View Single Post
  #32  
Old 01-09-2011, 12:39 PM
Sundancefisher's Avatar
Sundancefisher Sundancefisher is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Calgary Perchdance
Posts: 18,775
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by steelhead View Post
How deep of water were the nets placed? how many times a year and for how many years were the netting done to have a proper analysis done? How many different areas of the lake were the nets put in? Were those big fish released unharmed?

Ok, just an edit, I looked at your data that you use. Way too flawed to get anywhere near a fair estimate on the fish sizes in those lakes. I move to have that flawed data exempt from these talks and your petition.


I would say your assumptions are wrong and with flawed data.


Our fisheries budget gets smaller every year. One indicator that with more rules and regs and less spending on quality lakes, they dont need the money to enhance them, theyre doing it all on thier own, with less spending.


You also wrote....
I disagree that we need to stocking more...stocking implies an over harvest and an unsustainable fishery.

Theres not a fishery in Canada that is sustainable. Overharvest happens everywhere! So as many other provinces see it, stocking is the only way to go.


Alberta has done enough testing and fiddling with our fisheries. All to be proven to be the wrong approach. Take some examples from other provinces and spend money and raise enforcement.



Why dont we all band together and petition for more money and enforcement. Theres no way in Hades you will get quality anywhere in this province without it!


Start there, and in a few years, i'm sure everyone will sign your petition with no "nays" on the poll.


STEELHEAD
I am sorry you agree with scientific data from Provincial biologists. Not much I can say. Gill netting is a very good technique to see what is available. Unfortunately it is not a method with high survivorship...therefore it is used sparingly.

While the budget does looking annoying every year... Please provide data to show money is coming out of they system and where...is it expense accounts, studies, stocking, staffing etc. "Your budget question is hard to know. Can you provide information that shows that when Bullshead implemented the new rules and attracted a huge fishermen following that somehow the system was financially harmed. Please provide some facts as if true I will be emailing my MLA... Otherwise...it is just a theory. I remember the opposite...after regs came into being...enforcement increased and not targeted enforcement still prevails but tons of eyes are keeping those greedy people more honest." You did not answer this. If you think this a conspiracy to save money...how so? The initiative are started by fishermen...not F&W. It was actually an uphill battle to make the first two...same as this one. If it was a conspiracy...why don't F&W just make it a rule across the whole Province? Answer...because from a management perspective it makes more sense in some places than all places.

We can disagree on the stocking idea. I feel F&W needs to adjust the limits to account for an allowable harvest. Thereby the fishery is sustainable. Your generalized comment applies when the basic principles are not followed due to improper science, unexpected increase in harvest (not accounting for human population over time versus limits), natural disaster, spawning success etc. The Bow River for instance is a fishery that does not get stocked. Does fine. The Crowsnest is not stocked. The Oldman is not stocked. All these fisheries are going well without stocking. A put and take lake with no natural spawning...requires stocking.

Let us know when you have that petition started to increase the enforcement budget as an ADDITIONAL expense item on the Provincial budget.

Cheers

Sun
Reply With Quote