|
|
09-12-2011, 08:20 PM
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 4,018
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by avb3
Rainbows have had a direct negative effect on western cutthroat trout and likely the Athabasca rainbow trout, which is the only indigenous rainbow trout in Alberta.
I'm not aware of any negatives of Huns - we got lucky.
Although Pheasant hunting is a very popular activity by some Albertan's, if you look at the amount of money that has been spent on this bird, which essentially is a put and take as very few survive our winters, and then think of all the areas of native fish and animals that need money spent on them, which would you rather see? Pheasants or moose? Or sheep? Or get our goats back so we can hunt them? Or the Grizzly bear?
Why spend money on an non-native animal, when so many of our native ones need help, even if there appear to be no negative impacts.
Unless, of course, somehow we find that pot of gold at the end of some rainbow, after we fulfill societies other demands for healthcare, education, roads.... you know... the stuff that makes our world go round.
My vote goes to native species.
|
Who says you can't hunt goats in Alberta
|
09-12-2011, 08:28 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Chestermere lake
Posts: 351
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by sheephunter
Hybridization between birds is rare so not really a fair comparison and raibows have had some serious impacts on our cuthroats. Browns, the jury is still out. I see you forgot to mention brookies
Lots of stuff has been done in the past that will never be done again in the future. No matter how well-intentioned, two wrongs will never make a right!
|
I didn't forget to mention brookies. I understand there are risks involved with introducing new species one only needs to look at the disaster that occured in lake Victoria and the ongoing threat of the Asian carp getting into the great lakes. I think Bass are not in that catorgory as they already coexist with our same native species in other parts of Canada. Most if not all of the sutible habits for Bass in southern Alberta are man made water storage containers for irrigation purposes not natural occuring bodies of water.
__________________
I like fish cause they taste good
|
09-12-2011, 08:30 PM
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by horsetrader
99% of the waters bows are stock in are not suitable for spawning the % of natural spawned fish is not sufficient to self sustain the species. If the same stocking program was affixed to bass that the trout had there could be a nice bass fishery in alberta at this time
|
I doubt bass could survive in many of the waters rainbows are stocked in. I guess you could make an expensive put and take fishery for bass in parts of the province but I don't really see the point.
|
09-12-2011, 08:31 PM
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jorg
Most if not all of the sutible habits for Bass in southern Alberta are man made water storage containers for irrigation purposes not natural occuring bodies of water.
|
But most are connected and offer access to natural occuring bodies of water.
|
09-12-2011, 08:41 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: cowtown
Posts: 6,653
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by sheephunter
But most are connected and offer access to natural occuring bodies of water.
|
Hardly a concern if you truely beleive Bass cant survive
|
09-12-2011, 08:44 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Chestermere lake
Posts: 351
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by sheephunter
But most are connected and offer access to natural occuring bodies of water.
|
OK here is a question sorry to derail but is there any excess water from irrigation and how do they handle it ? Back on track thou I think the only real risk would be of the Bass getting into the south Sask drainage but I don't think there is sutible habitat in that drainage to support a Bass population not until Lake Diefenbaker anyhow.
__________________
I like fish cause they taste good
|
09-12-2011, 08:45 PM
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by chubbdarter
Hardly a concern if you truely beleive Bass cant survive
|
I never said they couldn't survive in some waters. In fact it's already been proven that they can survive...just not reproduce.
|
09-12-2011, 08:46 PM
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Central Alberta
Posts: 7,861
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by horsetrader
Who says you can't hunt goats in Alberta
|
How long do you think it will be until you can get drawn for one?
|
09-12-2011, 08:50 PM
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 538
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by avb3
How long do you think it will be until you can get drawn for one?
|
Doesn't matter, the fact is you can hunt them in Alberta, in fact I had one of the tags 3 years ago but was unsuccessful due to a broken foot.
|
09-12-2011, 08:58 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: cowtown
Posts: 6,653
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by sheephunter
I never said they couldn't survive in some waters. In fact it's already been proven that they can survive...just not reproduce.
|
so its a concern if we stock a lake and 12 escape?
