Will Covid 19 kill Alberta's stocking program?

[Pikebreath]

With Premier Jason Kenny predicting a $20 billion deficit, what are the odds of seeing Jason Nixon's enhanced stocking program dying from a Covid 19 induced budgetary coma?

[Jigsalot]

With Premier Jason Kenny predicting a $20 billion deficit, what are the odds of seeing Jason Nixon's enhanced stocking program dying from a Covid 19 induced budgetary coma?

I bet that is not high on their priority list. Can also see lots of parks people getting let go since all the parks are closed. Going to be a very bad year

[Smoky buck]

I would not jump to any conclusions yet but funding is definitely going to tighten up in my opinion. I bet some projects will be cut this season

No one can really judge how much impact this will have until we are getting to the rebuilding stage. Stocking is very low on the list of concerns may may have in the future

[slough shark]

This year no impact I’d say probable scale back in the coming years, hopefully not as our fees are supposed to pay for that but who knows

[WinefredCommander]

Won't be affecting this year as the fish are already in the systems growing, it might impact futures tho.

[pinelakeperch]

With Premier Jason Kenny predicting a $20 billion deficit, what are the odds of seeing Jason Nixon's enhanced stocking program dying from a Covid 19 induced budgetary coma?

Can you share more information on the "enhanced stocking program"?

[Pikebreath]

Can you share more information on the "enhanced stocking program"?

Direct quotes from 2020 Angling Regs,,, Minister's Message and Important Changes...


"...You will see a lot of the feedback you provided reflected in this 2020 sportfishing guide. Restoring and revitalizing fisheries and enabling a new direction will take time. We have also invested in Alberta hatcheries infrastructure which will become an important basis to our ambitious stocking program in Alberta waterbodies. …."

"….Stocking and Transfers

Alberta Environment and Parks is planning to stock walleye and transfer northern pike and yellow perch to increase fishing opportunities. Fish transfers will focus on re-stocking waters that have experienced fish kills or have recovered from drought conditions. Please know measures will be in place that prevent disease transfer. These programs are planned to begin this spring. Please be aware that these efforts will not likely result in immediate fishing opportunities. Updates on fish stocking and transfer activities will be provided during the year.

Tiger trout are listed as a sport fish in Alberta. Tiger trout stockings have also been expanded to more lakes; please review the site-specific regulations and Alberta’s Stocking Report on MyWildAlberta website.... "

[trigger7mm]

I’ve been wondering the same thing. Like it’s been said, fish stocking will be way down the priority list. I sure hope they don’t abolish it. Fingers crossed.

[pinelakeperch]

Direct quotes from 2020 Angling Regs,,, Minister's Message and Important Changes...


"...You will see a lot of the feedback you provided reflected in this 2020 sportfishing guide. Restoring and revitalizing fisheries and enabling a new direction will take time. We have also invested in Alberta hatcheries infrastructure which will become an important basis to our ambitious stocking program in Alberta waterbodies. …."

"….Stocking and Transfers

Alberta Environment and Parks is planning to stock walleye and transfer northern pike and yellow perch to increase fishing opportunities. Fish transfers will focus on re-stocking waters that have experienced fish kills or have recovered from drought conditions. Please know measures will be in place that prevent disease transfer. These programs are planned to begin this spring. Please be aware that these efforts will not likely result in immediate fishing opportunities. Updates on fish stocking and transfer activities will be provided during the year.

Tiger trout are listed as a sport fish in Alberta. Tiger trout stockings have also been expanded to more lakes; please review the site-specific regulations and Alberta’s Stocking Report on MyWildAlberta website.... "

Appreciate it :)

[338Bluff]

Increase license fees 5% and remove free seniors license ( don't whine about affordability if you have $$ for gas to go fishing you can afford a license) No doubt this is unpopular unpopular, but what are you going to do? Alternative is no fish. Times have changed.

[flyrodfisher]

Won't be affecting this year as the fish are already in the systems growing, it might impact futures tho.

Correct

[flyrodfisher]

Increase license fees 5% and remove free seniors license ( don't whine about affordability if you have $$ for gas to go fishing you can afford a license) No doubt this is unpopular unpopular, but what are you going to do? Alternative is no fish. Times have changed.

Even better;
1) Increase license fees to all non Alberta residents
2) Declare all east slope streams as classified waters...non Alberta residents pay $20/day

What's good for the goose....

