[steelhead]

I get a kick out of those who use the BC example when comparing its bass problems to Alberta.


The 2 provinces have vastly differing climates. And that is a huge reason why bass would never harm trout streams and habitat in this province.


Has anyone ever caught a bass in the elk river? Koocanusa is full of them. No reports, and no cases. Why? Too cold for survival and spawning. Cold water fishery and a cool to warm water specie. Doesnt work.


In this province, if bass were to run rampant, bass would only be found invading warmer rivers, so, they would be where walleyes and goldeyes thrive. Rarely or never past those ranges. And in this province, there are lines on all these rivers where the walleyes and goldeyes stop, and theres nothing but trout and whites. do ya get it?

Considering bass compete well and co-exist nicely with pike and walleyes and perch, the would compliment many of our lakes if they were to invade them. As a smaller specie than pike and walleyes, they would provide a forage base much nedded in many lakes in this province. They have billions of studies showing that in many other states and provinces.


As for invading trout streams and destroying the ecosystems we are trying to save, from our past mistakes i might add, it will never happen. Warmer lakes, yes, potholes, yes. And thats ok. Trout rivers into the foothills, never happen and theres a bc example for that.


Ah yes, using a vancouver island stream example is laughable as they are a temperate rainforest and those islands rivers are naturally a perfect temperature for bass to thrive.



STEELHEAD