PDA

View Full Version : No more Perch in Trout lakes


McLeod
03-17-2009, 10:18 AM
So if I understand this correctly , there is no more harvest of perch in the stocked lakes such as Spring , Hasse , Obed etc.
I hope they post lots of signs.

willy
03-17-2009, 10:59 AM
from the regs
Hasse Lake (13-52-2-W5) – Open all year – Trout limit 5; Perch limit 15
.Spring (Cottage) Lake – (30-52-1-W5) – Open all year – Trout limit 5; Perch limit 15

nicemustang
03-17-2009, 11:05 AM
I think the regs mean, if they don't list a perch limit in the lake, you can't keep any...at least that's the way I understood it.

McLeod
03-17-2009, 11:56 AM
So explain the logic behind that. Yes on some , no on others.

Morph1
03-17-2009, 12:10 PM
So explain the logic behind that. Yes on some , no on others.
What Logic??? , the fisheries here are managed by a bunch of crayons,
they are 100 years away from discovering the word LOGIC and another 100 away from defining the word itself . :lol::lol::lol:

redneck posse
03-17-2009, 12:14 PM
I think the regs mean, if they don't list a perch limit in the lake, you can't keep any...at least that's the way I understood it.

not sure i always thought if a lake had perch in it and was not in the regs it meant you could keep 15... might be a good question to ask F&W.

kostianych
03-17-2009, 12:26 PM
even if the lake is not in the regs:
C. For other PP2 Lakes, Reservoirs and Ponds not included under (A) or (B) and for fish species not mentioned at a listed lake.
Open all year – Walleye limit 3 over 50 cm; Pike limit 3 over 63 cm; Perch limit 15; Lake Whitefish limit 10; Burbot limit 10; (where present, Trout limit 5; Mountain Whitefish limit 5 over 30 cm); Bait allowed.

goober
03-17-2009, 12:30 PM
What Logic??? , the fisheries here are managed by a bunch of crayons,

Too funny, true, but hilarious!!:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

AlbertaAngler
03-17-2009, 12:38 PM
even if the lake is not in the regs:
C. For other PP2 Lakes, Reservoirs and Ponds not included under (A) or (B) and for fish species not mentioned at a listed lake.
Open all year – Walleye limit 3 over 50 cm; Pike limit 3 over 63 cm; Perch limit 15; Lake Whitefish limit 10; Burbot limit 10; (where present, Trout limit 5; Mountain Whitefish limit 5 over 30 cm); Bait allowed.

except that in the 2009 regs it states

To reduce the incentive of illegal stocking the retention of pike and perch in waters stocked with trout or grayling is illegal unless specified in water body specific regulations.

So I have to agree with nicemustang - if it is a stocked trout lake and it does not specify that you can keep perch or pike I don't believe you can.

nicemustang
03-17-2009, 12:41 PM
It says and I quote: "To reduce the incentive of illegal stocking the retention of pike and perch in waters stocked with trout or grayling is illegal unless specified in water body specific regulations."

nicemustang
03-17-2009, 12:41 PM
Yeah, beat me to it....I would love to have confirmation.

goober
03-17-2009, 12:46 PM
Yeah, beat me to it....I would love to have confirmation.

Confirmation granted, you are correct!!

Morph1
03-17-2009, 12:58 PM
It says and I quote: "To reduce the incentive of illegal stocking the retention of pike and perch in waters stocked with trout or grayling is illegal unless specified in water body specific regulations."

That is absolutely brilliant idea :lol: and I can see right away how the illegal stocking is gonna end , I already see the difference :lol::lol::lol:
Lets leave the predator alone and let it grow to abnormal proportions and on top of that lets stock it with the baby 10 cm rainbows to feed the reproducing predatory fish.

How F***ing Brilliant is that :lol::lol::lol: I wonder if Ted M had something to do with that :lol: I mean they must've got some help from outside some other thinking source to do that ,I just don't see how they could come up with this idea on their own ....

