New regs are out. Can keep a walleye and pike in Alberta again

[Crazy4MooseHunting]

Link is in Alberta relm app

https://open.alberta.ca/dataset/dbf392f4-266f-4947-adc0-fa4bdf4e2c9c/resource/7dc7cdc2-0cfb-497e-8b88-174a9800e437/download/alberta-guide-sportfishing-regulations-2020.pdf

[cujo1969]

link I see is for 2019. Post the link

[RavYak]

Woohoo, slots!

From a quick glance looks like some good changes.

[WayneChristie]

link works for me
no slots in my hood still overs.. and my lakes are still closed to retention so Im happy! more hogs! I do see one more that wont spring close now. and we can finally use the app and store our license on our phone!

[slough shark]

There are a few good changes, I’d like to see a few more slot sizes on walleye on a few more lakes but overall a positive move in the right direction.

[OL_JR]

Wow some good news for sure. I don't always go out to keep fish but in the summer camping it's sure nice have a little fish fry in the evening. This might actually change the travel plans up quite a bit.

[colt45]

No change for wolf lake where we used to go
Back to Saskatchewan again for us

[MooseRiverTrapper]

Wow interesting.

[DiabeticKripple]

both Gull and Sylvan are open for walleye.

Gull is 45-50cm, Sylvan is 1 any size

[whitetail Junkie]

I’m satisfied with the 50-55 walleye slots in the south.

[SNAPFisher]

both Gull and Sylvan are open for walleye.

Gull is 45-50cm, Sylvan is 1 any size

Interesting on Sylvan. When I took the survey and saw they were planning on stocking more in Sylvan, I was not for that. I voted slot but this works too. There are a lot of wallies in that lake now. I wonder how many others voted similar.

[SNAPFisher]

Interesting that they kept tags on certain lakes. Not sure if that will continue to work with slots on nearby lakes now. I'm still putting in for tags for Pigeon. Just too close for me not to :)

[calgarygringo]

A few changes for us. The app on your phone came into effect last year actually. Second year for me and others. Way better than carrying cpoies everywhere.

QUOTE=WayneChristie;4128990]link works for me
no slots in my hood still overs.. and my lakes are still closed to retention so Im happy! more hogs! I do see one more that wont spring close now. and we can finally use the app and store our license on our phone![/QUOTE]

[Smoky buck]

Did not notice anything negative but would like to see more effort in spreading the pressure. It’s a step in the right direction offering conservative c&k opportunity at least.

[caltheim]

Interesting that Gull and Sylvan both allow you to keep a fish, but Pigeon is still on a tag system. Looks like things are moving in the right direction though...

[pikeman06]

Yay they are finally listening to the anglers a bit. Much better. Eat em up boys. 😄

[slough shark]

Perhaps the biggest threat to these changes is they were only implemented on a few lakes, it would have been far better to spread out the pressure and open on a few more lakes (slots on cvr, Mcgregor, travers) to begin with would have been great as well. Don’t pound the heck out of the lakes boys, bringing one home for the grill is good but don’t overdo it so they say it doesn’t work.

[Smoky buck]

Perhaps the biggest threat to these changes is they were only implemented on a few lakes, it would have been far better to spread out the pressure and open on a few more lakes (slots on cvr, Mcgregor, travers) to begin with would have been great as well. Don’t pound the heck out of the lakes boys, bringing one home for the grill is good but don’t overdo it so they say it doesn’t work.

I have to agree with you

Anglers need to use common sense well enjoying their opportunity

[Sharpie]

No Oilers fans flipping out about the cover yet! wow

[dfrobert]

Hoping for slots on Lac Ste Anne and Pigeon for next year. It’s a start in the right direction, as long as they see it through for at least 5-6 years so the lakes can adjust and things improve.

[Couleestalker]

No Oilers fans flipping out about the cover yet! wow

The must have realized, at the time of printing, that the flames fans would all be out fishing while the Oilers made their run for the cup.

[FlyTheory]

These are some phenomenal changes to add to the experiment of our water bodies. There has been so much R&D that has gone into refining the regs, and I can tell at this point in time, it’s time that AEP is starting the “walleye” harvest experiment.

Of course there are some changes I’m not stoked about, but to all the haters, we can’t keep everyone happy!

[hookset]

no oilers fans flipping out about the cover yet! Wow

go flames!!

[HuyFishin]

finally some good news!

[SNAPFisher]

The must have realized, at the time of printing, that the flames fans would all be out fishing while the Oilers made their run for the cup.

Burn! :lol:

Looks like the only thing they may be running for is Covid-19 testing...but still holding onto a glimmer that things may start up again.

[Bigwoodsman]

I like what I've read so far.

BW

[pikeman06]

Can't stop drooling for some reason.....come on may 15!!!

[Buckhead]

What a joke. 20 years of mismanagement and now they finally come to their senses. No wonder I no longer fish in this province.

[HuyFishin]

What a joke. 20 years of mismanagement and now they finally come to their senses. No wonder I no longer fish in this province.

haha how far do you drive for your weekly fishing trips.

[Blastoff]

about time good job on those meetings that were held to talk to them yo yo`s

[old dog]

It will be nice to have a taste of fish once in awhile for sure . However I hope we all practice good conservation.

[Penner]

Like the slot idea unfortunately from my perspective the slot size is too wide and I’m concerned those age classes will all but disappear from those lakes. 45–48cm or 50-53cm would have been better imho.

Nice that the big girls will need to be released. That’s the most important piece for me.

[Pikebreath]

both Gull and Sylvan are open for walleye.

Gull is 45-50cm, Sylvan is 1 any size

What am I missing???? I don't see that in the PP2 regs for either Gull or Sylvan.

[MathewsArcher]

Perhaps the biggest threat to these changes is they were only implemented on a few lakes, it would have been far better to spread out the pressure and open on a few more lakes (slots on cvr, Mcgregor, travers) to begin with would have been great as well. Don’t pound the heck out of the lakes boys, bringing one home for the grill is good but don’t overdo it so they say it doesn’t work.


Its my understanding that slots will probably occur next year on the waterbodies you mentioned after they complete FWIN surveys this fall. Data was felt to be to old/dated to be used effectively to set the slot sizes.

That said most will over do it and fish will go home every time out. Hopefully the lakes can sustain the pressure and we can have a catch/keep fishery.

[deschambault]

Got a bit excited there for a minute but then saw Badger, Crawling Valley, Mcgregor and Travers all 0 fish and Newell still tags only. Tourism Saskatchewan and Tourism BC will still enjoy my donations this year assuming Covid doesn't win over me first.

[Buckhead]

haha how far do you drive for your weekly fishing trips.

As far as I need to.
Alberta's fishermen (myself included) have been pushing for slot limits to preserve Alberta's fisheries since at least the mid 1980's.
There is no logical reason they had to let the fisheries crash like they did.

[pinelakeperch]

Got a bit excited there for a minute but then saw Badger, Crawling Valley, Mcgregor and Travers all 0 fish and Newell still tags only. Tourism Saskatchewan and Tourism BC will still enjoy my donations this year assuming Covid doesn't win over me first.

I was hoping for a slot for CVR, Rolling Hills, and Newell. With the amount of pressure those lakes get, it doesn't really surprise me to not see anything. If it's for the sake of the sustainability of the fishery, I'm totally fine with it.

[Pilsner Man]

What am I missing???? I don't see that in the PP2 regs for either Gull or Sylvan.

I’m not seeing this either...

[Smoky buck]

The link in this thread is not matching the online regs

Is this an early April fools joke

[Pikebreath]

I noticed a handful of lakes with a pike slot of 1 fish from 63 - 70 cm (Berry Creek Res, Thurston Lake and Wadlin Lake). Would actually be interesting to see this type of slot expanded to several other lakes ,,, particularly in some of the current 1 fish over 63 cm lakes,,, ( ie Moose lake and Cold Lake in NB1 come to mind) and also some lakes with the general 3 fish over 63 cm reg (ie. Driedmeat and Coal in PP2) to see if this kind of slot could increase the number of larger pike in these lakes.

[SNAPFisher]

haha how far do you drive for your weekly fishing trips.

No kidding hey!

To buckhead, keep driving if that is what floats your boat...no pun.
They finally make changes and you are still not happy. Sounds like you never will be. :)

[Pikebreath]

The link in this thread is not matching the online regs

Is this an early April fools joke

yes,,,, you certainly do get a significantly different set of regs if you go from the link provided in the first post of this thread compared to the online version http://albertaregulations.ca/

A covid 19 victim???

[Pikebreath]

Appears that the downloadable full version http://albertaregulations.ca/2020-Alberta-Fishing-Regs.pdf is the one with all the 2020 changes and the online versions are still playing catch up,,,,

Looks like the geek in charge of harmonizing the online versions of regulations is trying to play catch up as each time I go back to the online version I see more reg changes showing up!

[SNAPFisher]

Appears that the downloadable full version http://albertaregulations.ca/2020-Alberta-Fishing-Regs.pdf is the one with all the 2020 changes and the online versions are still playing catch up,,,,

Looks like the geek in charge of harmonizing the online versions of regulations is trying to play catch up as each time I go back to the online version I see more reg changes showing up!

Yeah, saw that as well. Good! As long as this is actually happening. :)

[Pikebreath]

Yeah, saw that as well. Good! As long as this is actually happening. :)

Anyways, if this indeed the case I stand corrected on my previous posts on Sylvan, Gull and the 63 - 70 cm pike slot. While still complicated, the number of lakes with slots for walleye and pike should give the bios a good read on whether slots will work in Alberta or not. At the same time many vulnerable and collapsed lakes still have protection (with C&R) and there is potential for creating a few trophy fisheries as well.