[ShortsideK]

Never mind the stocking program.
With most recreational activities shut down everybody and their dog are going to be fishing (unless that is shut down too).

[Mr Flyguy]

Never mind the stocking program.
With most recreational activities shut down everybody and their dog are going to be fishing (unless that is shut down too).

Hey, welcome back Kennie! How long will it be before, well, you know :sHa_shakeshout:

[338Bluff]

Even better;
1) Increase license fees to all non Alberta residents
2) Declare all east slope streams as classified waters...non Alberta residents pay $20/day

What's good for the goose....

Is there even that many non-Residents fishing the East Slopes anymore? Not that I would be opposed but I don't think it would raise enough funds.

Sask has a voluntary conversation donation when you purchase a license that goes straight into stocking and habitat. I through 50 bucks at it every year. Tax deductible.

[CNP]

Increase license fees 5% and remove free seniors license ( don't whine about affordability if you have $$ for gas to go fishing you can afford a license) No doubt this is unpopular unpopular, but what are you going to do? Alternative is no fish. Times have changed.

Your token increase in licensing fees and tossing seniors aside is the fix? The alternative is no fish? I'm laughing in your general direction

[flyrodfisher]

Is there even that many non-Residents fishing the East Slopes anymore? Not that I would be opposed but I don't think it would raise enough funds.

Don't know exact numbers...but lots of folks from the province to the west fishing on our side in the pass....plus Americans on the Bow and east slope cutty and brown streams.

[pikeman06]

There are far more important governmental affairs at hand boys. Look at the state of our highways and other important infrastructure to try and maintain or upgrade. I don't expect rainbow trout stocking into some hopeless winter killed waste of money to be a real high priority at such a time or am I wrong in thinking this way ?

[zabbo]

Even better;
1) Increase license fees to all non Alberta residents
2) Declare all east slope streams as classified waters...non Alberta residents pay $20/day

What's good for the goose....

Is there even that many non-Residents fishing the East Slopes anymore? Not that I would be opposed but I don't think it would raise enough funds.

Sask has a voluntary conversation donation when you purchase a license that goes straight into stocking and habitat. I through 50 bucks at it every year. Tax deductible.

Excellent idea Flyrod! Make it $40 per day! Should have been done sometime ago!

I have fished the Oldman, Livingston, Dutch and Racehorse Creek area pretty much all summer for the last seven years. Home away from home for three months every year. Just got real lucky I guess! Sometimes you have to look pretty hard to find Alberta plates! Even on the average day you will find B.C., Montana, Idaho, Washington and even a few Saskatchewan Plates. I don't mind sharing, but it seems fair that these people pay a bit more. Unfortunately it probably wouldn't matter. In all the countless hours of fishing I have been asked for a license......... once!

I hope the stocking program continues, but in the current situation, I really believe we have bigger FISH to fry. :)

[338Bluff]

Your token increase in licensing fees and tossing seniors aside is the fix? The alternative is no fish? I'm laughing in your general direction

What's your solution? Why would the province spend one dime on stocking programs when we are heading into the worst economic situation since the Depression?

Increase license by 25% then and Seniors should definitely pay.

[338Bluff]

There are far more important governmental affairs at hand boys. Look at the state of our highways and other important infrastructure to try and maintain or upgrade. I don't expect rainbow trout stocking into some hopeless winter killed waste of money to be a real high priority at such a time or am I wrong in thinking this way ?

This. If we want stocked lakes it's going to be user pay or it won't be a priority. Not to stir the pot but is it inconceivable that they could they privatize it? Consessions are sold to private individuals who stock and aerate the lake then hire someone to collect the rod fees and police it? Not sure I would like that.

[ShortsideK]

Increase license fees 5% and remove free seniors license ( don't whine about affordability if you have $$ for gas to go fishing you can afford a license) No doubt this is unpopular unpopular, but what are you going to do? Alternative is no fish. Times have changed.

Here's an alternative:
Quadruple the license fee and leave the seniors alone.

[pinelakeperch]

Here's an alternative:
Quadruple the license fee and leave the seniors alone.

At $120.00 you're going to lose people, no doubt. How is a 17 year old high school student in a better position to spend $120.00 on a fishing license than a 65 year old retiree?

[bart]

On the Relm site fishing licenses aren`t included in the options. It`s curious at best.

[CardiacCowboy]

Bought mine yesterday no problem. Did notice what you mentioned but mine was already in my cart at the time.

Maybe once you buy it is not a option?