Cheers and smile :lol: its healthy

Penner
03-17-2009, 01:02 PM
What Logic??? , the fisheries here are managed by a bunch of crayons,
they are 100 years away from discovering the word LOGIC and another 100 away from defining the word itself . :lol::lol::lol:

Whoa, give fisheries management credit for try something differnent!!!

To perhpas clarify and as I understand - It will be "illegal" to keep either pike and or perch from bodies of water specifically stocked with trout or grayling.

My understanding of the logic behind this is that because nobody will be allowed to keep any Perch from a Trout or Grayling stocked body of water there will not be no incentive/reason for anyone to illegally introduce Perch into those bodies of water in the first place! Unless their incentive is to create a C&R trophy Perch fishery?

We have to fix the problem and the problem is not that the Perch, Pike, or Walleye are in those bodies of water but rather that someone put them in their illegally. The people are the problem not the fish!!!

Makes perfect sense to me. It’s thinking outside of the box now we will have to wait and see if it works. I would assume they are planning to kill off the illegally introduced species in the near future with this new regulation in-place.

I like the idea.

kostianych
03-17-2009, 01:15 PM
It says and I quote: "To reduce the incentive of illegal stocking the retention of pike and perch in waters stocked with trout or grayling is illegal unless specified in water body specific regulations."

that`s correct, I agree (according to the Important Changes For 2009 ), but how to be if the lake (pond, paddle) is not named in the regs?

Morph1
03-17-2009, 01:21 PM
Penner sorry ,
but I am wondering if you put your right shoe on your left foot and the left one on the right foot, do you put your shirt inside out and walk backwards moving forward.
This is not gonna work, have you ever seen a boat with a FWO on a pot hole lakes??? how are they gonna check if guys on the boat are not keeping the pike and perch ?? how is this enforcement going to help to the lakes that are already over populated with illegal fish species???
You're gonna talk about stunted fishery when folks are allowd to keep the illegal stocked fish , now how do you see ecosystem doing with the closure of harvesting the illegal fish ??? what is gonna be happening in the waters of Hasse lake (Example) if you could not harvest the perch, if this gonna go on in a lake like that, next 2 years you will be able to walk on water cause it will be so extremly populated with already ilegally introduced fish and no chance for trout to recover in any way.

Sorry man I eat my soup with a spoon not a FORK !! :lol:

Deano
03-17-2009, 02:25 PM
Whoa, give fisheries management credit for try something differnent!!!

To perhpas clarify and as I understand - It will be "illegal" to keep either pike and or perch from bodies of water specifically stocked with trout or grayling.

My understanding of the logic behind this is that because nobody will be allowed to keep any Perch from a Trout or Grayling stocked body of water there will not be no incentive/reason for anyone to illegally introduce Perch into those bodies of water in the first place! Unless their incentive is to create a C&R trophy Perch fishery?

We have to fix the problem and the problem is not that the Perch, Pike, or Walleye are in those bodies of water but rather that someone put them in their illegally. The people are the problem not the fish!!!

Makes perfect sense to me. It’s thinking outside of the box now we will have to wait and see if it works. I would assume they are planning to kill off the illegally introduced species in the near future with this new regulation in-place.

I like the idea.

I can see your point Penner. With all the talk about how there is no decent Perch fishing close to Edmonton, some people may be tempted to do something about it. I have never fished Hasse but I have heard from people there were some nice Perch in there for a couple of years. Unfortunately the ones who illegally stock the Perch don't care about rules and will keep them anyway.
It seems like nothing the government does is the right approach. But I agree with you it is nice to see them thinking outside the box.

Deano

Cal
03-17-2009, 02:35 PM
To me it seems lake the oposite aproach would have been more logical... no size or catch limit on pike or perch in trout lakes. Only time will tell if this new rule will work but I cant see it working out very well.