[Smoky buck]

With people being sent to work from home the tech guy is probably sitting on the coach smoking a joint slacking :bad_boys_20:

Oh well there is plenty of time before the 2020 season starts. I can’t wait for open water and already have my first trip planned

[Buckhead]

No kidding hey!

To buckhead, keep driving if that is what floats your boat...no pun.
They finally make changes and you are still not happy. Sounds like you never will be. :)

You are correct. I will probably never fish Alberta again.:sHa_shakeshout:
It makes no sense to eat fish out of fisheries that are already destroyed.

[WayneChristie]

You are correct. I will probably never fish Alberta again.:sHa_shakeshout:
It makes no sense to eat fish out of fisheries that are already destroyed.

to some people eating fish isnt the reason they love the sport. if thats all you fish for you are missing out

[pikeman06]

to some people eating fish isnt the reason they love the sport. if thats all you fish for you are missing out
At least now we have a choice Wayne. I don't know if you ever get up.into central alberta and catch 200 walleye a day all looking like they haven't ate for a month. The lakes they opened up need a thinning of walleye or stocking of pike perch and whites so obviously the cheapest option was to whack a few walleye and protect the bigger ones as they always should have pike included. It's way too little too late but it might give the remnant perch and pike a chance to recover if there is even a sustainable population of breeding fish left. The tag thing was really losing popularity fast up here and it was abused by the guys that would probably keep one and go home anyways.

[Battle Rat]

No Oilers fans flipping out about the cover yet! wow

They finished ahead of the Flames so they so their probably still thankful they dodged the bullet.

[Poppa]

When I filled out the survey, I basically said "do what you need to do in order to create a trophy walleye fishery. I have zero interest in water fish. I only want trophies. I think clearing out the 18" cookie cutters on Sylvan will help create a better trophy fishery there. This seems like good news, if true...

[DiabeticKripple]

i dont know if the 1 fish any size will help Sylvan.

You can bet its going to be BUSY all summer. that lake is going to get hammered. maybe the 43-50cm slot would work better.

[JohninAB]

Like the idea of trying slot sizes on some lakes to see how it works. Only comment I would add is wish on those lakes with retention they would have instituted a rule that once you retain a fish, you have to kill it immediately. No livewell/stringer culling then. The rule is used on some waters in Ontario, most notably Lac Seul.

[wind drift]

Like the idea of trying slot sizes on some lakes to see how it works. Only comment I would add is wish on those lakes with retention they would have instituted a rule that once you retain a fish, you have to kill it immediately. No livewell/stringer culling then. The rule is used on some waters in Ontario, most notably Lac Seul.

See page 22. It’s not a rule, per se, but even if it was, it wouldn’t be easily enforced. It’s really about ethics and being honest.

[wind drift]

When I filled out the survey, I basically said "do what you need to do in order to create a trophy walleye fishery. I have zero interest in water fish. I only want trophies. I think clearing out the 18" cookie cutters on Sylvan will help create a better trophy fishery there. This seems like good news, if true...

Allowing the harvest of all sizes of walleye won’t make a trophy fishery. It will clean them out. You can’t make big fish by killing them before they get big. Get ‘em while you can, folks. There won’t be many left next year. And don’t count on stocking to keep up with demand in the future. Even if they started stocking this year, it will be years before the fry are big enough to make a fishery. I’m going to bet the survey results will show most were in favour of getting rid of the walleye in Sylvan now and trying to make it put and take. Trophy fishery is unrealistic. Too much pressure.

[Smoky buck]

Allowing the harvest of all sizes of walleye won’t make a trophy fishery. It will clean them out. You can’t make big fish by killing them before they get big. Get ‘em while you can, folks. There won’t be many left next year. And don’t count on stocking to keep up with demand in the future. Even if they started stocking this year, it will be years before the fry are big enough to make a fishery. I’m going to bet the survey results will show most were in favour of getting rid of the walleye in Sylvan now and trying to make it put and take. Trophy fishery is unrealistic. Too much pressure.

I don’t think a any size limit will create a trophy fishery either But being a one fish limit should not have a deviation of walleye either. A slot or a shorter c&k season would likely be better in my opinion but that is just an opinion

You also don’t get a trophy fishery by stocking numbers that are too high for the forage base as well. Alberta botched the walleye stocking program. Lower numbers of fish with a larger forage base can promote a trophy fishery though. So possibly they may want to thin out some fish to bring balance to the predator numbers

Without seeing the long term managed plan we have no clue though

Personally I think walleye fight like a wet sock and the fishing techniques used to target them are kind of boring compared to other species so trophy walleye fishery is not a big interest. So if this is the fisheries plan hopefully it’s only a select few lakes

I rarely even eat fish but hope the new regs are an attempt to create balanced fisheries not just random changes do to survey results

[Pikebreath]

Like the idea of trying slot sizes on some lakes to see how it works. Only comment I would add is wish on those lakes with retention they would have instituted a rule that once you retain a fish, you have to kill it immediately. No livewell/stringer culling then. The rule is used on some waters in Ontario, most notably Lac Seul.

I am totally in favour of that as well. Having to kill a fish to retain it is certainly going to have people think twice about filling the livewell or stringer with the idea of culling them as day goes.

[Pikebreath]

There is quite a variation of slot sizes, min sizes, and retention limits across the province now for walleye and pike. While this makes things complicated, it does provide the means to compare the various impacts different limits and size restrictions have on our fisheries. The various harvest opportunities for Pigeon (tags), Gull (slot) and Sylvan (no size limit) should make for an interesting comparison.

In the past, slots and no size limits tended not to work well since these measures would concentrate anglers on those lakes where you could keep a fish, and anglers tended to cheat the slot as well.

Hopefully, enough anglers have "matured" in attitude that slot stretching isn't going to be a major issue anymore and there are enough harvest opportunities to avoid significant concentrating on a select few lakes with harvest as was happening in the past.

One particular reg I like is that many lakes that allow a walleye harvest are zero retention on pike. In the past the pike on many lakes have been "sacrificed " on lakes with restrictive walleye regulations as a means to placate the catch and keep crowd. Shifting the harvest opportunities to the walleye should certainly help grow larger trophy pike in many of these lakes. Lakes like Pinehurst and Lac la Biche come to mind.

[nick0danger]

Personally I think walleye fight like a wet sock and the fishing techniques used to target them are kind of boring compared to other species so trophy walleye fishery is not a big interest. So if this is the fisheries plan hopefully it’s only a select few lakes



I used to think that too, but this summer, after getting bored of jigs and smelts, i started to use cranks, spinner baits, and what not, when the walleye hit them they fight much harder, and typically get a better quality of walleye

[Smoky buck]

I used to think that too, but this summer, after getting bored of jigs and smelts, i started to use cranks, spinner baits, and what not, when the walleye hit them they fight much harder, and typically get a better quality of walleye

That is the main way I catch them because I hate bait fishing and finesse jigging. I definitely get nicer walleye on bigger crankbaits. Even on the fly rod I find them boring

Maybe deep down inside I am just racist towards walleye but they are still wet socks lol

[Jokey75]

"And they all rejoiced at their good fortune! Rusted frying pans were scrubbed til shiny. Metal stringers were untangled and Fish Crisp was stocked in abundance in anticipation of their supper. All praise be to the leader!"

Ancient Alberta Fishing Reg Proverb

[Poppa]

The only thing better than fishing for walleye is fishing topwater for bass....but that's just me.

[slough shark]

IMHO the best part of this plan is people will get a meal or 3 off the walleye and perhaps we can see a recovery of the perch, whitefish and pike populations. Walleye eat an absurd amount of these fish in the fry stage so in a few years perhaps we will see them come back

[Smoky buck]

The only thing better than fishing for walleye is fishing topwater for bass....but that's just me.

Now bass can be fun, smallmouth fight great for their size, largemouth are at least a short explosive fight. I can at least understand you here

Even though I think walleye are wet socks I fully support some fisheries focused towards good walleye fishing because I can respect that walleye are a passion for some. Just don’t want to see them be the only focus and effort put into other species for those of us who don’t care for walleye

[CptnBlues63]

That is the main way I catch them because I hate bait fishing and finesse jigging. I definitely get nicer walleye on bigger crankbaits. Even on the fly rod I find them boring

Maybe deep down inside I am just racist towards walleye but they are still wet socks lol

Each to his own........that leaves more for me. I'm guessing your a rainbow trout fan?

I'm not sure why anybody is having issues finding the reg's online. If you all don't have the following website bookmarked, you should do so:

http://www.albertaregulations.ca/

One stop shopping for all your fishing/hunting/trapping and draw needs.

[Pikebreath]

I'm not sure why anybody is having issues finding the reg's online. If you all don't have the following website bookmarked, you should do so:

http://www.albertaregulations.ca/

One stop shopping for all your fishing/hunting/trapping and draw needs.

No one was having issues finding the regs online,,,, the issue was there was differing regs to begin with depending on which link you followed. That appears to be corrected now.

[Smoky buck]

Each to his own........that leaves more for me. I'm guessing your a rainbow trout fan?

I'm not sure why anybody is having issues finding the reg's online. If you all don't have the following website bookmarked, you should do so:

http://www.albertaregulations.ca/

One stop shopping for all your fishing/hunting/trapping and draw needs.

Rainbows and perch rank lower then walleye for me actually. Pike and bulls are my favorite in Alberta but I do switch up often even a little walleye fishing wet sock fishing lol

Like you said to each there own we don’t all have to like the same species and not every body of water has to promote the same style of fishery

[Pikebreath]

"And they all rejoiced at their good fortune! Rusted frying pans were scrubbed til shiny. Metal stringers were untangled and Fish Crisp was stocked in abundance in anticipation of their supper. All praise be to the leader!"