[ShortsideK]

At $120.00 you're going to lose people, no doubt. How is a 17 year old high school student in a better position to spend $120.00 on a fishing license than a 65 year old retiree?

I was only serious about "leave the seniors alone".

Had more to say, but I just got out of AO jail so the spotlight is on me and I have to tread lightly........................................... ........... for now.

[thumper]

We should mirror what BC has done, and remove the responsibility of fishing from the government completely. There's not and will never be enough votes at stake for any politician to pay much attention to recreational fishing needs in this province. It's easy to ignore, and difficult to fund.
All of fishing license revenue in BC goes to a 'stand-alone' organization, totally separate and free from government involvement, interference, cutbacks and indifference. Check out the Freshwater Fisheries Society of BC for a full appreciation of what can be accomplished with fishing license revenues. In brief :
"Under an agreement signed between the Province and the Freshwater Fisheries Society of BC in 2015, 100% of the revenue generated from fishing licences directly benefits recreational fisheries. That’s right, every penny goes into research, conservation and education programs, improving angler access and our stocking program. The Habitat Conservation Trust Foundation receives 100% of the surcharge revenue collected from angling licence sales to provide grants for fish conservation projects."

I would think that the Alberta government would love to have an organization like that to take the thankless job of managing our fisheries, off of their hands !

[338Bluff]

Here's an alternative:
Quadruple the license fee and leave the seniors alone.

Why would you leave them alone? I have zero issue with free prescriptions and other services but you should have to pay for a luxury irregardless of age. Nobody is going to quit fishing if they have to pay 28 bucks.

[ShortsideK]

Why would you leave them alone? I have zero issue with free prescriptions and other services but you should have to pay for a luxury irregardless of age. Nobody is going to quit fishing if they have to pay 28 bucks.

If you think about it, YOU are paying for the Senior licenses. If seniors payed the same as you, licenses could cost about 1/2 and result in the same amount taken in.
I am more than happy for YOU to foot the bill.

[Smoky buck]

If you think about it, YOU are paying for the Senior licenses. If seniors payed the same as you, licenses could cost about 1/2 and result in the same amount taken in.
I am more than happy for YOU to foot the bill.

I don’t really care about the whole seniors license and think it’s peanuts in the big picture of things but your showing exactly why many fisheries are lacking funding

Everyone wants to scream we need more funding to improve the fishery but a large % thinks someone else should pay for it

[338Bluff]

If you think about it, YOU are paying for the Senior licenses. If seniors payed the same as you, licenses could cost about 1/2 and result in the same amount taken in.
I am more than happy for YOU to foot the bill.
You are not changing mind. Why would they decrease the cost of the current license? I'm fine with paying the same or slightly more now. When I'm a senior I will also gladly pay if it means that the there will be stocked water for everyone. What's 28 bucks?

[goldscud]

$28 for a year of entertainment....incredible value....no matter how old your are

[flyrodfisher]

If you think about it, YOU are paying for the Senior licenses. If seniors payed the same as you, licenses could cost about 1/2 and result in the same amount taken in.
I am more than happy for YOU to foot the bill.

Nope...
About 310,000 licences are sold yearly in Alberta...or about 8% of the population minus seniors.
Seniors total about 580,000....so, if 8% of them bought licences, it would only amount to 46,000 more licences.

310,000 times $28 equals $8,680,000 equals current yearly take

so...to get the same amount of money if seniors bought licences;
$8,680,000 divided by 356000 equals $24.38

For your statement to be valid, 310,000 seniors would have to buy a license...which would be about 60% of the Alberta senior population...which is to put it mildly...improbable...

[flyrodfisher]

Even better;
1) Increase license fees to all non Alberta residents
2) Declare all east slope streams as classified waters...non Alberta residents pay $20/day

What's good for the goose....

Although I'm not opposed to adding seniors to the list....but if we do that...we should consider adding EVERYONE that engages in "fishing" and that includes children.

it has always been a beef of mine in that some come with a whack of kids to allow the adult to claim multiple limits.
At the VERY minimum, go with Canada Parks and INCLUDE the catch of juniors in the limit of the adult.

[ShortsideK]

Nope...
About 310,000 licences are sold yearly in Alberta...or about 8% of the population minus seniors.
Seniors total about 580,000....so, if 8% of them bought licences, it would only amount to 46,000 more licences.