Sundancefisher
03-17-2009, 02:45 PM
I can see your point Penner. With all the talk about how there is no decent Perch fishing close to Edmonton, some people may be tempted to do something about it. I have never fished Hasse but I have heard from people there were some nice Perch in there for a couple of years. Unfortunately the ones who illegally stock the Perch don't care about rules and will keep them anyway.
It seems like nothing the government does is the right approach. But I agree with you it is nice to see them thinking outside the box.

Deano

Time will tell

The premise is that if you put perch in a trout lake you ruin the trout lake and can't catch perch either. If you assume that these idiots are putting perch places in order to be the hero and have perch nearby for a few years until they stunt then this take away the incentive for them. If they are smart or not totally dumb then they will stop the practice. Also with the increased negative feelings towards these sorts of stupid illegal bucket stockings combined with the loss of a trout fishery...this behavoir will cease. Without trying something...only chaos and extremely poor fishing is in the horizon.

If anyone is dead set against this sort of regulation...come up with a better one.

History has proven in a lake that does not regularly winterkill or gets aerated that:

1. Trout do very well for ever and ever
2. Perch do very well then stunt and become a wasted fishery
3. Trout and perch do poorly together
4. Intensive fishing perch in a trout lake hardly dents the population.
5. Lake after lake is getting vandalized in this fashion.
6. Millions of dollars have been wasted trying to fix the problem to no avail
7. Most of these lakes are smaller lakes that can not support a harvest of walleye and pike. Therefore with a limited population such a fishery consisting of small walleye, pike and perch would not do well. Also stocking walleye is expensive, pike are seriously impacted by habiltat loss along the shoreline and perch will most likely explode still and be uncontrolled by the predators due to the advance start in the population explosion cycle.

Therefore...rather than complain about the problem...be part of the solution. What would you do to stop this from happening? That is the most important problem. It needs to be addressed before there is no more trout around and the same guys now complain about the lake of trout fishing cause there are too many small perch lakes around.

Then you need to come up with a solution to combat the population boom on the current illegally stocked perch lakes.

I would suggest you get a group together and approach your local fish and game association. Offer to raise some funds for buying some fyke nets and 1 inch stretch mesh gill nets. Then round up volunteers...put together a netting schedule and start netting the crap out of one trout lake stocked with perch. Run the fyke nets over night and during the day. Kill all perch...live release all trout. Then during the day run the gill nets in a cycling fashion...set net...wait 15-20 minutes then check the start again for trapped fish. Kill perch release trout. Repeat if successful. Lengthen set time to compensate for lack of fish or move net. If trout mortality becomes a question...short set time. With intensive netting, you may prove to help bring the fishery back. Offer the perch to the poor or set up a cleaning station and fillet...beer batter and deep fry for the end of the day volunteer perch fry...

While you are at it, tie up any illegal perch stockers and cover in honey and place on red ant colony...:evilgrin:

Cheers

Sun

Couleestalker
03-17-2009, 03:17 PM
This new regulation will work great for stoked lakes that do not currently have introcduced pike or perch. What about all the lakes that already have perch in them? It won't do a thing to increase the trout fishery in those lakes. Now that the regs are set, the lakes with illegally introduced fish must be cleaned out (kill everything) and start stocking trout once again, and hopefully the new regs wil deter people from putting perch in them again.

Penner
03-17-2009, 04:08 PM
Penner sorry ,
but I am wondering if you put your right shoe on your left foot and the left one on the right foot, do you put your shirt inside out and walk backwards moving forward.
This is not gonna work, have you ever seen a boat with a FWO on a pot hole lakes??? how are they gonna check if guys on the boat are not keeping the pike and perch ?? how is this enforcement going to help to the lakes that are already over populated with illegal fish species???
You're gonna talk about stunted fishery when folks are allowd to keep the illegal stocked fish , now how do you see ecosystem doing with the closure of harvesting the illegal fish ??? what is gonna be happening in the waters of Hasse lake (Example) if you could not harvest the perch, if this gonna go on in a lake like that, next 2 years you will be able to walk on water cause it will be so extremly populated with already ilegally introduced fish and no chance for trout to recover in any way.