Ancient Alberta Fishing Reg Proverb

This deserves the "like" click if there was one!!!!:)

[SNAPFisher]

That is the main way I catch them because I hate bait fishing and finesse jigging. I definitely get nicer walleye on bigger crankbaits. Even on the fly rod I find them boring

Maybe deep down inside I am just racist towards walleye but they are still wet socks lol

You are not the alone on this. Same with me on the fly rod. It is the only way I catch them now...or want to. I find catching them on the fly rod in the river, such as RDR, is more fun and a better fight. Other than that, good thing they taste good because they are not much else ;)

[WayneChristie]

The only thing better than fishing for walleye is fishing topwater for bass....but that's just me.

pike in the weeds on a buzzbait are pretty heart stopping too :):sHa_shakeshout:

[Smoky buck]

pike in the weeds on a buzzbait are pretty heart stopping too :):sHa_shakeshout:

Building a 6inch surface walker based of an Australian lure right now just for shallow water pike :sHa_shakeshout:

[anything_but_fish]

Perhaps the biggest threat to these changes is they were only implemented on a few lakes, it would have been far better to spread out the pressure and open on a few more lakes (slots on cvr, Mcgregor, travers) to begin with would have been great as well. Don’t pound the heck out of the lakes boys, bringing one home for the grill is good but don’t overdo it so they say it doesn’t work.

So just to play the Devil's advocate, didn't we try this one and tank a bunch of walleye fisheries around the province?

Also if you change everything everywhere at once you'll never be able to show whether anything worked like you think it did. Far better to try new regs at a couple locations and compare to lakes/locations without new regs than to change everything at once...

At least that's my understanding of how to science usually works..

[Penner]

So just to play the Devil's advocate, didn't we try this one and tank a bunch of walleye fisheries around the province?

Also if you change everything everywhere at once you'll never be able to show whether anything worked like you think it did. Far better to try new regs at a couple locations and compare to lakes/locations without new regs than to change everything at once...

At least that's my understanding of how to science usually works..

Can't open just a few lakes as everyone will target them. That's is what went wrong the first time and it also I don't think is was a slot limit (thought is was open for only a few weeks with a 1 over a certain size).

Additionally a slot limit will only work where fish population in said water body has a wide variety of age classes. A slot limit on Pigeon wouldn't work as ~90% of the fish in that lake right now are either 45cm-50cm or 50cm-55cm. If you went with either slot size limit a huge portion of the Walleye population would be removed and the population would collapse, that is likely why certain water bodies are staying on a tag system.

My concern (other than the slot size not being tight enough), I'm not certain they opened enough lakes to spread the pressure around. Hoping between the lakes with a slot limit and tags it will disperse anglers around enough. Only time will tell.

[anything_but_fish]

Can't open just a few lakes as everyone will target them. That's is what went wrong the first time (and it wasn't a slot limit).

My concern (other than the slot size not being tight enough), I'm not certain they opened enough lakes to spread the pressure around. Hoping between the lakes with a slot limit and tags it will disperse anglers around enough. Only time will tell.

Yeah, but the problem is even when all lakes were open the fisheries collapsed during the 90s I thought, at least given what I've read and have heard from old timers...we don't have a very good track record it would seem, which is why saying we should open them all at once seems...interesting :confused:

[Garlicmarshmellow]

After a quick glance I believe out of province anglers will be paying more for their licence then we do, that's a step in the right direction

[Brandonkop]

Interestingly I read this as well in the updates:

"In addition to invasive species, whirling disease, a parasite that
infects salmonids, is now found in the Bow, Oldman, Red Deer
and North Saskatchewan watersheds. Whirling disease can
spread naturally, but also through the movement of spores on gear,
water, infected fish and fish parts. Avoid using felt soled waders or
live fish as bait, and dispose fish parts in the garbage to prevent
further spread."


So does that mean they can start stocking the trout lakes close to the rivers again. Hope they start stocking the City lakes around edmonton that they stopped a few years back. Those were great opportunities for the city folks.

[wind drift]

Can't open just a few lakes as everyone will target them. That's is what went wrong the first time and it also I don't think is was a slot limit (thought is was open for only a few weeks with a 1 over a certain size).

Additionally a slot limit will only work where fish population in said water body has a wide variety of age classes. A slot limit on Pigeon wouldn't work as ~90% of the fish in that lake right now are either 45cm-50cm or 50cm-55cm. If you went with either slot size limit a huge portion of the Walleye population would be removed and the population would collapse, that is likely why certain water bodies are staying on a tag system.

My concern (other than the slot size not being tight enough), I'm not certain they opened enough lakes to spread the pressure around. Hoping between the lakes with a slot limit and tags it will disperse anglers around enough. Only time will tell.

With about 300,000 of us and way less than 1000 road accessible lakes, including stocked trout ponds, there’s no possible way to spread the pressure around enough. To make it worse, I bet there will more anglers this year than last, because of COVID and fewer other leisure options. Double whammy. I’m afraid another generation of Albertans is going to learn how fast some lakes can get fished out.

[Smoky buck]

With about 300,000 of us and way less than 1000 road accessible lakes, including stocked trout ponds, there’s no possible way to spread the pressure around enough. To make it worse, I bet there will more anglers this year than last, because of COVID and fewer other leisure options. Double whammy. I’m afraid another generation of Albertans is going to learn how fast some lakes can get fished out.

It can be effectively spread and manageable c&k opportunities in the US in areas with higher angler density. You cannot manage Alberta like other Canadian provinces that is true but there is other parts of North America with higher angler density

Just because Alberta mismanaged it’s fisheries does not mean it is impossible to go beyond C&R

[wind drift]

It can be effectively spread and manageable c&k opportunities in the US in areas with higher angler density. You cannot manage Alberta like other Canadian provinces that is true but there is other parts of North America with higher angler density

Just because Alberta mismanaged it’s fisheries does not mean it is impossible to go beyond C&R


Interesting. Sounds like you have some expertise. Where in the US is per lake angler density higher, with similarly short growing seasons and low numbers of fish species? I understood the southern advantage is much longer growing seasons, no ice cover in many states, and many more species present. That, plus intensive stocking programs.

[anything_but_fish]

It can be effectively spread and manageable c&k opportunities in the US in areas with higher angler density. You cannot manage Alberta like other Canadian provinces that is true but there is other parts of North America with higher angler density

Just because Alberta mismanaged it’s fisheries does not mean it is impossible to go beyond C&R

Yeah, you seem to be forgetting or ignoring that walleye in Alberta grow super slow--its a combination of angling pressure and the god-given production these systems can afford, which unfortunately is not very much based on historical experience.

Fish in Alberta can take 7 years to reach maturity, and easily live more than 20 years. This is insanely long-lived and slow growing relative to more southerly finned critters...At least that's what a researcher told me at the open house event in St. Paul.

[Coiloil37]

The only thing better than fishing for walleye is fishing topwater for bass....but that's just me.

You need to get some more worldly fishing experience. There’s a lot better fishing then walleye. The tuna I catch for marlin bait fights harder then a walleye.

[Smoky buck]

Wind drift and anything but fish

I am not going to beat a dead horse with you two on AO two people who have clearly made up their minds. Yes I have knowledge when it comes to fish management, husbandry, growth, health, disease and an number of other areas. It is how I made my living in the past but no I did not specialize in walleye. I have not worked with the species or have real interest in them. My only issue with walleye in Alberta is there poor management has an impact on other species and balance in some lakes.

There is tons of information on the Internet alone search beyond your boarders. I am not going to do it for you.

[Penner]

Yeah, but the problem is even when all lakes were open the fisheries collapsed during the 90s I thought, at least given what I've read and have heard from old timers...we don't have a very good track record it would seem, which is why saying we should open them all at once seems...interesting :confused:

The reason why fisheries collapsed in the 90’s was greed/entitlement and there were limits of 10 fish. Limits were eventually reduced to 5 fish, then 3 fish, and...

I’ve been a proponent of tags. I’ve been a proponent of a “strict” slot limit as it allows some harvest and promotes the survival of trophy sized fish. Calling lake seems to have done fairly well with a slot for many years. Let’s hope it’s as successful for the new locations.

If we could now do something with sustenance harvesting.

[wind drift]

Wind drift and anything but fish

I am not going to beat a dead horse with you two on AO two people who have clearly made up their minds. Yes I have knowledge when it comes to fish management, husbandry, growth, health, disease and an number of other areas. It is how I made my living in the past but no I did not specialize in walleye. I have not worked with the species or have real interest in them. My only issue with walleye in Alberta is there poor management has an impact on other species and balance in some lakes.

There is tons of information on the Internet alone search beyond your boarders. I am not going to do it for you.

You’re right, ironically. Info about climate, growing season, continental walleye range, species diversity, stocking, etc. is available online. I just don’t think you appeared to consider it and were making comparisons that aren’t really apples to apples. No worries, it’s just a chat about fish. Be well.

[anything_but_fish]

Wind drift and anything but fish

I am not going to beat a dead horse with you two on AO two people who have clearly made up their minds. Yes I have knowledge when it comes to fish management, husbandry, growth, health, disease and an number of other areas. It is how I made my living in the past but no I did not specialize in walleye. I have not worked with the species or have real interest in them. My only issue with walleye in Alberta is there poor management has an impact on other species and balance in some lakes.

There is tons of information on the Internet alone search beyond your boarders. I am not going to do it for you.