310,000 times $28 equals $8,680,000 equals current yearly take

so...to get the same amount of money if seniors bought licences;
$8,680,000 divided by 356000 equals $24.38

For your statement to be valid, 310,000 seniors would have to buy a license...which would be about 60% of the Alberta senior population...which is to put it mildly...improbable...

Wow, you certainly gave attention to my statements and put in the effort to see what is what.
I, on the otherhand, was just throwing it out there.
Still, LEAVE SENIORS ALONE!
LOL!

[ShortsideK]

Although I'm not opposed to adding seniors to the list....but if we do that...we should consider adding EVERYONE that engages in "fishing" and that includes children.

it has always been a beef of mine in that some come with a whack of kids to allow the adult to claim multiple limits.
At the VERY minimum, go with Canada Parks and INCLUDE the catch of juniors in the limit of the adult.

I agree 100%

[338Bluff]

Although I'm not opposed to adding seniors to the list....but if we do that...we should consider adding EVERYONE that engages in "fishing" and that includes children.

it has always been a beef of mine in that some come with a whack of kids to allow the adult to claim multiple limits.
At the VERY minimum, go with Canada Parks and INCLUDE the catch of juniors in the limit of the adult.

Agree.

[338Bluff]

Nope...
About 310,000 licences are sold yearly in Alberta...or about 8% of the population minus seniors.
Seniors total about 580,000....so, if 8% of them bought licences, it would only amount to 46,000 more licences.

310,000 times $28 equals $8,680,000 equals current yearly take

so...to get the same amount of money if seniors bought licences;
$8,680,000 divided by 356000 equals $24.38

For your statement to be valid, 310,000 seniors would have to buy a license...which would be about 60% of the Alberta senior population...which is to put it mildly...improbable...

46,000 more licenses is 1.3 million dollars. That buys some fish. I think you are light at 8%. There are alot of 65+ guys out there with more free time than they know what to do with. The real number is likely closer to 15%, but we will never know since they never buy a license.

[flyrodfisher]

46,000 more licenses is 1.3 million dollars. That buys some fish. I think you are light at 8%. There are alot of 65+ guys out there with more free time than they know what to do with. The real number is likely closer to 15%, but we will never know since they never buy a license.

In a perfect world....you would be correct...but sadly the world is not perfect.

The breakdown is as follows;
License fee $29.40

ACA levy $18.30
IBM fee $8.20
Alta government $1.50
GST $1.40

In reality only $18.30 goes back into conservation...that goes into the bureaucracy of the ACA....not all of that goes back into fisheries...even less into actual stocking of fish...

But yes, there would be some money available to buy fish.

As I said, I'm not against licensing seniors...but focusing on them is a red herring.....pun intended.

There are better ways to raise revenue...even if we used your generous 15% number, that would only bring in the same amount of money by raising the licences overall by $6.00 and still leaving seniors exempt.

[tallieho]

Being of age 65 now. I am still willing to pay for a licence.i still believe that if you use the resource,you should pay.given the co vid times.with the govt.virtually giving monies up,like druken //.the first thinks that they will cut,are things that cost them to produce.hence passing it on to subscribers.we should all pay imo...

[ShortsideK]

"As I said, I'm not against licensing seniors...but focusing on them is a red herring.....pun intended.

There are better ways to raise revenue..."


I get what you are saying.

[anything_but_fish]

flyrodfisher hit the nail on the head--most of this money goes to ACA, and what they do to fund fisheries is fairly questionable at best. Perhaps someone should ask them how their funding has been used to improve fisheries--because to my understanding this money is entirely separate from all of the revenue pots that fund our monitoring and regulation development side of things with AEP.

[338Bluff]

[QUOTE=flyrodfisher;4146664]In a perfect world....you would be correct...but sadly the world is not perfect.

The breakdown is as follows;
License fee $29.40

ACA levy $18.30
IBM fee $8.20
Alta government $1.50
GST $1.40

In reality only $18.30 goes back into conservation...that goes into the bureaucracy of the ACA....not all of that goes back into fisheries...even less into actual stocking of fish...

But yes, there would be some money available to buy fish.

As I said, I'm not against licensing seniors...but focusing on them is a red herring.....pun intended.

There are better ways to raise revenue...even if we used your generous 15% number, that would only bring in the same amount of money by raising the licences overall by $6.00 and still leaving seniors.


I understand that but all users should have to be licensed except kids. We have no idea how many seniors are fishing. Everyone is guessing. A license changes that. Even with your deductions close to a million dollars is coming in.