Sorry man I eat my soup with a spoon not a FORK !! :lol:

Dude, the regulation doesn’t even take effect until April 1st and you are already calling it dead in the water. It’s a lot easier to be a pessimist I guess. For the record, I didn't say it was going to work I just said I liked the idea. Good disscusion anyways.

P.S. Can you really eat soup or is it more of a drink? :scared:

I can see your point Penner. With all the talk about how there is no decent Perch fishing close to Edmonton, some people may be tempted to do something about it. I have never fished Hasse but I have heard from people there were some nice Perch in there for a couple of years. Unfortunately the ones who illegally stock the Perch don't care about rules and will keep them anyway.
It seems like nothing the government does is the right approach. But I agree with you it is nice to see them thinking outside the box.

Deano

One thing is certain, the current rules are clearly not working so may as well try something different you never know. I agree the ones who illegally stock the Perch don't care about rules and will keep them anyway I just hope there are more CO's hired to enforce the rules otherwise this entire discussion is pointless.

pdfish
03-17-2009, 04:16 PM
Time will tell


I would suggest you get a group together and approach your local fish and game association. Offer to raise some funds for buying some fyke nets and 1 inch stretch mesh gill nets. Then round up volunteers...put together a netting schedule and start netting the crap out of one trout lake stocked with perch. Run the fyke nets over night and during the day. Kill all perch...live release all trout. Then during the day run the gill nets in a cycling fashion...set net...wait 15-20 minutes then check the start again for trapped fish. Kill perch release trout. Repeat if successful. Lengthen set time to compensate for lack of fish or move net. If trout mortality becomes a question...short set time. With intensive netting, you may prove to help bring the fishery back. Offer the perch to the poor or set up a cleaning station and fillet...beer batter and deep fry for the end of the day volunteer perch fry...

While you are at it, tie up any illegal perch stockers and cover in honey and place on red ant colony...:evilgrin:

Cheers

Sun

I like this idea, and would be willing to help out with this if it ever got off the ground. I'd even be willing to use my boat as a trawler. :evilgrin:

Sundancefisher
03-17-2009, 08:52 PM
I like this idea, and would be willing to help out with this if it ever got off the ground. I'd even be willing to use my boat as a trawler. :evilgrin:

Netting every day for the summer will help big time...but also netting over the course of a few years. Also snorkle and scuba guys sucking up eggs will be huge benefit. No seining required. All nets are stationary.

Cheers

linemanpete
03-17-2009, 09:51 PM
To me it seems lake the oposite aproach would have been more logical... no size or catch limit on pike or perch in trout lakes. Only time will tell if this new rule will work but I cant see it working out very well.

I agree I noted this on the survey that was posted a little while back. This seems most 'logical' to me

Sundancefisher
03-18-2009, 07:52 AM
I agree I noted this on the survey that was posted a little while back. This seems most 'logical' to me

Think about it.

If you said you can kill and keep as many perch of any size from an illegally stocked lake...don't you think the guys doing the illegal stocking will jump for joy and stock the remaining lakes?

Seriously... The first priority is to ensure this behavoir stops. Second priority is to deal with previous damage.

McLeod
03-18-2009, 07:55 AM
Think about it.

If you said you can kill and keep as many perch of any size from an illegally stocked lake...don't you think the guys doing the illegal stocking will jump for joy and stock the remaining lakes?

Seriously... The first priority is to ensure this behavoir stops. Second priority is to deal with previous damage.

Make sense but why allow any harvest at some of the trout lakes such as Hasse and Spring. If your going to bring in the no harvest regulation why not have it at ALL the stocked trout lakes ?

Morph1
03-18-2009, 08:33 AM
Think about it.

If you said you can kill and keep as many perch of any size from an illegally stocked lake...don't you think the guys doing the illegal stocking will jump for joy and stock the remaining lakes?