Okay, agree do disagree then. Pretty sure there was an article in AO in March discussing this and other walleye misconceptions, which said walleye balance was not an issue.

[Pikebreath]

I caught my first fish out of Moose Lake in 1960

[Smoky buck]

You’re right, ironically. Info about climate, growing season, continental walleye range, species diversity, stocking, etc. is available online. I just don’t think you appeared to consider it and were making comparisons that aren’t really apples to apples. No worries, it’s just a chat about fish. Be well.

I am far from someone who does not consider the different factors if anything I over analyze things. I also am far from the mindset that Alberta could successfully have a harvest rate comparable to other provinces. No matter what species or body of water there is no such thing as an apples to apples comparison even when comparing bodies of water within the same province. When referencing different management plans in other areas you can only play off the similarities and decide how much of a difference the factors of each ecosystem will change the out come.

What most don’t realize is management plans are only theories someone or a group of people came up with based on facts. Without putting them to the test and documenting the results they are basically an opinion. I have been there to solve failed educated theories and applied failed educated theories myself.

Fact of the matter is only time will show the results of the changes to the management on some lakes in Alberta. Like any management plan there is factors that can cause it to fail or succeed

[Pikebreath]

I caught my first fish out of Moose Lake in 1960

Don't know what happened to the rest of my post,,, (doesn't help being computer illiterate, I guess). Anyways back in the 60s we caught a lot of walleye out the Bonnyville / Lac La Biche area lakes. Our "pickerel"catch rates were usually better than our pike catch rates in the first year or two of road access.

One should think that many of these lakes back then should have been "balanced" prior to road access. The abundance of easily caught walleye tells me that walleye may actually be the apex predator species on many of our lakes in a "balanced fishery".

[Smoky buck]

Don't know what happened to the rest of my post,,, (doesn't help being computer illiterate, I guess). Anyways back in the 60s we caught a lot of walleye out the Bonnyville / Lac La Biche area lakes. Our "pickerel"catch rates were usually better than our pike catch rates in the first year or two of road access.

One should think that many of these lakes back then should have been "balanced" prior to road access. The abundance of easily caught walleye tells me that walleye may actually be the apex predator species on many of our lakes in a "balanced fishery".

The funny thing with fisheries management it’s rarely ever trying to achieve a natural ecosystem.

[anything_but_fish]

The funny thing is this idea of balance in the first place. Albertans seem to be the only people arguing walleye-pike-perch eat each other out of house and home. No one makes these arguments in any other jurisdiction in north america...which is very bizarre given they also have pike-walleye-perch fisheries.

You only ever see these arguments when people want to kill more fish, and invariably people blame anything but themselves for the demise of the fish they harvest the snot out of. Seems like cognitive dissonance--what if anything would get folks to change their minds? We never think that we might be the problem, which is alarming.

Let the great harvesting and stocking experiment begin, but I'll be over here saying I "toe da so" when you tank a fishery with that logic. And if I'm wrong, I'll eat crow and apparently some more shore lunch.

[Pikebreath]

The funny thing with fisheries management it’s rarely ever trying to achieve a natural ecosystem.

Good point,,,,

In an earlier post I applauded that several lakes now allowed walleye harvest with zero pike retention,,, as my user name indicates, I live / "breathe" for pike fishing,,, particularly large pike on the fly!!! So regs that potentially grow more larger pike certainly get my attention.

I do think we have enough differing management practices and regs now, be it slots, zero retention, reduced retention, increased retention, min size, no size restriction, stocking etc that most of the management theories / practices questioned or supported here can be tested / proved / disproved ,,, provided of course adequate monitoring is done.

No doubt some fisheries will suffer declines in populations and catch rates,, hopefully, SRD can catch these before they become collapsed,,, while other fisheries should improve. My hope is that the improved fisheries will significantly out number the fisheries that decline.

[Smoky buck]

The funny thing is this idea of balance in the first place. Albertans seem to be the only people arguing walleye-pike-perch eat each other out of house and home. No one makes these arguments in any other jurisdiction in north america...which is very bizarre given they also have pike-walleye-perch fisheries.

You only ever see these arguments when people want to kill more fish, and invariably people blame anything but themselves for the demise of the fish they harvest the snot out of. Seems like cognitive dissonance--what if anything would get folks to change their minds? We never think that we might be the problem, which is alarming.

Let the great harvesting and stocking experiment begin, but I'll be over here saying I "toe da so" when you tank a fishery with that logic. And if I'm wrong, I'll eat crow and apparently some more shore lunch.

There are many examples where over stocking or introduction of a species results in one species out competing another or preying on another. This is extremely well documented across the world with a wide variety of species

By the way I am well over 90% C&R I only kept 2 fish last year. This is not about wanting to keep fish

[anything_but_fish]

Stocking is very different than a natural population, and many of our lakes feature naturally reproducing walleye populations, no?

Also, go pick up your March issue of the Alberta Outdoorsmen and read the section on "balance" in the walleye management misconceptions article by the researchers at the University of Calgary who have been studying this exact thing...They wrote a whole section on this and evaluated the evidence using Alberta data. If you don't want to, I'll follow wind drift's lead and wish you well :)

[Smoky buck]

Good point,,,,

In an earlier post I applauded that several lakes now allowed walleye harvest with zero pike retention,,, as my user name indicates, I live / "breathe" for pike fishing,,, particularly large pike on the fly!!! So regs that potentially grow more larger pike certainly get my attention.

I do think we have enough differing management practices and regs now, be it slots, zero retention, reduced retention, increased retention, min size, no size restriction, stocking etc that most of the management theories / practices questioned or supported here can be tested / proved / disproved ,,, provided of course adequate monitoring is done.

No doubt some fisheries will suffer declines in populations and catch rates,, hopefully, SRD can catch these before they become collapsed,,, while other fisheries should improve. My hope is that the improved fisheries will significantly out number the fisheries that decline.

I am one that likes to see a variety of species promoted and a body of water utilized to it best potential. This goes for paying attention to the ecosystem in each body of water so each species thrives to its full potential

[Smoky buck]

Stocking is very different than a natural population, and many of our lakes feature naturally reproducing walleye populations, no?

Also, go pick up your March issue of the Alberta Outdoorsmen and read the section on "balance" in the walleye management misconceptions article by the researchers at the University of Calgary who have been studying this exact thing...They wrote a whole section on this and evaluated the evidence using Alberta data. If you don't want to, I'll follow wind drift's lead and wish you well :)

If I pick it up I will read it because of my own interest. I will wish you well myself and let time show us the future results

I am going to go back to playing dumb pretending I have no education and background on these subjects and absorb the valued information instead :party0052:

[SNAPFisher]

I live / "breathe" for pike fishing,,, particularly large pike on the fly!!! So regs that potentially grow more larger pike certainly get my attention.


Now you're talking my language! :)

I'm curious, did you get a chance to fish Wab in the days of the warm water discharge?

[Pikebreath]

Now you're talking my language! :)

I'm curious, did you get a chance to fish Wab in the days of the warm water discharge?

A couple of times,,,, Wab was never really on my radar since I was living well east of Edmonton during the glory years . I made an effort to fish it bit more in period from 2013 to 2017 to see how well the C&R regs were working.

[SNAPFisher]

Nice, I managed to get in on the last 2 years of the plant. Lots of fun tying up big flies to try out on some big pike. Usually kept things going well into November. Pike on the fly, and especially top water fly, is awesome.

[bessiedog]

hmmmmm


rather strange....

I can't find ANYthing on Waterton resevior... its not listed....

[Rifle]

The biggest problem for lakes with a walleye slot size is that none of the fish that size or smaller are going to be alive 2 years from now (I'm thinking Gull). They'll get hammered so badly that none will make it to be "big girls" who get to reproduce. Oh well, enjoy it while it lasts.

[nick0danger]

The biggest problem for lakes with a walleye slot size is that none of the fish that size or smaller are going to be alive 2 years from now (I'm thinking Gull). They'll get hammered so badly that none will make it to be "big girls" who get to reproduce. Oh well, enjoy it while it lasts.

You know unless they have a plan for that, like next season no harvest, or change the slot size, or pike are now aloud to be harvested on a slot size, and no walleye harvest. Lots of options then just let her buck for a few years.

[barbless]

Going on around 30 yrs. I lost count long time ago. Couldn't and still can't keep one at CVR. REALLY :angry3:? Oh well. Das ist zu schade. C&R as always. Come on man!!!! One morsel :argue2:

[FlyTheory]

hmmmmm


rather strange....

I can't find ANYthing on Waterton resevior... its not listed....

Isn’t it because it’s part of a NP.....?

[Pikebreath]

It might be worth bringing waterfowl hunting management in as a comparison.

Waterfowl populations across North America were in serious decline through the first half of the 20th century. Restrictive regulations on harvest along with habitat protections and changes have brought many waterfowl populations back to historic or even record high levels (particularly for geese). The last 20 some years have seen increasingly liberalized harvest opportunities as a result and goose populations still continue to increase.

Admittedly hunter numbers are far less than anglers. In 2017, in Alberta, there were just under 17,000 total waterfowl hunter (res and non res combined), so it is certainly not an apples to apples comparison,,,, but one of the thoughts in increasing harvest opportunities for geese (50 per day for snow geese now!!!) is that waterfowl managers have proven they can bring back waterfowl populations should over harvest become a limiting factor.

The past 25 years of restrictive walleye regulations have also shown we can recover collapsed walleye populations if we do go back to that situation. Certainly this is not the management goal,,, collapse the fishery just to prove we can bring it back,,,, but we do know what measures can "rebound" populations.