[338Bluff]

flyrodfisher hit the nail on the head--most of this money goes to ACA, and what they do to fund fisheries is fairly questionable at best. Perhaps someone should ask them how their funding has been used to improve fisheries--because to my understanding this money is entirely separate from all of the revenue pots that fund our monitoring and regulation development side of things with AEP.
What's questionable they stock about 60-70 water bodies? What are they not doing?

[Rvsask]

Is there even that many non-Residents fishing the East Slopes anymore? Not that I would be opposed but I don't think it would raise enough funds.

Sask has a voluntary conversation donation when you purchase a license that goes straight into stocking and habitat. I through 50 bucks at it every year. Tax deductible.

Thank you for your donation.

I think licence fee increases in every province is a good idea. If you cannot pay a little more than you do not care too much about fisheries in general. As for hammering it to non residents, that's a slippery slope. I generally look at more red plates in the summer than green ones where we have a cabin.
"What's good for the goose" I believe was mentioned.

[ShortsideK]

I'm fine with the status quo.

The ACA will gladly accept donations from those that feel the fish stocking program needs more $$.

[Pikebreath]

Raising general licence fees to fund a stocking program isn't going to fund a lot of stocked fish.

Current rates for rainbow trout from private hatcheries range from $2- 5 per fish depending on size... I am by no means any kind of aquaculture expert, but it is my understanding, rainbow trout are the among the most cost effective fish to raise for stocking purposes. Walleye are far more expensive to raise and as far I am aware there are no pike aquaculture facilities so any stocking is accomplished by transfers,,, again probably not the most cost effective.

"Best bang for your buck" is almost invariably going to be to let wild naturally producing fish stocks produce fish for us to catch. That's why their protection from overharvest and habitat needs are paramount!

[Smoky buck]

Raising general licence fees to fund a stocking program isn't going to fund a lot of stocked fish.

Current rates for rainbow trout from private hatcheries range from $2- 5 per fish depending on size... I am by no means any kind of aquaculture expert, but it is my understanding, rainbow trout are the among the most cost effective fish to raise for stocking purposes. Walleye are far more expensive to raise and as far I am aware there are no pike aquaculture facilities so any stocking is accomplished by transfers,,, again probably not the most cost effective.

"Best bang for your buck" is almost invariably going to be to let wild naturally producing fish stocks produce fish for us to catch. That's why their protection from overharvest and habitat needs are paramount!

Your cost on rainbows is about right for fish in the 8-14 inch size and you are also correct that rainbows are the most cost effective. Even 2inch trout are around 30 cents each when buying 10k or more. I can back you on this as I still have friends in the aquaculture industry

I also agree yearly stocking for c&k is an expensive way to offer opportunities is an a fishery. This is very true in the case many trout lakes that see no reproduction do to sterile/straight female fish or stocked in waters without spawning habitat. Proper management combined with enhancement of bodies of water are a more cost effective long term option but will not support the harvest put and take waters will

[flyrodfisher]

What's questionable they stock about 60-70 water bodies? What are they not doing?

Some of you seem to be misguided into thinking that your fishing license dollars equate directly into stocked fish in the pond.

Facts about where your ACA dollars go...;

2019 levy revenue collected by the ACA from hunting and fishing licenses was $13.5 million

Of the $13.5 million collected, $7.3 million went directly to staff salaries alone
The ACA has a staff of about 80 people, of which 50 - 60 are biologists/techs
The CEO's salary is $305,000 per year

For those that still think every $ in increased license fees goes to "fish in the pond"....I will leave you with this sobering number;

The ACA stocked 63 ponds last year with a total of 106,090 trout
The ACA revenue from fishing license sales last year was $5,217,000
$5,217,000 divided by 106,090 equals $49.18 per stocked fish

So...it would take the sale of almost 3 fishing licenses to stock one fish

[flyrodfisher]

Another interesting fact;

You need to sell 16,700 fishing licences to pay the yearly salary of the CEO of the ACA

[anything_but_fish]

What's questionable they stock about 60-70 water bodies? What are they not doing?

My point is there are a lot of things that go into successful fisheries management that don't involve stocking. Fish dumped in doesn't really equate to successful fisheries management in my opinion.

[wind drift]

Some of you seem to be misguided into thinking that your fishing license dollars equate directly into stocked fish in the pond.

