Proposed 2015 Angling Regulation changes.

[Hooker]

I happened to find this on the web while making a search for 2015 fishing regulations.

http://esrd.alberta.ca/fish-wildlife/fisheries-management/documents/Proposed2015AnglingChanges-Nov28-2014.pdf

[biggyJ]

Bow river listed as (bearspaw to Carseland) is incorrectly listed as PP2 when it should be ES1

[fish gunner]

Hate the new regs . :sign0176:

[MoFugger21]

Will be interesting to see just how much the fishing pressure increases on Badger and Keho with McGregor and Travers being closed....

[jacenbeers]

I like the idea of no catch limit in McGregor to help pike recover. The amount of pike poaching I have seen and called in off the dam is ridiculous.

[Crankbait]

I like the idea of no catch limit in McGregor to help pike recover. The amount of pike poaching I have seen and called in off the dam is ridiculous.

the pike there are in a bad state of health, I've seen garter snakes with more girth. when it does recover - if it recovers - it will be a nice catch and release lake. though the walleye are piglet sized.

[rena0040]

Theres very few fish I eat but I do like a decent pike. it looks like its getting real hard for a guy to have a fish fry without visiting a store.
And before the c&r guys go crazy, I keep probably 2 fish a year.

[jacenbeers]

the pike there are in a bad state of health, I've seen garter snakes with more girth. when it does recover - if it recovers - it will be a nice catch and release lake. though the walleye are piglet sized.

I have caught some monster walleye out of Macregor. There are tons of big walleye in there.

[bubba 96]

Will be interesting to see just how much the fishing pressure increases on Badger and Keho with McGregor and Travers being closed....

I just said the exact same to my wife, they might as well do it to those reservoirs as well or they will be done in a year...

[Crankbait]

I have caught some monster walleye out of Macregor. There are tons of big walleye in there.

that's what I meant by piglet, pig - on second thought - might have been a better choice of word.

if a zero retention or a slot size be created, why did badger not get on the list?

[Hooker]

These are "proposed" changes. They aren't cast in stone yet. You can always write your MLA or the department or both if you agree/disagree with them.

[Habfan]

IMO, that's what happens when you stock a lake with 30 million walleye, then not let you keep any. The walleye eat everything in sight and the pike suffer !! It's not from over fishing !! With the closure of netting whitefish, the increased small whites that will result, should get the pike back in a hurry, not to mention putting some more weight on those plentiful walleyes and even bring back the perch that used to be !!!!

[TROLLER]

Changing to catch and release or special size range does not seem to be working.

Just go to Clear and see all the people that think they can keep 3 over 63, even when you tell them the size regulation they more or less do not believe or know there is no F&W around.

It is amazing how many people do not bother to see if the regs have changed from year to year.

[Fishtracker]

IMO, that's what happens when you stock a lake with 30 million walleye, then not let you keep any. The walleye eat everything in sight and the pike suffer !! It's not from over fishing !! With the closure of netting whitefish, the increased small whites that will result, should get the pike back in a hurry, not to mention putting some more weight on those plentiful walleyes and even bring back the perch that used to be !!!!


Walleye are turning into a Nuisance! Time to open up the limits!!:)

[FlyTheory]

Walleye are turning into a Nuisance! Time to open up the limits!!:)

I agree with you, and in terms of Baptiste Lake (which is a lake they are closing for pike in 2015) the size of the walleye in the last few years have been exceeding that of pike, and the pike average plummet. I think if they added more tags, or opened up walleye for one year, it would help balance out things. Or if we were patient... which we aren't... we could leave the lake alone for a few hundred years and let nature do what it does.

[Rifle]

Guys always blame the walleye for low pike numbers when the walleye limit is zero. The reality is that when they aren't allowed to keep eyes, way more guys try for pike so they "have somethin' for the pan!" Then with that overpressure the pike get stunted. Not the walleyes' fault. And if they open it for walleye within an hour and half of Edmonton it would be cleaned out in 3-4 weeks. Too many guys, not enough lakes. Same old story.

[burbotman]

Guys always blame the walleye for low pike numbers when the walleye limit is zero. The reality is that when they aren't allowed to keep eyes, way more guys try for pike so they "have somethin' for the pan!" Then with that overpressure the pike get stunted. Not the walleyes' fault. And if they open it for walleye within an hour and half of Edmonton it would be cleaned out in 3-4 weeks. Too many guys, not enough lakes. Same old story.