Hopefully with all the new regs, we can find a balance between harvest and protection,,, and our fisheries are monitored well enough to not let populations go into significant decline before we act to protect them this time around!

[Kings]

I am really happy with the change in regulations and would like see slot size harvest in CVR, lake McGregor and Travers soon.
Also support to get rid of Tag system and adjust the revenue by increasing the license fee. Cheers

[Pikebreath]

Isn’t it because it’s part of a NP.....?

Waterton Lakes are in the park, not Waterton Reservoir.

[Pikebreath]

hmmmmm


rather strange....

I can't find ANYthing on Waterton resevior... its not listed....

Quick check of last couple years regs shows the same,,, default regs would apply is most likely answer.

[Pikebreath]

I am really happy with the change in regulations and would like see slot size harvest in CVR, lake McGregor and Travers soon.
Also support to get rid of Tag system and adjust the revenue by increasing the license fee. Cheers

I wouldn't be so quick to throw out the tags just yet,,, on some lakes still may be the only way to allow enough fish to grow through the slot while allowing some harvest.

[slough shark]

The funny thing is this idea of balance in the first place. Albertans seem to be the only people arguing walleye-pike-perch eat each other out of house and home. No one makes these arguments in any other jurisdiction in north america...which is very bizarre given they also have pike-walleye-perch fisheries.

You only ever see these arguments when people want to kill more fish, and invariably people blame anything but themselves for the demise of the fish they harvest the snot out of. Seems like cognitive dissonance--what if anything would get folks to change their minds? We never think that we might be the problem, which is alarming.

Let the great harvesting and stocking experiment begin, but I'll be over here saying I "toe da so" when you tank a fishery with that logic. And if I'm wrong, I'll eat crow and apparently some more shore lunch.

We might be the only ones talking about imbalance with walleye/perch/pike because to the best of my knowledge Alberta is the only jurisdiction to stock tens of millions of walleye into a number of lakes where they weren’t previously and then have catch and release on walleye for the next several decades in those same lakes. Pretty well all other places allow harvest on walleye that I know of anyways, we are the only place with a man made massive imbalance of species.

[SNAPFisher]

You know unless they have a plan for that, like next season no harvest, or change the slot size, or pike are now aloud to be harvested on a slot size, and no walleye harvest. Lots of options then just let her buck for a few years.

Yep. Good point. Too many getting on here getting a little worked up. Let's see how this goes. If slots don't work, then we know tags will cover it. .... haha.

[anything_but_fish]

We might be the only ones talking about imbalance with walleye/perch/pike because to the best of my knowledge Alberta is the only jurisdiction to stock tens of millions of walleye into a number of lakes where they weren’t previously and then have catch and release on walleye for the next several decades in those same lakes. Pretty well all other places allow harvest on walleye that I know of anyways, we are the only place with a man made massive imbalance of species.

Yeah, which we had to do because we literally extirpated walleye from some lakes and it was dang near impossible to catch a walleye in many of the popular and accessible lakes...

[calgarygringo]

I suggested to the bios lack of food has been a huge part of the issue. Stock a pile of predator fish on a lake and no food guess what happens? All the stuff like, stunted growth never grow, eat all other fishes and on and on. They agree. We have to have a balance of these predator fish and feed. They will grow faster, spawn sooner, healthier populations etc. Now they are looking at just that in some lakes lets hope it improves things.

[SNAPFisher]

The funny thing is this idea of balance in the first place. Albertans seem to be the only people arguing walleye-pike-perch eat each other out of house and home. No one makes these arguments in any other jurisdiction in north america...which is very bizarre given they also have pike-walleye-perch fisheries.

You only ever see these arguments when people want to kill more fish, and invariably people blame anything but themselves for the demise of the fish they harvest the snot out of. Seems like cognitive dissonance--what if anything would get folks to change their minds? We never think that we might be the problem, which is alarming.

Let the great harvesting and stocking experiment begin, but I'll be over here saying I "toe da so" when you tank a fishery with that logic. And if I'm wrong, I'll eat crow and apparently some more shore lunch.

Good post. We'll see alright. There are a number on here crying that it was only because we didn't try slots. Well, that day is here now. Let's see how that goes. And, I don't think anyone one on this forum or at least most on this forum are the problem ones. It is the hoards out there just waiting for a day like this. Fine tuning of the regs will be required...

[OL_JR]

Stocking is very different than a natural population, and many of our lakes feature naturally reproducing walleye populations, no?

Also, go pick up your March issue of the Alberta Outdoorsmen and read the section on "balance" in the walleye management misconceptions article by the researchers at the University of Calgary who have been studying this exact thing...They wrote a whole section on this and evaluated the evidence using Alberta data. If you don't want to, I'll follow wind drift's lead and wish you well :)

I read it. Hilarious if you ask me, we've literally watched walleye eat themselves out of "house and home" on certain lakes but still the sheep out there saying "the guvment told me so" so it can't be true. Unreal.

I understand that Jason Nixon had a big role in the new regs and I applaud him for it. Something had to be done.

Just as you are willing to eat crow if this works, I'm willing to eat crow if it doesn't. Liking my chances.

[anything_but_fish]

Why is someone a sheep if they decide to side with the best available science?

That doesn't seem to make a lot of sense to me, and I guess it makes me wonder what if anything would get people to change their minds sometimes.

Also, I'm going to guess most of the bios don't agree that the fish are eating themselves out of house and home as none of them said this at the open house I was at and I specifically asked several folks about this, and given the best available science doesn't show that this is occurring.

If you can't answer the question of what if anything would get you to change your mind, perhaps you aren't being a sheep, but you might be an ostrich with your head stuck in the ground and ignoring all reason.

I'll change my opinion on this when the data/evidence/science changes, which seems reasonable enough for now :fighting0030:

[OL_JR]

Why is someone a sheep if they decide to side with the best available science?

That doesn't seem to make a lot of sense to me, and I guess it makes me wonder what if anything would get people to change their minds sometimes.

Also, I'm going to guess most of the bios don't agree that the fish are eating themselves out of house and home as none of them said this at the open house I was at and I specifically asked several folks about this, and given the best available science doesn't show that this is occurring.

If you can't answer the question of what if anything would get you to change your mind, perhaps you aren't being a sheep, but you might be an ostrich with your head stuck in the ground and ignoring all reason.

I'll change my opinion on this when the data/evidence/science changes, which seems reasonable enough for now :fighting0030:

I would feel like an ostrich with my head stuck in the sand if I ignored what I see happening out there, in the field. The best available science is flawed imho.

Some will call guys like me an armchair biologist, a blowhard perhaps. I'm fine with that.

[anything_but_fish]

No one is ignoring what anyone is observing--quite the opposite I think.

Arguably the turbo-nerd researchers heard that fishermen thought the fish were eating themselves out of house and home, and then used actual data to test that hypothesis. From the sounds of that article, they used a lot of data spanning like 20 years or something ridiculous.

Just because their science doesn't agree with your current viewpoint doesn't mean that they are wrong or out to get you. It just means that your views don't currently align with the best available science, which is fine but important to note I think.

Cheers--

[OL_JR]

No one is ignoring what anyone is observing--quite the opposite I think.

Arguably the turbo-nerd researchers heard that fishermen thought the fish were eating themselves out of house and home, and then used actual data to test that hypothesis. From the sounds of that article, they used a lot of data spanning like 20 years or something ridiculous.

Just because their science doesn't agree with your current viewpoint doesn't mean that they are wrong or out to get you. It just means that your views don't currently align with the best available science, which is fine but important to note I think.

Cheers--

Fair enough noted. Time will tell I guess and as mentioned I'm optimistic the new regs are a good move. I'm absolutely ecstatic that retention doesn't have to mean every fish over a certain length is fair game anymore. Protection for the big girls is paramount to this working imho and a bit of a safety net if it doesn't. I know I'm speaking in broad terms but my thoughts are at least we will be left with something if the harvest is to hard on fisheries.

[calgarygringo]

The eating out of house and home scenario came up a couple times at the meeting I was at. Twin Valley is a good example of that as they are canabalizing themselves due to lack of food. They are supposedly going to net some whites and perch from another lake to use as food as well as add walleye. They told me there are other lakes they are thinking of doing this as well maybe help the fish grow more and mature faster. Give them credit at least they are trying things they have not been doing in the past.



QUOTE=anything_but_fish;4131959]Why is someone a sheep if they decide to side with the best available science?

That doesn't seem to make a lot of sense to me, and I guess it makes me wonder what if anything would get people to change their minds sometimes.

Also, I'm going to guess most of the bios don't agree that the fish are eating themselves out of house and home as none of them said this at the open house I was at and I specifically asked several folks about this, and given the best available science doesn't show that this is occurring.

If you can't answer the question of what if anything would get you to change your mind, perhaps you aren't being a sheep, but you might be an ostrich with your head stuck in the ground and ignoring all reason.

I'll change my opinion on this when the data/evidence/science changes, which seems reasonable enough for now :fighting0030:[/QUOTE]

[Smoky buck]

:party0052:

[anything_but_fish]

I mean, these topics came up at the meeting I was at too, but "coming up" doesn't mean the bios agree with it. :fighting0074:

[Smoky buck]

And if you provide data from a study to multiple bio’s with no affiliation to each other you will get different conclusions and opinions on steps that should be taken. Like they say opinions are like A holes everyone has one even is goes for bio’s too

Usually when you see multiple management strategies it’s a sign of a difference in opinion and someone is testing a theory

Or you can read someone’s opinion a follow it like gospel :D

But I am just a dumb fisherman :thinking-006:

[anything_but_fish]

Yeah, but just because some folks disagree on the facts doesn't mean that your view is automatically right.