Facts about where your ACA dollars go...;

2019 levy revenue collected by the ACA from hunting and fishing licenses was $13.5 million

Of the $13.5 million collected, $7.3 million went directly to staff salaries alone
The ACA has a staff of about 80 people, of which 50 - 60 are biologists/techs
The CEO's salary is $305,000 per year

For those that still think every $ in increased license fees goes to "fish in the pond"....I will leave you with this sobering number;

The ACA stocked 63 ponds last year with a total of 106,090 trout
The ACA revenue from fishing license sales last year was $5,217,000
$5,217,000 divided by 106,090 equals $49.18 per stocked fish

So...it would take the sale of almost 3 fishing licenses to stock one fish

What a gross misuse of our licence funds. There’s no way a not for profit organization with a staff of less than 100 doing work for AEP and us should compensate its head that richly. The board should be fired and the agreement with AEP ripped up.

[Smoky buck]

My point is there are a lot of things that go into successful fisheries management that don't involve stocking. Fish dumped in doesn't really equate to successful fisheries management in my opinion.

I would have to agree here

[pipco]

Some of you seem to be misguided into thinking that your fishing license dollars equate directly into stocked fish in the pond.

Facts about where your ACA dollars go...;

2019 levy revenue collected by the ACA from hunting and fishing licenses was $13.5 million

Of the $13.5 million collected, $7.3 million went directly to staff salaries alone
The ACA has a staff of about 80 people, of which 50 - 60 are biologists/techs
The CEO's salary is $305,000 per year

For those that still think every $ in increased license fees goes to "fish in the pond"....I will leave you with this sobering number;

The ACA stocked 63 ponds last year with a total of 106,090 trout
The ACA revenue from fishing license sales last year was $5,217,000
$5,217,000 divided by 106,090 equals $49.18 per stocked fish

So...it would take the sale of almost 3 fishing licenses to stock one fish


Interesting stats.

106,090 sounds low but I'm not expert.

Where are you getting your numbers?

[SNAPFisher]

Interesting stats.

106,090 sounds low but I'm not expert.

Where are you getting your numbers?

They can download the data through government open data. That said, he must of had a miscalculation or missed a zero. Page 1 alone adds up to close to 72,000 trout stocked. At the bottom it shows the total numbers stocked:

Total trout stocked 2019: 1,664,549

So the numbers are a "tad" off. As in a gaping chasm.

I think we need something called social media distancing. Limits the spread of useless conversations :lol:

[Pikebreath]

In a perfect world....you would be correct...but sadly the world is not perfect.

The breakdown is as follows;
License fee $29.40

ACA levy $18.30
IBM fee $8.20
Alta government $1.50
GST $1.40

In reality only $18.30 goes back into conservation...that goes into the bureaucracy of the ACA....not all of that goes back into fisheries...even less into actual stocking of fish...



There are better ways to raise revenue...

How about this idea that's been floating around for a few years ,,, a 10% excise tax on fishing related gear with all funds dedicated to enhancing fisheries (including stocking programs) in Canada?

Check out www.csia.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Excise-Tax-Sheet.pdf


Concept is based on the Dingell-Johnson Act in the United States https://fishuntamed.com/dingell-johnson-act/ and the Pittman- Robertson Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pittman–Robertson_Federal_Aid_in_Wildlife_Restorat ion_Act

The amount of money raised for conservation in the States under these programs significantly dwarfs licence fee revenues.

[damaltor]

Being a senior, I have no objection to paying for a license.
Sheesh, it's only $28.
I actually was wanting to buy a license this year, so I don't have to carry my driver's license around with me, but AlbertaRELM wouldn't let me??
I too would like to see a "Cassified Waters" fee, similar to BC here in AB!!

[Lefty-Canuck]

Make it a strictly user based system... you pay to play regardless of age, 5yrs an up... subsidize the youth and the seniors, but you pay to play. People enter their youngins into the draws to get more tags. I have kids and did it too, I have no issues with paying as long as it goes directly into the resource.

LC

[anything_but_fish]

Make it a strictly user based system... you pay to play regardless of age, 5yrs an up... subsidize the youth and the seniors, but you pay to play. People enter their youngins into the draws to get more tags. I have kids and did it too, I have no issues with paying as long as it goes directly into the resource.

LC

The problem is fishing generates a lot of $ through licensing, and thus politicians can't seem to keep their hands off of it.

There are examples of what you suggest working though. In Wisconsin, there is a trout stamp. It has been written into legislation that all money from this stamp goes directly into habitat funding. It might also have some funds allocated to harvest regulations--I cannot remember for sure.