Seriously... The first priority is to ensure this behavoir stops. Second priority is to deal with previous damage.

Sundance are you seriously thinking that the new regulation put in effect is gonna help the lakes already stocked with the illegal fish species???
It's just plain and simple IT WILL NOT ! it does not take a rocket scientist to figure this one out :lol: and is this gonna stop the illegal stocking to the trout pot hole lakes that are not currently stocked with perch and pike ?? perhaps but what lakes would those be ????
tell me what trout pot hole lakes around Edmonton do not contain perch ???
almost all of them do, there is a lits posted by Mr Don Anderson describing
which pot hole lakes are affected. why won't you read it and see it for yourself and then perhaps comment on the new regulation.
I Like your idea though with the netting and no limit but I totally disagree with the upcoming regs regarding this issue - dumb as much as almost most of the things those guys come up with.
Regs need to be put in place buy the people that actually do some fishing not the office not giving **** beaurocrats that like to carry a debates, get paid , go home and play violin all day long :lol:

Penner
03-18-2009, 09:54 AM
Sundance are you seriously thinking that the new regulation put in effect is gonna help the lakes already stocked with the illegal fish species???
It's just plain and simple IT WILL NOT ! it does not take a rocket scientist to figure this one out :lol: and is this gonna stop the illegal stocking to the trout pot hole lakes that are not currently stocked with perch and pike ?? perhaps but what lakes would those be ????
tell me what trout pot hole lakes around Edmonton do not contain perch ???
almost all of them do, there is a lits posted by Mr Don Anderson describing
which pot hole lakes are affected. why won't you read it and see it for yourself and then perhaps comment on the new regulation.
I Like your idea though with the netting and no limit but I totally disagree with the upcoming regs regarding this issue - dumb as much as almost most of the things those guys come up with.
Regs need to be put in place buy the people that actually do some fishing not the office not giving **** beaurocrats that like to carry a debates, get paid , go home and play violin all day long :lol:

I would assume the plan going forward would be to selectively kill off the lakes one-by-one chemically, or by forced winterkill, or by what ever means. Historically the chemical method appears to be preferred and most effective method but to chemically remove fish from a body of water requires many pprovals from all levels of government as well as from DFO. My understanding is that it is also very expensive $$$.

I think we can all agree just leaving the existing illegally introduced fish species in the bodies of water with no plans to remove them in the near future would be really pointless. Again both ways are speculative right now because until the plan is actually exercised, nobody can say it will or will not work.

DoUCWhatIC
03-18-2009, 12:04 PM
Penner,

You have made some great points and I commend you on your patience. Some individuals are completely ignorant to this issue but seem compelled to provide unproductive and often attacking commentary. I suppose that is just reality on a public forum. Eat your soup with a fork if you want!!!

Jamie
03-18-2009, 12:22 PM
Guys at first blush I thought "WHAT A STUPID IDEA"

But then I got to thinking..

#1 do fishermen even put a dent in the illegal perch populations?

#2 If not then we must find away to get rid of the Illegals ASAP

#3 We must find away to discourage people from fishing for perch. If they cant fish for them, they wont want to become amature bioligists

Actually not a bad idea. Interested to see if it works.

Jamie

Penner
03-18-2009, 01:53 PM
Penner,

You have made some great points and I commend you on your patience. Some individuals are completely ignorant to this issue but seem compelled to provide unproductive and often attacking commentary. I suppose that is just reality on a public forum. Eat your soup with a fork if you want!!!

I appreciate the comments. I don't think anyone involved in this discussion has been ignorant, to me at least. It’s been a good passionate discussion. Nothing wrong with that. As long as HPF stays clear we should all be good.

P.S. Apparently you can eat/drink “Chunky” with a fork or spoon but I can hardly get that crap down the gullet. Yuk! :sick:

McLeod
03-18-2009, 02:45 PM
But again , why is it that you can keep some Perch from some stocked Trout lakes but then a few miles down the road you won't be able to keep any perch from a stocked lake?
This is what makes no sense to me.