Like, if multiple biologists tend toward the same opinion, that indicates to me there's probably a lot of scientific evidence to that point.

Its the same as the single "expert" who says vaccines are bad or climate change isn't real. This person is a quack.

In this case, its better to go with the number of opinions that tend in a single direction vs. finding a single outlier person who supports your particular view, no? :scared:

[slough shark]

Yeah, which we had to do because we literally extirpated walleye from some lakes and it was dang near impossible to catch a walleye in many of the popular and accessible lakes...

You’re forgetting the fact that there are a number of lakes where the lions share of walleye were stocked where walleye had not existed previously so yeah it was impossible to catch one. That and where the walleye had existed previously stocking millions of walleye throws things out of whack.

[anything_but_fish]

Nah, I was mostly talking about Pigeon, LLB, wolf, and the natural walleye lakes in the province that collapsed hard.

The arguments that the southern reservoir fish are eating themselves out of house and home seems mostly bogus because these fish grow faster here than they do anywhere else in the province, at least if you ask the bios. If you are eating yourself out of house and home you sure ain't gonna be growing fast.

Maybe I don't know what lakes you are referring to specifically...

Also, it is very funny that the data nearly always show the truncation in walleye size right at the legal limit size. That's too coincidental for me to think that its a "eating themselves out of house and home" phenomenon.

More like a "here's your sign" type experience IMHO.

[Smoky buck]

Yeah, but just because some folks disagree on the facts doesn't mean that your view is automatically right.

Like, if multiple biologists tend toward the same opinion, that indicates to me there's probably a lot of scientific evidence to that point.

Its the same as the single "expert" who says vaccines are bad or climate change isn't real. This person is a quack.

In this case, its better to go with the number of opinions that tend in a single direction vs. finding a single outlier person who supports your particular view, no? :scared:

Best thing I found years ago is provide data/studies to bio’s outside of the area that are not part of their team and hear their opinion. Found out long ago their is always a bit of a play nice or you will not advance or be removed within fisheries departments

First red flag for any fisheries management opinion is when it stretches across too many bodies of water. A smart bio will not throw out blanket conclusions that cover a whole state or prove but focus only on a body of water or drainage. Factors vary way too much to reach solid conclusions and most areas will face different issues

But it always sounds great to the public and much cheaper

[anything_but_fish]

So, you want biologists from outside your area to throw blanket statements into your area basically? :confused:

Not sure I agree with this circular logic give you already say you don't want people making blanket statements in your post.

Not gonna lie, this sounds pretty conspiratorial to me.

[Pikebreath]

[QUOTE=Smoky buck;4132218

Usually when you see multiple management strategies it’s a sign of a difference in opinion and someone is testing a theory

:[/QUOTE]

I do believe this is certainly the case now,,, hopefully, now we can prove or disprove who is right,,, the armchair biologists or the paid professional bios?

[slough shark]

Nah, I was mostly talking about Pigeon, LLB, wolf, and the natural walleye lakes in the province that collapsed hard.

The arguments that the southern reservoir fish are eating themselves out of house and home seems mostly bogus because these fish grow faster here than they do anywhere else in the province, at least if you ask the bios. If you are eating yourself out of house and home you sure ain't gonna be growing fast.

Maybe I don't know what lakes you are referring to specifically...

Also, it is very funny that the data nearly always show the truncation in walleye size right at the legal limit size. That's too coincidental for me to think that its a "eating themselves out of house and home" phenomenon.

More like a "here's your sign" type experience IMHO.

All fish grow faster in the southern reservoirs, warmer water, longer growing season. Look at old stocking reports for mcgregor, travers, cvr for a few examples, 30 years ago they stocked millions of them now those lakes are filthy with them, pretty easy to have 50-100 fish days, almost all walleye. They make a disproportionate amount of biomass in those lakes, you’d have to be blind or stupid to argue otherwise. For an accumulative effect of regs favouring walleye look at sylvan, gull and pigeon, A lot of what you catch nowadays is walleye, 20 years ago schools of perch, whitefish pike were a lot more numerous and bigger. Over the years the shift due to regulations mandating release of walleye (a mid level predator) have along with harvest really hit those fisheries hard. They don’t support half the harvest that they did for years due to the disproportionate number of walleye. Now I’m not saying kill all the walleye but sacrificing all other species in favour of a c&r fishery for walleye is one of the dumbest things f&w ever did and they did it almost province wide

[Smoky buck]

So, you want biologists from outside your area to throw blanket statements into your area basically? :confused:

Not sure I agree with this circular logic give you already say you don't want people making blanket statements in your post.

Not gonna lie, this sounds pretty conspiratorial to me.

It’s called getting a non biased opinion from an outside source. Unfortunately At times studies can be done with a predetermined conclusion at times. This can be done unconsciously or consciously at times when it is to support or discredit a theory.

Because of this it can actually be valuable at times to get an opinion strictly on data that has no knowledge of a fisheries managers plans or goals. This does not need to be from outside of the area but with fish/wildlife management it can be valuable do to possible insight from being in the same field

Do I think this is something that is always need no but can it be valuable if you question a conclusion reached after a study yes. It’s really just a tool

My opinion is you approach management and conclusions on what is going on based on each body of water not apply data on walleyes impact on forage from a hand full of lakes to a whole province for starters.

But continue

[anything_but_fish]

Sure, maybe there were more of the other species in the before times and when people suddenly couldn't eat walleye perhaps they moved over to other species and then over harvested these as well. Same data with a different and yet completely reasonable hypothesis.

Also, why do we think that twenty years ago is the appropriate baseline to manage our fisheries for?

We should expect there to be differences between 20 years ago and now, and we should maybe temper our expectations given there seem to be conservation tradeoffs present.

Also also, of course they don't support the harvest they once did. The harvest that was once "supported" collapsed the fisheries! That's the whole point of limiting harvest :sign0161:

Its the same thing with the cod collapse. For years and years cod fisheries supported an insanely high harvest rate, and then all of a sudden things got squirrely and the fisheries collapsed. Now they are harvested at a lower rate because we took our medicine and know better after we caused a massive economic and ecological collapse.

[anything_but_fish]

The only way this would be reasonable is if you got a whole bunch of outside opinions from a variety of biologists, and then sifted through them to make sense of the big picture.

If you just go trying to find a single person who agrees with you, you're just reinforcing your beliefs in an echo chamber and you're probably not willing to change your beliefs.

So "non biased opinion" is certainly up for debate.

Time to go make some sourdough. Y'all have fun without me for a few hours :)

It’s called getting a non biased opinion from an outside source. Unfortunately At times studies can be done with a predetermined conclusion at times. This can be done unconsciously or consciously at times when it is to support or discredit a theory.

Because of this it can actually be valuable at times to get an opinion strictly on data that has no knowledge of a fisheries managers plans or goals. This does not need to be from outside of the area but with fish/wildlife management it can be valuable do to possible insight from being in the same field

Do I think this is something that is always need no but can it be valuable if you question a conclusion reached after a study yes. It’s really just a tool

My opinion is you approach management and conclusions on what is going on based on each body of water not apply data on walleyes impact on forage from a hand full of lakes to a whole province for starters.

But continue

[Smoky buck]

Missing the biggest issue when managing a body of water because they are either a closed system or drainage that can vary a lot and need to be addressed on an individual basis

Reaching conclusions for a province based on a handful of lakes is poor scientific management and anyone doing so should be questioned

But I am done here because forum talk is not going to impact anything

[anything_but_fish]

Given the obvious limitation that there isn't enough money or manpower to survey all lakes every year, how the heck would you like the bios to inform management then? This isn't an alberta problem, either. Its not like they survey all lakes every year *anywhere*

Making broad claims about why bios do what they do seems misguided unless you can explicitly give them a better way to do it.

Easy to throw stones, but much more challenging to provide any sort of useful guidance on how to move forward for the good of the critters.

Okay, sourdough for real now

:scared0018:

[Smoky buck]

Given the obvious limitation that there isn't enough money or manpower to survey all lakes every year, how the heck would you like the bios to inform management then? This isn't an alberta problem, either. Its not like they survey all lakes every year *anywhere*

Making broad claims about why bios do what they do seems misguided unless you can explicitly give them a better way to do it.

Easy to throw stones, but much more challenging to provide any sort of useful guidance on how to move forward for the good of the critters.

Okay, sourdough for real now

:scared0018:

How do I reach a conclusion about how things go amongst bio’s at times? I was not always just a dumb fisherman and shook hands with one or two. Might still talk to more than 1 even but non are from Alberta.

If you had interest in that subject of solutions I might have focused on it but you came with a predetermined conclusion on how things should be and are. You read a study or two and have been to meetings and came here to tell us how it is

So no I did not take things in the direction of solutions and I doubt you wanted to hear it anyway

I am done here because I would rather just enjoy the forum as a fisherman and hunter

[anything_but_fish]

How do I reach a conclusion about how things go amongst bio’s at times? I was not always just a dumb fisherman and shook hands with one or two. Might still talk to more than 1 even but non are from Alberta.

If you had interest in that subject of solutions I might have focused on it but you came with a predetermined conclusion on how things should be and are. You read a study or two and have been to meetings and came here to tell us how it is

So no I did not take things in the direction of solutions and I doubt you wanted to hear it anyway

I am done here because I would rather just enjoy the forum as a fisherman and hunter

Just because I have an (apparently) markedly different opinion than you does not mean that I came here with a predetermined conclusion--that's a cop out.

