Go Back   Alberta Outdoorsmen Forum > Main Category > Fly-Fishing Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 09-26-2017, 05:04 PM
millsboy79's Avatar
millsboy79 millsboy79 is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Calgary
Posts: 768
Exclamation North Central Native Trout - Proposed Angling Closures

There is a new survey on the APE website.

Be sure to take the time to have your voices heard ... not that it will probably change the outcome but you never know!

https://talkaep.alberta.ca/north-cen...gling-closures
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 09-26-2017, 10:10 PM
flyrodfisher flyrodfisher is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 12
Default

What is up with AEP?

1) Sure...make it difficult for folks...need to register to take the survey and comment??? Whats up with that? Guess AEP really doesn't want input.

2) None of the proposed changes were discussed at the fisheries management meetings....which actually have not been held in some time...

3)2016 Pembina closure was also dropped on anglers with no input.

4) Can you imagine the pressure this will put on other area streams?

5) Do any of you remember Wampus , Deerlick and Eunice???...closed for decades...to study. They have never been re-opened. 30+ years later, we are still awaiting the study results.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 09-26-2017, 10:23 PM
flyrodfisher flyrodfisher is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 12
Default

The affected river and proposed 2018 closures are identified here.

http://aep.alberta.ca/fish-wildlife/...-recovery.aspx
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 09-26-2017, 10:23 PM
slough shark slough shark is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Airdrie
Posts: 1,444
Default

What are they looking at? The page doesn't load on my phone?
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 09-26-2017, 10:35 PM
flyrodfisher flyrodfisher is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 12
Default

Major portions and tributaries of the Berland, Clearwater, Kakwa, North Saskatchewan, Ram, Pembina, Upper Red Deer and Pinto Lake
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 09-27-2017, 08:25 AM
MK2750's Avatar
MK2750 MK2750 is online now
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Sylvan Lake
Posts: 2,301
Default

Shutting down rivers to save the Bull Trout? I for one couldn't care less if I ever see another Bull Trout. Brown Trout have been here longer than the majority of us. They are much more fun to catch and get absolutely no respect as a sport fish in Alberta.

The Red Deer River and Tributaries are world class Brown Trout fisheries in spite of government, imagine what they would be like with a little help like a fall breeding season closure and a few officers that patrol places other than the parking lot at Dickson.

White-tailed Deer are not native as well. I say we tear down the population so Mule Deer thrive again and ban all hunting where Mule Deer might be threatened by human activity.

I find it strange that on all of the fly fishing forums I frequent that there is hardly ever a mention of Bull Trout and White Fish yet every fisher is excited about big Rainbows and Browns. Shouldn't fishermen be protesting these closures? Imagine all the western streams teaming with big stupid Bull Trout. They will have eaten everything else. I would bet money that few if any would even bother fishing anymore. But we need not worry as fishing will be completely banned for fear of mortality of the dumb things.

Have I mentioned I don't care for Bull Trout?
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 09-27-2017, 08:54 AM
SNAPFisher SNAPFisher is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,277
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MK2750 View Post
Shutting down rivers to save the Bull Trout? I for one couldn't care less if I ever see another Bull Trout. Brown Trout have been here longer than the majority of us. They are much more fun to catch and get absolutely no respect as a sport fish in Alberta.

The Red Deer River and Tributaries are world class Brown Trout fisheries in spite of government, imagine what they would be like with a little help like a fall breeding season closure and a few officers that patrol places other than the parking lot at Dickson.

White-tailed Deer are not native as well. I say we tear down the population so Mule Deer thrive again and ban all hunting where Mule Deer might be threatened by human activity.

I find it strange that on all of the fly fishing forums I frequent that there is hardly ever a mention of Bull Trout and White Fish yet every fisher is excited about big Rainbows and Browns. Shouldn't fishermen be protesting these closures? Imagine all the western streams teaming with big stupid Bull Trout. They will have eaten everything else. I would bet money that few if any would even bother fishing anymore. But we need not worry as fishing will be completely banned for fear of mortality of the dumb things.

Have I mentioned I don't care for Bull Trout?
Good post
I do care for the bull trout. As much as browns or bows...never really considered that. I think it is pretty equal for me.

Regardless, I do not agree with a 5 year closure and pressure up at other streams and rivers. An alternating year closure could be okay but not 5 years like the Pembina. At least in my humble opinion. Taking survey next...

Op, thanks for posting this.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 09-27-2017, 11:13 AM
jgib01's Avatar
jgib01 jgib01 is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Kipp's Crossing
Posts: 134
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flyrodfisher View Post
What is up with AEP?