Morph1
03-18-2009, 02:54 PM
Sorry for my attitude in the previous posts ,
but to me what makes no sense is that most of the pot holes are already stocked with the illegal fish, how will this procedure benefit those lakes ??
I mean if there is some future sort of plan lets hear it all .

Cheers !

gpguy7
03-18-2009, 03:18 PM
#3 We must find away to discourage people from fishing for perch. If they cant fish for them, they wont want to become amature bioligists

I tend to disagree with this comment, most people like to fish for perch, even in the summer months I'll CnR the perch all day long. In my opinion it's just more fun to jig for a perch than to use a bobber and worm for a little rainbow.

Yes the illegal stocking of perch has and will continue to ruin trout stocked lakes. The only lake I've ever witnessed with both of them existing side by side is Sardine Lake near Drayton Valley. and I think the only reason they do is because the pond gets winter killed each year. And this pond I believe is illegally stocked with perch as well.

I'm not sure if the new regs will help at all, but something has to be done to stop this.

DoUCWhatIC
03-18-2009, 03:39 PM
SRD has a complicated plan to deal with affected waters. Each waterbody will be assessed individually. Some will be chemically treated. Some will be drained (where possible). Some will be subject to forced winterkill attempts. Some will be netted. Some won't be salvaged at all. It obviously won't happen overnight! Unsuccessful attempts have and are expected to occur. At least there is a commitment to try to tackle the issue!

Sundancefisher
03-18-2009, 04:06 PM
But again , why is it that you can keep some Perch from some stocked Trout lakes but then a few miles down the road you won't be able to keep any perch from a stocked lake?
This is what makes no sense to me.

Problem has been in removing perch only to have someone restock. The new regs should help and with the new regs come new punishment like having to "pay" for the fixing of the vandalism...which could be hundreds of thousands of dollars...and maybe millions. That liability should scare even the stupidest of the bunch.

GPGUY7...I find it really hard to believe that you would prefer to catch and release 4 inch perch all day then 12 inch or bigger rainbows all day. Studies and actual lakes have proven that the new 1 over 20 rainbow regs have drastically improved the sporting nature of fisheries. Unfortunately until the perch are removed...pot hole lakes that could benefit from this new management regulation will have to wait. I find at Lake Sundance that people are super excited to "learn" how to catch 4-6 inch perch. They come back once or twice more and then it is a waste of their time. While some people would rather catch something than watch TV...most likely 99% of people would say no thanks...there is paint to watch dry instead.

There is a solution to this problem and that is for someone to come forth and turn in their buddy. I strongly suspect this is being done by a very, very small number of people. Education is also a key so having it drummed into people's head the shear stupidity of the act of illegal perch stocking may hopefully finally get through to the right guys.

gpguy7
03-18-2009, 04:14 PM
Sundance, I'm not saying I like to catch 4 inch perch. I said I prefer to catch perch over a stocked rainbow. Being up in Grande Prairie we don't have the issue of 4 inch perch, and stunted growth like down south. There's nothing wrong with catching trout, but up here there isn't a lot of fishing in the area and it seems like stocked trout is getting old. Hopefully that clears it up.

I don't agree with the illegal stocking, I was just stating I prefer to catch an 11 inch perch over an 11 inch rainbow.

addicted
03-18-2009, 05:35 PM
maybe a more positive option could be netting the perch and transplanting them to other lakes in the areas that naturally have perch popullations , but could use a boost from fresh stock. If you think about it alot of these perch could then reach a really nice size and contribute to increasing good populations in some lakes that in recent years you just don't see or catch as readlily. Like my dad tells me of years back at wabamun where guys would be lined up on the dock shoulder to shoulder catching perch. They would and could be a very good asset to have in these lakes to boost popullations of other game fish walleye, pike, burbot, even whites.