It just means I'm asking you to defend your views that apparently go against what seems to be the best available scientific evidence. Instead of doing that you seem to be relying on arguments from authority (i.e., mysterious biologists whom you have contacted) and a couple of anecdotes, which are untrustworthy sources at best. That next step fisheries team crew in my neck of the woods does this all the time, and their arguments are equally unsatisfactory.

It doesn't matter who you know or who you shake hands with or who you have talked to, but rather the cogency of your argument. And right now, yours confuses the snot out of me and doesn't seem to hold water, at least to me. :confused:

Cheers-

[slough shark]

Sure, maybe there were more of the other species in the before times and when people suddenly couldn't eat walleye perhaps they moved over to other species and then over harvested these as well. Same data with a different and yet completely reasonable hypothesis.

Also, why do we think that twenty years ago is the appropriate baseline to manage our fisheries for?

We should expect there to be differences between 20 years ago and now, and we should maybe temper our expectations given there seem to be conservation tradeoffs present.

Also also, of course they don't support the harvest they once did. The harvest that was once "supported" collapsed the fisheries! That's the whole point of limiting harvest :sign0161:

Its the same thing with the cod collapse. For years and years cod fisheries supported an insanely high harvest rate, and then all of a sudden things got squirrely and the fisheries collapsed. Now they are harvested at a lower rate because we took our medicine and know better after we caused a massive economic and ecological collapse.

It’s not just that they don’t support the harvest they once did but now in a number of places they don’t support a harvest of anything except a few whitefish and burbot (unless they open up harvest to some walleye) not huge numbers of course but one for the pan every now and then. All lakes can support some harvest to skew the biology of a lake completely in favour of one predator artificially by stocking millions and then complain about how everything else collapsed is disingenuous or willfully stupid. It’s all about balance and many of our lakes don’t have that right now due to past management decisions.

[anything_but_fish]

It’s not just that they don’t support the harvest they once did but now in a number of places they don’t support a harvest of anything except a few whitefish and burbot (unless they open up harvest to some walleye) not huge numbers of course but one for the pan every now and then. All lakes can support some harvest to skew the biology of a lake completely in favour of one predator artificially by stocking millions and then complain about how everything else collapsed is disingenuous or willfully stupid. It’s all about balance and many of our lakes don’t have that right now due to past management decisions.

So, I'm stupid for not agreeing with you? Nice. Also, as I alluded to before, this balance stuff makes little sense when you dig into it. It seems to be a catch-all phrase for the people who think the fishing ain't as good as it used to be and that the fishing stunk back then, too.

I'm pretty sure the nerds who study fisheries call it population *wait for it* dynamics.

What is balance, by the way? Arguably, none of us know what a pristine perch-pike-walleye population looks like in Alberta as many of these have been substantially overharvested, and unless we were around pre-1950 we'd have a heck of a time justifying our view or assumption of what "balance" means in terms of Alberta lakes. Food for thought.

Now, I'm going to guess that while some of us on this forum may be old, we probably aren't THAT old..

[slough shark]

Sorry for calling you stupid but you do realize that an artificial man made imbalance isn’t healthy for a lake right? You also realize that an artificial overpopulation of a predator has negative consequences for everything else in the lakes right? Heck even the overpopulation of walleye hurts the age structure dynamics of the walleye themselves, that’s why you go to many of these lakes and most walleye are the same size give or take.

[WayneChristie]

I miss fishing in the 50's, when all was in perfect balance

[anything_but_fish]

Counterpoint: the reason the walleye are all the same size is because when one gets big enough to eat it someone plucks it up out of the lake (myself included). That's not rocket science, its fisheries science.

You keep using words that have ambiguous meanings. Balance, health, etc. Define these terms explicitly, otherwise the assumptions of what you think is good/bad/ugly are unassailable and you're just spewing buzzwords with the rest of the geezers.

You don't have to apologize for calling me stupid, especially when you actually think that to be the case.

I for example feel that if leather were logic, you wouldn't have enough to saddle the back of a small walleye.

:fighting0074:

[Pikebreath]

What is balance, by the way? Arguably, none of us know what a pristine perch-pike-walleye population looks like in Alberta as many of these have been substantially overharvested, and unless we were around pre-1950 we'd have a heck of a time justifying our view or assumption of what "balance" means in terms of Alberta lakes. Food for thought.

Now, I'm going to guess that while some of us on this forum may be old, we probably aren't THAT old..

Well,,, FWIW,,, ( and yes I am not that old to have fished before 1950),,, as I mentioned in a much earlier[post in this thread,,,, back in the 60's a lot of new roads were being punched in to new lakes as resource development ramped up.

A anecdotal case in point would be Wolf Lake,,, I can't remember the exact year, but the first year the road went in, mom, dad and I caught a 3 person limit of 15 pickerel each (45 in all) in a couple hours trolling back and forth in front of the launch. We headed back to shore and cleaned the fish, and mom proceeded to start canning the fish over a coleman stove in the parking lot along with the other half dozen or so women doing the same while us men folk went out and caught a bunch more walleye!!!

Those years (the 60's) the walleye fishing was great,,, we typically caught a lot more walleye than pike out of lakes like Wolf in the first couple years of road access. As a previously untouched lake due to lack of access, was Wolf Lake out of balance back becuz walleye were so abundant and easy to catch?

However, the walleye catch rate would quickly decline and we would focus our attention on pike for a few more years after that. By the late 70s we quit going to Wolf, as our pike catch rates had declined significantly as well.

Fast forward to 2020,,, we now have walleye catch rates (fish per hour caught) on several lakes that rival the "good old days". Are we getting closer or further away from balance?

[anything_but_fish]

I think that information is worth a lot, pikebreath! That's exactly what I'm alluding to--that people seem to miss the real baseline when they are thinking about walleye and pike fishing in Alberta.

Fascinating and insightful story.

[Smoky buck]

Well,,, FWIW,,, ( and yes I am not that old to have fished before 1950),,, as I mentioned in a much earlier[post in this thread,,,, back in the 60's a lot of new roads were being punched in to new lakes as resource development ramped up.

A anecdotal case in point would be Wolf Lake,,, I can't remember the exact year, but the first year the road went in, mom, dad and I caught a 3 person limit of 15 pickerel each (45 in all) in a couple hours trolling back and forth in front of the launch. We headed back to shore and cleaned the fish, and mom proceeded to start canning the fish over a coleman stove in the parking lot along with the other half dozen or so women doing the same while us men folk went out and caught a bunch more walleye!!!

Those years (the 60's) the walleye fishing was great,,, we typically caught a lot more walleye than pike out of lakes like Wolf in the first couple years of road access. As a previously untouched lake due to lack of access, was Wolf Lake out of balance back becuz walleye were so abundant and easy to catch?

However, the walleye catch rate would quickly decline and we would focus our attention on pike for a few more years after that. By the late 70s we quit going to Wolf, as our pike catch rates had declined significantly as well.

Fast forward to 2020,,, we now have walleye catch rates (fish per hour caught) on several lakes that rival the "good old days". Are we getting closer or further away from balance?

You will find many variations of what you observed

Each species thrives over another if the conditions of the lake favor that species over the other if left with minimal outside interface. You will at times see less of of an issue is with larger bodies of water with big variation in depth and habitat. You can see this on remote fly in/hike in lakes of northern BC for example. You will see the dominant species switch between lake trout, bull trout, pike, and walleye. You spend time in enough remote lakes you will come across over populated waters with stunted fish as well. This changes as soon as you add harvest pressure, stocking and at times changes to habitat through irrigation/dams

Balanced fishery is the management of a multi species fishery where the management goal is to promote multiple species managing harvest rate to achieve this. It is not natural it is a man made management plan that is applied to many fisheries. This is just one of many forms of fisheries management

Fisheries management goals are about utilizing or creating a fishery in most cases and rarely about creating a natural fishery. There are many examples and different goals to achieve different results.

This is modern fisheries science based management not 1950’s utilizing a resource thinking it won’t run out and adjust as it dwindles.

At least this is what fish geeks go to school and learn or should I ask anything but fish

[calgarygringo]

We have some old pics somewhere of wifes grandad down south with pike on a rope tied on each end of a fence. Her grandma used to pickle them and they always had fish. Funny this place still has a pretty good pike population 50 or probably more years later. Wayne...you and I met at this lake one spring when you had your trailer parked at the end of the road on the side of lake. I thought we were all Lost. Still go down in spring if it thaws before things get going elsewhere.

I miss fishing in the 50's, when all was in perfect balance

[Smoky buck]

Call it all the Covid19 crap bugging me making moody so I am going to apologize for being a bit of a jerk to anything but fish

I worked in the private sector as a fish geek as it was put and usually don’t get into too much debate in theses threads because I don’t always keep a good attitude

Open water hurry up and get here I need something better to do lol

[anything_but_fish]

So why is it up to you to decide what "natural" and "balanced" is, if you just admitted that natural systems can have a wide range of outcomes based on habitat and external stressors, smoky buck? Are you going to try and push half of the lakes one way and the other half the other way to create an idealized landscape of variable fish populations based on your observations of Northern BC lakes?

"Balance" is not a new version of fisheries management. It was first brought up by a fisheries biologist named Homer Swingle in like 1950. He said it meant "sustainable harvest year after year for a variety of species." Ironically, that's far from the meaning that smoky and others on this forum would like it to mean, which is whatever suits their "give us more fish" stance. If you don't believe me, go to google scholar and type in "Homer Swingle Balanced Fisheries" and bucket-biologist your little heart out.

Oh, and I should point out that this view of balance in ecology and fisheries went the way of the dodo in about 1980, or around 40 years ago, because folks started to realize that fisheries in particular were always in a state of dynamic flux, rather than using unhelpful phrases like "balanced" or "unbalanced."