Its been mentioned that a Brown and Bull cross might occur.....hmm because the brown is a invasive species..lol
What possible harm comes from a fish that cant do the the fish funky
|
09-12-2011, 08:59 PM
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 4,018
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by avb3
How long do you think it will be until you can get drawn for one?
|
Or get our goats back so we can hunt them
This is your statement not that you have to draw.
you are like most people who argue a lost point you will not state the full facts
just like you were saying the demise of the bull trout was from the introduction of non native fish you did not mention the decline was from 1 migratory barriers, 2 habitat degradation and fragmentation, 3 angling pressure and past population management.
|
09-12-2011, 09:00 PM
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by chubbdarter
so its a concern if we stock a lake and 12 escape?
Its been mentioned that a Brown and Bull cross might occur.....hmm because the brown is a invasive species..lol
What possible harm comes from a fish that cant do the the fish funky
|
Ummm, they could eat a whole lot of fish that can do the funky and they could become a real competitor for forage. Bass are voracious eaters.
|
09-12-2011, 09:05 PM
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 538
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by sheephunter
Ummm, they could eat a whole lot of fish that can do the funky and they could become a real competitor for forage. Bass are voracious eaters.
|
Cattle are huge competitors with native ungulates for food and voracious eaters, does that mean cattle are bad and we need to get rid of them and tear down all the fences in Alberta and re-introduce bison everywhere?
|
09-12-2011, 09:08 PM
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeo2
Cattle are huge competitors with native ungulates for food and voracious eaters, does that mean cattle are bad and we need to get rid of them and tear down all the fences in Alberta and re-introduce bison everywhere?
|
Huh?
That doesn't even make sense. If you are trying to say that two wrongs make a right...sorry, they don't.
|
09-12-2011, 09:09 PM
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 4,018
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by sheephunter
I doubt bass could survive in many of the waters rainbows are stocked in. I guess you could make an expensive put and take fishery for bass in parts of the province but I don't really see the point.
|
they have made that same expensive put and take fishery for trout for years
|
09-12-2011, 09:11 PM
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by horsetrader
they have made that same expensive put and take fishery for trout for years
|
Yup, so why do it with bass when it already exists with trout?
|
09-12-2011, 09:14 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: cowtown
Posts: 6,653
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by sheephunter
Ummm, they could eat a whole lot of fish that can do the funky and they could become a real competitor for forage. Bass are voracious eaters.
|
well then those 12 fish....will be highly prized as a sport fish.
We currently use a rock/sand strain in canals that come from irrigation res. to fill trout ponds....to prevent pike migration.
This can be used to prevent Bass migration...Bass need a big void to escape .
|
09-12-2011, 09:15 PM
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 4,018
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by sheephunter
Ummm, they could eat a whole lot of fish that can do the funky and they could become a real competitor for forage. Bass are voracious eaters.
|
So are pike and there is no guarantee as stated by AVB3 that any species can invade other waters
|
09-12-2011, 09:15 PM
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by chubbdarter
well then those 12 fish....will be highly prized as a sport fish.
We currently use a rock/sand strain in canals that come from irrigation res. to fill trout ponds....to prevent pike migration.
This can be used to prevent Bass migration...Bass need a big void to escape .
|
And how did you come up with the number 12?
If bass got into the South Sask, they could get into the Oldman, the Bow, well you get the picture.
|
09-12-2011, 09:16 PM
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by horsetrader
So are pike and there is no guarantee as stated by AVB3 that any species can invade other waters
|
But we already have pike...we don't have bass.
|
09-12-2011, 09:18 PM
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 4,018
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by sheephunter
Yup, so why do it with bass when it already exists with trout?
|
Why not cut down on the amount of trout restocked each year and introduce a new fishery HOW MANY TROUT DO PEOPLE NEED
|
09-12-2011, 09:21 PM
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by horsetrader
Why not cut down on the amount of trout restocked each year and introduce a new fishery HOW MANY TROUT DO PEOPLE NEED
|
How many bass to people need. Do we really need to put our waters at risk and incur huge expenses to create another put and take fishery?