Just a thought:innocent:

jrs
03-18-2009, 06:03 PM
"maybe a more positive option could be netting the perch and transplanting them to other lakes in the areas that naturally have perch popullations , but could use a boost from fresh stock. If you think about it alot of these perch could then reach a really nice size and contribute to increasing good populations in some lakes that in recent years you just don't see or catch as readlily. Like my dad tells me of years back at wabamun where guys would be lined up on the dock shoulder to shoulder catching perch. They would and could be a very good asset to have in these lakes to boost popullations of other game fish walleye, pike, burbot, even whites.

Just a thought"


Sounds good in theory but it comes down to cost and effectiveness. Trying to remove perch with non-lethal methods (traps/nets/angling etc) costs a ton of money and needs to be done very frequently (likely every year). Draining a lake or poisoning with rotenone (or both) is very expensive and controversial, not a method thats easily utilized anymore. I know there's lakes that would really benefit from perch stockings (at least to feed the pike and walleye) but then other factors come into play as well. More species in a lake make management more time consuming and expensive (or so the story goes). Spreading parasites and disease also makes the government hesitant to move fish around in many situations.
Removing every fish from a large waterbody without draining or poison is next to impossible, even if you have millions of dollars to spend on crews of netters to work for months straight its tough.
I really like the new regulation, at least it's worth a try. Some lakes are obviously just being accepted for what they are, and a perch limit of 15 remains. There's just no removing perch from lakes like Cow where the surface area and weed density make it so tough to cover the entire thing. I still think stocking brown trout instead of rainbows in some of the illegally stocked lakes would be another good idea but i don't think the money is there to give it a try (browns, especially big ones will eat a lot of other fish).

shedcrazy
03-18-2009, 06:52 PM
I think it is worth a try...Hopefully it will protect the lakes that do not have perch in them yet. Most of my favorite trout lakes do not have perch in them yet and I hope this regulation change will help. Too many times people only think of the lakes they know and there are many that do not have perch in them yet. It is too late already for the lakes that are illegally stocked. Sorry but fishing pressure alone will not wipe out the perch in lakes like Hasse.

It is not our fisheries managers that illegally stocked these lakes so the real idiots are these guys. Sorry but I disagree with the statements to take management of fisheries away from fishery biologists and let fisherman do the management. Some of these same fisherman are the reason we have this problem.

Fishery and wildlife management do need more money (habitat improvement, COs, stocking, surveying, etc) so let's do our part and let our government reps know that...That is how we will better manage our lakes and wildlife for the future.

Sundancefisher
03-18-2009, 08:11 PM
Sundance, I'm not saying I like to catch 4 inch perch. I said I prefer to catch perch over a stocked rainbow. Being up in Grande Prairie we don't have the issue of 4 inch perch, and stunted growth like down south. There's nothing wrong with catching trout, but up here there isn't a lot of fishing in the area and it seems like stocked trout is getting old. Hopefully that clears it up.

I don't agree with the illegal stocking, I was just stating I prefer to catch an 11 inch perch over an 11 inch rainbow.

The point is that in the context given (ie. illegal perch stocking in a trout lake)...such perch while they may grow big for a short time...soon they stunt and all you have is 4 inch perch. It is that short sighted nature of the idiots that do these stockings... They ruin one fishery after another and then they die and our kids are left with useless fisheries. I understand your interest in catching 11 inch perch but putting it into perspective would you want to catch 4 inch perch instead of 11 inch trout? I don't think you would.

Therefore you have to understand the problem and see the logic in a solution. You have to stop the cancerous spread of illegal perch. Perch in a pike, walleye, burbot, whitefish lake are natural and controlled by mother nature.

Problems with lack of perch in natural populations is over exploitation and poor management. That issue is another topic all together.


jrs...I agree. Transplanting live fish is fraught with peril. That is why stocking is conducted from a controlled hatchery most times and with eggs that have only been in the hatchery. I believe one rare live fish transfer was browns from the Bow into the Red Deer.