[anything_but_fish]

I'll agree with smoky buck. All this COVID-19 self isolation's got me fiesty. Cheers and don't take it personally, I mostly just like to think about fish and debate people. :)

[Smoky buck]

It’s just one of many forms of management plan and still practiced today along with many others. Your not talking to an old retired guy based on outdated knowledge.

You clearly have no idea what my stance even is but that’s ok. it doesn’t matter here

Good luck out on the water

[Smoky buck]

I'll agree with smoky buck. All this COVID-19 self isolation's got me fiesty. Cheers and don't take it personally, I mostly just like to think about fish and debate people. :)

Let’s just let it pass or it won’t end lol

[slough shark]

Counterpoint: the reason the walleye are all the same size is because when one gets big enough to eat it someone plucks it up out of the lake (myself included). That's not rocket science, its fisheries science.

You keep using words that have ambiguous meanings. Balance, health, etc. Define these terms explicitly, otherwise the assumptions of what you think is good/bad/ugly are unassailable and you're just spewing buzzwords with the rest of the geezers.

You don't have to apologize for calling me stupid, especially when you actually think that to be the case.

I for example feel that if leather were logic, you wouldn't have enough to saddle the back of a small walleye.

:fighting0074:

In most of the lakes I’m referencing walleye were introduced, by the million, over the next number of years the number and quality of other species declined or collapsed while the millions of walleye which were protected stunted. Perhaps one of the healthiest fishery over the years has been travers, tons of walleye with good numbers of whitefish and pike and until a couple years ago you were allowed to keep a walleye. On the other hand go to mcgregor and you can pull in a bucket full of walleye which you let go and the whitefish and pike numbers are in hard decline, haven’t even seen a perch there for years one used to go ice fishing there and pull out a bunch of whites and pike were more numerous and bigger. I’m not arguing for a free for all but skewing the biology of a lake with stocking and then letting them wreck havoc on what’s there destroys everything else. I’m not arguing for a return to the good old days when you could keep whatever you caught and you caught a ton, I know thats not realistic in today’s Alberta with a lot more people but if you want a healthy fishery with more species of fish than walleye there needs to be some retention of them

[WayneChristie]

We have some old pics somewhere of wifes grandad down south with pike on a rope tied on each end of a fence. Her grandma used to pickle them and they always had fish. Funny this place still has a pretty good pike population 50 or probably more years later. Wayne...you and I met at this lake one spring when you had your trailer parked at the end of the road on the side of lake. I thought we were all Lost. Still go down in spring if it thaws before things get going elsewhere.

yah I may be there tomorrow, been wandering around breathing sunshine all weekend. did fish one for a bit but the mudpuppies must have been elsewhere

[Brandonkop]

The funny thing is this idea of balance in the first place. Albertans seem to be the only people arguing walleye-pike-perch eat each other out of house and home. No one makes these arguments in any other jurisdiction in north america...which is very bizarre given they also have pike-walleye-perch fisheries.

You only ever see these arguments when people want to kill more fish, and invariably people blame anything but themselves for the demise of the fish they harvest the snot out of. Seems like cognitive dissonance--what if anything would get folks to change their minds? We never think that we might be the problem, which is alarming.

Let the great harvesting and stocking experiment begin, but I'll be over here saying I "toe da so" when you tank a fishery with that logic. And if I'm wrong, I'll eat crow and apparently some more shore lunch.


You sure make some big claims for someone who seems to have very little reading time under their belt. Not sure you have the ability to say, "No one makes these arguments in any other jurisdiction in north america."

For a fact I have read management articles from Montana and Washington that consider balancing predator populations with retention. Just read about Montana and Washington mandates and ever changing limits on walleye and retention size of walleye to create healthier populations rather than over populations.

You should know any time you make a blanket statement in life you're wrong. There will always be an exception.

[anything_but_fish]

Funny that you believe there are few books upon my shelf just because I don't agree with you.

First point, there are no native walleye populations in Washington, so not sure where you're going there.

Second, there's a difference between what people claim in fishing magazines/forums whathaveyou vs. what the best available science suggests. I choose to side with science.

For a fact I have read management articles from Montana and Washington that consider balancing predator populations with retention. Just read about Montana and Washington mandates and ever changing limits on walleye and retention size of walleye to create healthier populations rather than over populations.

Even more anecdotes. There is no evidence that harvesting one species to achieve some ill-defined thing like "balance" works in fisheries, particularly when trying to use angler harvest to achieve it. Go to google scholar and take a look for yourself...

Maybe if you're willing to rotenone a population or something it might work, as has been the plan in southern Utah, western United States reservoirs, and a few midwestern reservoirs with bass-bluegill dynamics back in the 70s and 80s.

:sSc_hiding:

[Smoky buck]

Anything but fish just curious what management plans and studies have you put into place or worked on?

[anything_but_fish]

I was unaware the value of my argument should be linked to anything other than the cogency of my points.

Why does my status or lack thereof matter for the points I make?

The only thing that matters right now is that you can't back your claims up with published science. I recommend spending an evening scrolling through google scholar and looking for yourself. You don't have to agree with me, but at least you'll have access to scientific information.

:)

[Pikebreath]

Here is a link to a great reference book called "Atlas of Alberta Lakes" which was published in 1990. It has creel data for several lakes (mostly in the Beaver drainage and some lakes in the Athabasca Peace as well) collected during the 1980's which show how poor the fishing really was back then.

http://albertalakes.ualberta.ca/

Here are a couple of creel survey data tables (Wolf and Touchwood)from The Atlas of Alberta Lakes:


162030

162031


The walleye catch rate of 0.05 fish per hour in Wolf Lake (1988) means anglers on average angled 20 hours to catch one walleye,,,, or if 20 anglers fished one hour, one of them would catch a walleye!!!

The current state of Alberta fisheries is not perfect,,,, but believe me,, Today's issues of what to do with too many fish is a much better problem to have than what to do about not having enough fish !!!

I certainly still have some questions about current regs on certain lakes,,, but I am willing to give these new regs the chance to hopefully achieve new management objectives beyond fish stock recovery such as increased harvest on some lakes, maintain / increase catch rates on others, improve average size,, and create some quality / trophy fisheries.

[Smoky buck]

I was unaware the value of my argument should be linked to anything other than the cogency of my points.

Why does my status or lack thereof matter for the points I make?

The only thing that matters right now is that you can't back your claims up with published science. I recommend spending an evening scrolling through google scholar and looking for yourself. You don't have to agree with me, but at least you'll have access to scientific information.

:)

It was an honest curiosity is all

[anything_but_fish]

It was an honest curiosity is all

Also, smoky buck, I thought we were friends after our kiss and make up yesterday a la corona :love0025:

I guess us self-isolation crazies are back at it. lol.

[Smoky buck]

Also, smoky buck, I thought we were friends after our kiss and make up yesterday a la corona :love0025:

I guess us self-isolation crazies are back at it. lol.

Nope You can run wild with your arguments. I got no interest in putting together an argument for something I am not getting paid for or does not lead to a end goal of value. The soap box is yours lol

The question was honest curiosity nothing more

[anything_but_fish]

I mean, presumably a good end goal would be you making sure you're not full of it and that your beliefs hold water--there is always room for personal growth.

[Smoky buck]

I mean, presumably a good end goal would be you making sure you're not full of it and that your beliefs hold water--there is always room for personal growth.

You must be bored

[SNAPFisher]

As usual, I think this thread started off okay. 2 pages of posts, now covered under 4 pages of dribble.

Go fishing!

[Smoky buck]

Guilty of getting dragged into it and feeding the fire.

Definitely need to go fishing but need open water to scratch the itch

[Brandonkop]

Guilty of getting dragged into it and feeding the fire.

Definitely need to go fishing but need open water to scratch the itch

I'm going fishing as well. I've seen the changes first hand. Do my own creel studies. I'll be out whacking some walleye in Alberta again once this Coronavirus settles down! Maybe one day we'll be able to catch something besides 100's of 2 pound walleye.

[Smoky buck]

I'm going fishing as well. I've seen the changes first hand. Do my own creel studies. I'll be out whacking some walleye in Alberta again once this Coronavirus settles down! Maybe one day we'll be able to catch something besides 100's of 2 pound walleye.

Even with the new regs i still won’t target walleye much and I still won’t keep many fish. Ate too many fish years ago and rarely eat it now

But I am pretty excited to go try one of my old early season brown trout spots. It’s been years since I have fished it so hopefully it still holds some good fish

I also designed a new top water pike lure I can’t wait to test. First truly finished batch will be complete late this week or early next week. Also a new count down spy bait design in the final stages and with the extra time with the Covid19 mess who knows what else I come up with

All I know is open water can’t get here soon enough :sHa_shakeshout:

[walking buffalo]

I'm happy to hear that some of Nature's bounty will be available to us again.

Lots here seem to like researching science.

Look into the concept of "Balance in Nature".

There is no such thing.
I wish that this knowledge was still mandatory before any biologist receives a degree.... current educations are so lacking in common sense.

We can try to influence populations as we desire, but we can Never create a Balance in Nature.

[pikeman06]

I'm going fishing as well. I've seen the changes first hand. Do my own creel studies. I'll be out whacking some walleye in Alberta again once this Coronavirus settles down! Maybe one day we'll be able to catch something besides 100's of 2 pound walleye.

Absolutely...see you out there, very excited to see the effects of thinning the "piranhas in the bathtub." Maybe just maybe there's enough perch in the odd lake to have decent perch fishing again. Or at least a diverse healthy fishery. Kudos to the government for the changes.