Point being, this was super tricky to implement and good luck getting the current administration to part with your license money in the current economic downturn. This is a thing politicians need to do, not biologists. Doesn't mean its impossible, just means its harder to get up and running.

I hope it happens for the fisheries, but I'm also a realist and don't see this happening any time soon.

[flyrodfisher]

They can download the data through government open data. That said, he must of had a miscalculation or missed a zero. Page 1 alone adds up to close to 72,000 trout stocked. At the bottom it shows the total numbers stocked:



So the numbers are a "tad" off. As in a gaping chasm.

I think we need something called social media distancing. Limits the spread of useless conversations :lol:

Dear Mr snapfisher;

You apparently have no understanding of what the ACA does...nor have ever been to their website;

ALL numbers I have quoted come directly from the ACA website;

Number of fish and waterbodies stocked;

https://www.ab-conservation.com/downloads/annual_report/aca_2018_annual_report.pdf

On page 2 it states;

"106090 twenty cm long trout (95250 rainbow. 5000 brown and 5840 brook trout) were stocked into 63 ponds"


The CEO salary also comes from this annual report, as do the revenue sources. The employee count/make up comes from the staff list available on the ACA website.

I suggest that you take some time to read the annual report so that you can see how your money that is being directed to the ACA is being spent.


Sadly,most don't even have a clue as to what the ACA does.


The number you quote regarding fish stocking INCLUDE the ones stocked by AEP.....that has NOTHING to do with the ACA dollars.

NO useless conversation here...

[pipco]

Dear Mr snapfisher;

You apparently have no understanding of what the ACA does...nor have ever been to their website;

ALL numbers I have quoted come directly from the ACA website;

Number of fish and waterbodies stocked;

https://www.ab-conservation.com/downloads/annual_report/aca_2018_annual_report.pdf

On page 2 it states;

"106090 twenty cm long trout (95250 rainbow. 5000 brown and 5840 brook trout) were stocked into 63 ponds"


The CEO salary also comes from this annual report, as do the revenue sources. The employee count/make up comes from the staff list available on the ACA website.

I suggest that you take some time to read the annual report so that you can see how your money that is being directed to the ACA is being spent.


Sadly,most don't even have a clue as to what the ACA does.


The number you quote regarding fish stocking INCLUDE the ones stocked by AEP.....that has NOTHING to do with the ACA dollars.

NO useless conversation here...

Thank you for the clarification.

That makes much more sense. I was thinking of overall stocking ( not just ACA) numbers and I'd guess Snapfisher was as well.

[SNAPFisher]

Thank you for the clarification.

That makes much more sense. I was thinking of overall stocking ( not just ACA) numbers and I'd guess Snapfisher was as well.

Yep exactly. Kind of hard to follow your trail flyrodfisher but you made it clearer so thanks.

And, yes, been to the ACA many times and understand it. It is more your poor communications that led to it. Maybe give that a thought Mr. FlyRodFisher.

Useless applies to the other arguments over charging seniors for licenses. Really? I can take the word of the actual senior forum members on here who say they are okay paying. Good on you, really! I remember my own dad, rest his soul, and how much he appreciated the privilege of not paying. Most of the seniors of that time are living at or way below the poverty line. And, above all, I think they've earned a friggin break. The government takes way to much from our seniors. While tossing in a free license is a drop in the bucket, it is something at least and I hope brings a smile to the face of some. License aside, there should be more and more perks added for seniors than what they see today.

I don't know of any of you that don't agree that have actually done the taxes for your parents or a senior that lives at or below the poverty line. If you did, you might have a different way of thinking about it. My wife is a Social Worker and did 10 years supporting seniors. I can tell you stories that she told me that would make you shake your head. It helps to give me a different perspective on things.

Note, these last two paragraphs are not directed at you Mr. FlyRodFisher. Thought I better be clear in my communication.

[flyrodfisher]

Yep exactly. Kind of hard to follow your trail flyrodfisher but you made it clearer so thanks.

And, yes, been to the ACA many times and understand it. It is more your poor communications that led to it. Maybe give that a thought Mr. FlyRodFisher

Poor communication?

This is what I said in a previous post;

"The ACA stocked 63 ponds last year with a total of 106,090 trout"


Can't get much clearer than that.

Regardless...as this thread has drifted a bit...I will start a new one.

[pinelakeperch]

Today I saw a video of the ACA stocking trout in Taber, Foremost, and a few other places. Hopefully stocking isn't affected too terribly.