Well said, on both points

[Habfan]

The reason for these closures is over fished !!! They don't say if it was commercially over fished or angling over fished !!! I noticed that the lakes listed in the new proposals were lakes that were all commercially fished,up until this year. If you drop 35 million walleye in a lake, then not have any retention they will eat all available food in that lake, plus the netting of white fish, which is a major contributor to the food chain, how are the pike or perch going to survive ? You should come down to some of these huge reservoirs down south and see for yourself that there is not a lot of angling pressure ! It's a combination of things that were all done wrong by the ESRD !!! Don't go blaming anyone that's wants to take home a fish for the frying pan !! Just my opinion so take it as is !

[huntsfurfish]

Guys always blame the walleye for low pike numbers when the walleye limit is zero. The reality is that when they aren't allowed to keep eyes, way more guys try for pike so they "have somethin' for the pan!" Then with that overpressure the pike get stunted. Not the walleyes' fault. And if they open it for walleye within an hour and half of Edmonton it would be cleaned out in 3-4 weeks. Too many guys, not enough lakes. Same old story.

Agree!

[Habfan]

I like the idea of no catch limit in McGregor to help pike recover. The amount of pike poaching I have seen and called in off the dam is ridiculous.

On a 20 mile long lake do you you think that would even make a dent in the population ? People fishing that little piece of shoreline don't make a difference ! There are other factors that some people just won't admit too ! Maybe when the amount of fish taken by nets is made public you will change your mind !!:snapoutofit:

[boomstick]

starting to get to the point we may as well give up fishing . if u can,t keep one or two for a meal on a weekend , whats the point of buying a license .

[FlyTheory]

starting to get to the point we may as well give up fishing . if u can,t keep one or two for a meal on a weekend , whats the point of buying a license .

Because everyone here fishes for sustenance

[AlbertaCutthroat]

On a 20 mile long lake do you you think that would even make a dent in the population ? People fishing that little piece of shoreline don't make a difference ! There are other factors that some people just won't admit too ! Maybe when the amount of fish taken by nets is made public you will change your mind !!:snapoutofit:

It's that attitude that wiped out the bison.....
There's too many people and not enough lakes, get used to it. Can't always blame somebody else, recreational fishing has a huge impact on the fish community in those lakes...

[the local angler]

pretty soon the whole province will be catch and release only lol. kinda disappointed with the zero limits being purposed on so many bodies of water that i frequent especially the bow. i thought having the option of keeping 1 trout under 35cm was very reasonable. unless the flood did much more damage then anticipated? i didn't think the bow river section mentioned was in that much danger for them to purpose a zero limit on all species?

[Cory1]

pretty soon the whole province will be catch and release only lol. kinda disappointed with the zero limits being purposed on so many bodies of water that i frequent especially the bow. i thought having the option of keeping 1 trout under 35cm was very reasonable. unless the flood did much more damage then anticipated? i didn't think the bow river section mentioned was in that much danger for them to purpose a zero limit on all species?

My understanding of the bow is that "the majority of anglers want it to be a c&r trophy fishery"

My thoughts are removing retention from one fishery is just going to place the pressure somewhere else. My first thought is that we need a quota based system, where with your liscence you get x number fish for each species.

[chriscosta]

Guys always blame the walleye for low pike numbers when the walleye limit is zero. The reality is that when they aren't allowed to keep eyes, way more guys try for pike so they "have somethin' for the pan!" Then with that overpressure the pike get stunted. Not the walleyes' fault. And if they open it for walleye within an hour and half of Edmonton it would be cleaned out in 3-4 weeks. Too many guys, not enough lakes. Same old story.

You have a valid point about if ya open walleye up theyd be cleaned out ...but only tbe ones of keeper size the rest would go back .....look at buck lake ...huge pike perch and whitefish lotsa small walleye and the odd keeper ..lakes doin great imo ..now look down the hwy to pigeon lake or any lake for that matter where its stocked with lotsa walleye with zero retention...every year you catch more and more walleye they dont seem to grow very good once the population is skyrocketing and all the other species deminish ...just keep a close eye on wab cuz its already starting to happen there ...number of ten pound plus fish in wab has seemed to go down and a 15 pounder is few and far between when before all the walleye a 15 to 20 pound pike was common ..only difference is thousands of walleye ...my best walleye fishing day this winter was at wab as far as numbers are concerned ..thats a first for me ...but thats just my opinion

[bobalong]

starting to get to the point we may as well give up fishing . if u can,t keep one or two for a meal on a weekend , whats the point of buying a license .