Don't get me wrong, I love fishing for bass but with the limited budget our department operates on and the risk an introduction comes with, I just don't see stocking bass as a responsible move when it's nothing more than a put and take fishery at best. I love fishing for musky and stripers too but I don't see the point of introducing them either.
|
09-12-2011, 09:21 PM
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 4,018
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by sheephunter
But we already have pike...we don't have bass.
|
You were talking about the bass getting in trout waters do you have pike in trout waters
|
09-12-2011, 09:23 PM
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by horsetrader
You were talking about the bass getting in trout waters do you have pike in trout waters
|
Yup, so why add another competitor/predator that's not even native to Alberta or is this a case of two wrongs making a right?
|
09-12-2011, 09:26 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: cowtown
Posts: 6,653
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by sheephunter
And how did you come up with the number 12?
If bass got into the South Sask, they could get into the Oldman, the Bow, well you get the picture.
|
i pulled the number 12 out of my scientific data......i figured if everyone is making up chit...i could too.
How many are you saying are gonna escape? Past the sand trap.
Most irrgigation by pass water doesnt empty into the SSR....but either way if the Super Bass did find its way into the Oldman...its journey ends at the very least in cowley....any Bow river super bass ends its journey in Bassano....at least then the Bass cant have sex with a bulltrout and make BullAss fishes.
Im sorry i still fail to see how a fish that cant breed and relies on its population thru escapement into a huge water way can become a issue.
|
09-12-2011, 09:26 PM
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 4,018
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by sheephunter
How many bass to people need. Do we really need to put our waters at risk and incur huge expenses to create another put and take fishery?
Don't get me wrong, I love fishing for bass but with the limited budget our department operates on and the risk an introduction comes with, I just don't see stocking bass as a responsible move when it's nothing more than a put and take fishery at best. I love fishing for musky and stripers too but I don't see the point of introducing them either.
|
But if you remove some trout stocking and introduce bass there is no greater expense it would would be a trade off not an addition.
|
09-12-2011, 09:28 PM
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by chubbdarter
i pulled the number 12 out of my scientific data......i figured if everyone is making up chit...i could too.
How many are you saying are gonna escape? Past the sand trap.
Most irrgigation by pass water doesnt empty into the SSR....but either way if the Super Bass did find its way into the Oldman...its journey ends at the very least in cowley....any Bow river super bass ends its journey in Bassano....at least then the Bass cant have sex with a bulltrout and make BullAss fishes.
Im sorry i still fail to see how a fish that cant breed and relies on its population thru escapement into a huge water way can become a issue.
|
So say you are right. What is the point of incuring huge expenses to create a marginal put and take fishery?
|
09-12-2011, 09:29 PM
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by horsetrader
But if you remove some trout stocking and introduce bass there is no greater expense it would would be a trade off not an addition.
|
Other than the huge costs of creating a new hatchery or importing fish from the U.S.
|
09-12-2011, 09:34 PM
|
Banned
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 4,018
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by sheephunter
Yup, so why add another competitor/predator that's not even native to Alberta or is this a case of two wrongs making a right?
|
don't think of it as a competitor its pike food
|
09-12-2011, 09:36 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: cowtown
Posts: 6,653
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by sheephunter
So say you are right. What is the point of incuring huge expenses to create a marginal put and take fishery?
|
okay..suppliment the expense with licence fees....you play you PAY.
No one knows it will be marginal......if scientists had all the answers why did Island lake fail? Why did they try it?
Is it possible a southern res may work?
Can a Bass fishery be a economic bonus like the Bow.
Ask the fishinggeeks what happened when the nets broke in saskabush.
im sorry but so called scientist and fishery people backed by scientists are not running on a good track record with current fishery decisions........
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:23 PM.
|