First of all the old anglers per waterbody argument is severely overplayed on this forum and is next to meaningless. If you want to actually compare provinces in this manner you need to look at the primary people holding areas(say 3 hrs surrounding every city), data for which I do not believe is available. If you did this the angler/waterbody or area of water would skyrocket in most other provinces because most of their waterbodies are inaccessible or rarely accessed by their primary fishing populations.
Alberta on the other hand only has a handful of very remote waterbodies that don't see regular pressure and outside of the few major lakes close to Edmonton/Red Deer/Calgary our fishing pressure is spread out pretty effectively.
If you have ever fished any of these other provinces you will know that there are many lakes/rivers in some of these other provinces that see just as much if not more pressure then our AB waterbodies see. I know I have seen it in both SK and BC as well as many times in fishing shows etc for ON.
Back to the walleye topic.
Your comments regarding Chin are a great example of why the tag system is not the solution here in AB. The only way to properly micromanage a lake by controlling tag numbers requires in depth population estimates every couple years at least. Netting is the main way they get this information but that is not a good means especially on a year to year or every other year basis as their is significant mortality associated with that netting.
Chin is an example why test netting should be done and more frequently. Nothing to do with tag system. If it was tested every 2 years they could have adjusted 3 fish to 1 and still had ample time to see the effects that move had. Test netting mortality is acceptable in most Provinces and States. Other means are available as well I believe. But they are critical to making decisions.
The only way the tag system is effective with lack of perfect micromanaging is if it is used like it currently is on Pigeon and Ste. Anne where the lakes are overpopulated and the tag numbers are set low to ensure there are not too many fish removed. That has other negative effects though because it screws up the lakes ecosystem and decimates other fish species populations as is completely obvious on those lakes both of which used to have populations of pike, perch and whitefish all of which are now lacking and not really recovering even though the limits have been closed for some time now(for pike anyways)...
Better to remove to few than to many. Patience may be required. Cant really blame tags when population was already to great
I am vehemently against a province wide tag system because I know it won't be managed properly and all it is going to do is ruin these waterbodies. If they want to use it on the lakes close to city that do see signifcant pressure like Pigeon etc do then I am ok with that but implementing these on every lake across the province and them now wanting to do so for pike as well is utterly ridiculous and is going to do far more harm then good.
I also am against province wide tag system. But not for your reasons. Last resort to me. I also think close to large cities tags are a good option. For pike too.
Alternatives to the tag system are minimum size limits which have proven effective(and which for the record AEP also says are effective minus the stunted average size) and slot limits which have all the advantages of a minimum size limit plus give a population of larger fish as well.
Agree, but with the comment that if to many fish are removed the upper limit is unneeded or useless
AEP really likes to focus on walleye, grayling and bull trout but they keep doing so at the expense of other species and it is time that they step back and realize what they are doing and start making some better decisions regarding the big picture of fish populations and angling in Alberta.