I see this statement quite a bit, and don't really understand the reasoning. You spend 50-100 bucks for fuel for your truck/boat, another 20 on bait, rods and reels etc. and if you can keep one fish it is all worth it, but if you cant keep any, it isn't?

There are many, many sports that people participate in, and don't get to keep anything from it, except the joy and memories of doing it....golf, hiking, hockey, tennis, etc., why do you have to be able to keep something when fishing, just because you pay a whole 25/year to do it.

If you are only fishing for food, in your case you are probably right about not buying a licence, you should probably look at another activity that you do for ENJOYMENT. :sHa_sarcasticlol:

[wind drift]

You have a valid point about if ya open walleye up theyd be cleaned out ...but only tbe ones of keeper size the rest would go back .....look at buck lake ...huge pike perch and whitefish lotsa small walleye and the odd keeper ..lakes doin great imo ..now look down the hwy to pigeon lake or any lake for that matter where its stocked with lotsa walleye with zero retention...every year you catch more and more walleye they dont seem to grow very good once the population is skyrocketing and all the other species deminish ...just keep a close eye on wab cuz its already starting to happen there ...number of ten pound plus fish in wab has seemed to go down and a 15 pounder is few and far between when before all the walleye a 15 to 20 pound pike was common ..only difference is thousands of walleye ...my best walleye fishing day this winter was at wab as far as numbers are concerned ..thats a first for me ...but thats just my opinion

Not the only difference. Fishing pressure has increased a fair bit since the walleye restoration was begun. Even with catch and release, hooking mortality can reduce the numbers of pike, particularly the older ones. The challenge with Wabamun will likely be maintaining the fishery quality if pressure keeps increasing.

[tallieho]

I wonder about there term 'experimental' means

[ORV]

The reason for these closures is over fished !!! They don't say if it was commercially over fished or angling over fished !!! I noticed that the lakes listed in the new proposals were lakes that were all commercially fished,up until this year. If you drop 35 million walleye in a lake, then not have any retention they will eat all available food in that lake, plus the netting of white fish, which is a major contributor to the food chain, how are the pike or perch going to survive ? You should come down to some of these huge reservoirs down south and see for yourself that there is not a lot of angling pressure ! It's a combination of things that were all done wrong by the ESRD !!! Don't go blaming anyone that's wants to take home a fish for the frying pan !! Just my opinion so take it as is !

I agree with you on the angling pressure in some lakes down south
90% of the pressure at Macgregor is in two spots less than 1/4 mile long
in a lake that is 40k,s long!
we caught and released lots of pike all summer down there.

[calgarygringo]

Maybe a dumb question but it has come up on several outings with different people.
When we go out fishing to a lake and one group catches nothing and another group in another spot on the lake catches all day long how do you use those numbers as showing how the lake may be doing.

Spin that another way as I have seen the netting crews and talked to a few of them too but always forget to ask. How do they decide where to do the netting in a big lake. The same as above would concern me as they could net in places and get nothing and miss the areas that the fish are holding and doing well. The opposite could potentally occur too. Just wondering how they know where all these fish are supposed to be hiding out?
I also know they have done shore surveys but I have seen days where we caught fish all day and most nothing according to the guy doing the survey so who's information gets the most attention? The one that says the lake is doing great or the guys that say there is no fish left in the lake?

Just curious.

[kevinhits]

Maybe a dumb question but it has come up on several outings with different people.
When we go out fishing to a lake and one group catches nothing and another group in another spot on the lake catches all day long how do you use those numbers as showing how the lake may be doing.

Spin that another way as I have seen the netting crews and talked to a few of them too but always forget to ask. How do they decide where to do the netting in a big lake. The same as above would concern me as they could net in places and get nothing and miss the areas that the fish are holding and doing well. The opposite could potentally occur too. Just wondering how they know where all these fish are supposed to be hiding out?
I also know they have done shore surveys but I have seen days where we caught fish all day and most nothing according to the guy doing the survey so who's information gets the most attention? The one that says the lake is doing great or the guys that say there is no fish left in the lake?

Just curious.

Secrets of the universe I guess...LOL

Totally see what you are saying though Ken....