[trigger7mm]

Does any one know if ACA is currently doing stocking of trout? Diplomat Mine Pond specifically. Thanks, keep safe.

[trigger7mm]

What a gross misuse of our licence funds. There’s no way a not for profit organization with a staff of less than 100 doing work for AEP and us should compensate its head that richly. The board should be fired and the agreement with AEP ripped up.

Absolutely!

[HRFisher]

ACA's list of stocked lakes for 2020 (only 4 stocked so far; remainder pending)

https://www.ab-conservation.com/programs/fish/aca-stocked-lakes/

[trigger7mm]

Thanks for providing that info.

[Isopod]

Until this Covid budget mess is over, raise license fees for all, but make sure the funds are directed to stocking and not just sucked up as general government revenue.

Seniors (and I'm getting close) should pay to fish also, maybe at a discounted rate.

When I go fishing to an Alberta lake, taking into account the cost of gas, wear and tear on my vehicle, the price of bait and any new fishing tackle, etc, etc, the $28 for an annual license fee is nothing. I'm glad that it's nothing, but in troubled economic times I don't mind if it goes up, so long as the funds are invested into stocking programs (that otherwise might be cancelled).

[flyrodfisher]

Until this Covid budget mess is over, raise license fees for all, but make sure the funds are directed to stocking and not just sucked up as general government revenue.

You guys really need to pay attention to where your license fee goes.
VERY little goes into general revenue


It's in the regs….and here it is again;

http://www.outdoorsmenforum.ca/showthread.php?t=379631

It also discusses the fact that increased license fees do NOT equal more stocked fish.

[flyrodfisher]

deleted

[Isopod]

flyrodfisher, I think I basically agree with you, and I realize where the fees go is all laid out in the regs. But I still would support higher fees, at least while we are recovering from this economic mess, as long as those fees are specifically used for stocking programs.

Otherwise I fear the govt might just cancel stocking, or re-direct fees that were previously used for stocking, since budgets are a mess and fishing is not a priority item, at least not when compared to hospital budgets, unemployment, etc.

If increased license fees DID equal more stocked fish, and it was clearly specified that higher fees are directed to fish stocking, then I think many fishers might support a fee increase.

[WayneChristie]

flyrodfisher, I think I basically agree with you, and I realize where the fees go is all laid out in the regs. But I still would support higher fees, at least while we are recovering from this economic mess, as long as those fees are specifically used for stocking programs.

Otherwise I fear the govt might just cancel stocking, or re-direct fees that were previously used for stocking, since budgets are a mess and fishing is not a priority item, at least not when compared to hospital budgets, unemployment, etc.

If increased license fees DID equal more stocked fish, and it was clearly specified that higher fees are directed to fish stocking, then I think many fishers might support a fee increase.

Thousands out of work for months probably, and you think its great to raise fees. so what do the people who are too broke to eat give up, 2 or 3 meals? you want to put more money into the stocking programs raise it yourself or donate some of your pay checks. leave the rest of the population who may be having serious financial issues alone!

[Isopod]

Thousands out of work for months probably, and you think its great to raise fees. so what do the people who are too broke to eat give up, 2 or 3 meals? you want to put more money into the stocking programs raise it yourself or donate some of your pay checks. leave the rest of the population who may be having serious financial issues alone!

Looks like someone needs to have a Snickers.

[WinefredCommander]

Todd making $300000 a year is a travesty on all fronts. That's more money than any AEP biologist...

[flyrodfisher]

Todd making $300000 a year is a travesty on all fronts. That's more money than any AEP biologist...

Premier Kenney only makes about $200,000

[i love fishing]

No cutties will be stocked this year due to the Job Lake spawning camp being cancelled.

[MrDave]

After looking at the stocking plan and report, there will be far less lakes and ponds stocked. Several that I fish are not listed.

https://open.alberta.ca/publications/fish-stocking-list

[flyrodfisher]

After looking at the stocking plan and report, there will be far less lakes and ponds stocked. Several that I fish are not listed.

https://open.alberta.ca/publications/fish-stocking-list

Not true;
The list is not current and only has the stocking to date...it is usually a few days behind.
Currently stocking now.

[korie83]

Does anyone know if the stocking has been done according the planned stocking report here:

https://open.alberta.ca/opendata/planned-trout-stocking

I'm mostly curious if the planned stocking for lakes in and around Edmonton were done over the last couple days?