMHO

[WayneChristie]

Wayne,

That's not a bad idea...:thinking-006:recommend any good taxidermists?

theres one that sponsors this forum, Ive seen his work and its pretty great

[CritterCommander]

Was not trying to get around possession limits, but funny how people automatically figure everyone is a crook, let the young uns' keep 1 fish. That's all.

Enjoy your snakehead soup.

[slivers86]

Survey completed a day or two ago. Thanks for the post :-)

[Lefty-Canuck]

How did you guys answer the part about kids fishing? I for one think young kids, say kids under 10 should be able to keep 1 fish - whatever they catch. That way they have accomplished something other than winching in a fish - which most kids that age do with gusto by the way - but the pride in bringing that home, cleaning and help cook it is awesome to see in the little ones. Anything we can do to instill a love of fishing and the outdoors and get these wee ones off the internet and game boxes or whatever other diversion they have has to be a good thing? Kids 10-16 follow the same rules as the rest of us because know they are old enough to understand conservation.

Thoughts?

I voted to combine limits with the adult present....if it is a retention lake the adult won't mind sharing his limit with his children...that way they can still keep "their" fish, they shouldn't be able to keep "whatever they catch" it doesn't fit a management strategy at all....

LC