[ORV]

Maybe a dumb question but it has come up on several outings with different people.
When we go out fishing to a lake and one group catches nothing and another group in another spot on the lake catches all day long how do you use those numbers as showing how the lake may be doing.

Spin that another way as I have seen the netting crews and talked to a few of them too but always forget to ask. How do they decide where to do the netting in a big lake. The same as above would concern me as they could net in places and get nothing and miss the areas that the fish are holding and doing well. The opposite could potentally occur too. Just wondering how they know where all these fish are supposed to be hiding out?
I also know they have done shore surveys but I have seen days where we caught fish all day and most nothing according to the guy doing the survey so who's information gets the most attention? The one that says the lake is doing great or the guys that say there is no fish left in the lake?

Just curious.

very good point.
one time by milo a fews years back they were out in a boat & caught very little
we caught about 40 off the dam (wallys)
goes to show ya.

orv.

[calgarygringo]

I bet they reported the lake was in bad shape. A few of the netting reports I have come across at places I have fished I am amazed at how few it says they caught at lakes we have had great days in the boat.

[the local angler]

My understanding of the bow is that "the majority of anglers want it to be a c&r trophy fishery"

My thoughts are removing retention from one fishery is just going to place the pressure somewhere else. My first thought is that we need a quota based system, where with your liscence you get x number fish for each species.

i do agree and just thought that the retention part of the bow was fairly reasonable compared to before, i guess that's in my mind. like being allowed 1 trout under 35cm and i think its 3 whitefish over 30cm. i would rather see another reduction in the retention then a total reduction. the bow is the only place that i like is close to home where i can go fish for rocky mountain whitefish. i know they are else where in other river systems but i have not targeted them in other rivers before.

[wind drift]

Maybe a dumb question but it has come up on several outings with different people.
When we go out fishing to a lake and one group catches nothing and another group in another spot on the lake catches all day long how do you use those numbers as showing how the lake may be doing.

Spin that another way as I have seen the netting crews and talked to a few of them too but always forget to ask. How do they decide where to do the netting in a big lake. The same as above would concern me as they could net in places and get nothing and miss the areas that the fish are holding and doing well. The opposite could potentally occur too. Just wondering how they know where all these fish are supposed to be hiding out?
I also know they have done shore surveys but I have seen days where we caught fish all day and most nothing according to the guy doing the survey so who's information gets the most attention? The one that says the lake is doing great or the guys that say there is no fish left in the lake?

Just curious.

Answers:
http://esrd.alberta.ca/fish-wildlife/fisheries-management/fall-walleye-index-netting/default.aspx

[cube]

Maybe a dumb question but it has come up on several outings with different people.
When we go out fishing to a lake and one group catches nothing and another group in another spot on the lake catches all day long how do you use those numbers as showing how the lake may be doing They take an average and then do their own test angling to set a correcting fudge factor. This corrects for the guys that always say they caught a couple less or a couple more. They know fishermen have a tendency to lie a little. .

Spin that another way as I have seen the netting crews and talked to a few of them too but always forget to ask. How do they decide where to do the netting in a big lake. This is done by random draw. They mark a map of the lake in sections and then random draw the area's that will be netted. They put out certain numbers of nets in both shallow and deep areas given the size and depth profile of a lake. The same as above would concern me as they could net in places and get nothing and miss the areas that the fish are holding and doing well. The opposite could potentally occur too. Just wondering how they know where all these fish are supposed to be hiding out?
I also know they have done shore surveys but I have seen days where we caught fish all day and most nothing according to the guy doing the survey so who's information gets the most attention? The one that says the lake is doing great or the guys that say there is no fish left in the lake? Again they take an average and then do their own test angling to set a correcting fudge factor. This corrects for the guys that always say they caught a couple less or a couple more. They know fishermen have a tendency to lie a little. .

Just curious.

Hoped that help

[Bear7001]

On a 20 mile long lake do you you think that would even make a dent in the population ? People fishing that little piece of shoreline don't make a difference ! There are other factors that some people just won't admit too ! Maybe when the amount of fish taken by nets is made public you will change your mind !!:snapoutofit:


Totally agree. Commercial fishing has killed alot of lakes. One just has to go back to see some of the limits commercial fishers were allowed to take. 900kg from Keho and Traverse in 2013 and you can only imagine what affect this has over the years.