1) Sure...make it difficult for folks...need to register to take the survey and comment??? Whats up with that? Guess AEP really doesn't want input.
I think the registration is likely a way of ensuring completion of one survey per person... just a guess though. In my opinion, asking for input via even a somewhat cumbersome online process is better than not asking at all (the latter being the common practice of many government departments historically).

I can certainly understand the concerns about shifting pressures to other waters, at those other waters' expense. That is a valid concern that I'm not sure I have ever seen a comprehensive response to, on this or other proposed closures of various types.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 09-27-2017, 02:26 PM
wind drift wind drift is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 354
Default

The background info is well done:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gle_uscXYz8

http://aep.alberta.ca/fish-wildlife/...-recovery.aspx
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 09-27-2017, 03:47 PM
italk2u's Avatar
italk2u italk2u is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Edmonton, AB
Posts: 396
Default

Done. Only took a minute to register...time well spent.
__________________
God grant me the Focus to Visualize myself catching fish, the Faith to believe that I will, and the Wisdom to keep the freezer stocked with hamburgers and hot dogs
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 09-27-2017, 06:27 PM
Renegade J Renegade J is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 94
Question Ncnt

After reading info in links above, it seems to me like this plan is already set in motion. Looks like I need to take up a new hobby if all of the east slope's best trout streams have a recreational fishing ban. I didn't know that our fisheries were in that rough of shape. Funny thing about these closures is that Arctic Greyling and Athabasca 'bows have never existed in the majority of the rivers that they plan to close...
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 09-27-2017, 07:05 PM
SamSteele's Avatar
SamSteele SamSteele is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 1,145
Default

Done here as well. I believe there are many larger factors at play beyond the C&R fishing of these rivers. Bulls and Grayling are all 0 retention already. I have to think that over development plays a larger role than any mortality from C&R.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
"To be glad of life because it gives you the chance to love and to work and to play and to look up at the stars- to be satisfied with your possessions but not content with yourself until you have made the best of them...to think seldom of your enemies, often of your friends, and every day of Christ; to spend as much time as you can in God's out-of doors- these are the little guideposts on the footpaths to peace."

-Henry Van Dyke

Instagram: @mharder80
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 09-27-2017, 07:21 PM
tardymice tardymice is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 5
Default

Took the survey...I do agree that fishing has declined in those watersheds over the last few decades - and not just from fishing pressure.
We have to make sure that AEP is living up to their commitments over the next five years though and fixing some of the other issues like water withdrawal/road crossings/forestry etc.... simply banning fishing just doesn't cut it!
Here's to hoping that it's short term pain for long term gain
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 09-27-2017, 11:36 PM
smitty9 smitty9 is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 395
Default I thoughtful perspective...

I'll post this here too, since this issue is double posted in the fishing forum as well.

(Former) publisher of the Alberta Fishing Guide Dave Jensen has been heavily involved in fisheries issues for a few decades. Agree or disagree, but I respect his knowledge on these issues, and, equally important, the political aspects and bureaucratic red tape that the AEP seems to be infected with.

Consider this viewpoint before you fill out the survey:

http://flyfishalberta.com/jensenflyf...-trout-survey/
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 09-28-2017, 03:59 AM
NUK SOO KOW NUK SOO KOW is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Lethbridge Alberta
Posts: 537
Default

What would your guys opinion be on re-stocking river systems that are in bad shape? Fish stocking of flowing waters was made illegal some years back and I'm not sure why. I was told by biologists that stocking non native species is against the law(ie brown/rainbow trout) even though they are already in many rivers reproducing. . Browns were stocked in the oldman river when the dam was built. There is a small self sustaining population but I always thought it could use a boost. Even try stocking browns or rainbows upstream from the weir in Lethbridge. There are several trout holding rivers that join the oldman anyway. My point is if cutties are hurting in a river system. Stock it. Bulls hurting... stock it. Instead of closing them down boost them up. Thoughts??
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 09-28-2017, 07:18 AM
slickwilly's Avatar
slickwilly slickwilly is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 283
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NUK SOO KOW View Post
What would your guys opinion be on re-stocking river systems that are in bad shape? Fish stocking of flowing waters was made illegal some years back and I'm not sure why. I was told by biologists that stocking non native species is against the law(ie brown/rainbow trout) even though they are already in many rivers reproducing. . Browns were stocked in the oldman river when the dam was built. There is a small self sustaining population but I always thought it could use a boost. Even try stocking browns or rainbows upstream from the weir in Lethbridge. There are several trout holding rivers that join the oldman anyway. My point is if cutties are hurting in a river system. Stock it. Bulls hurting... stock it. Instead of closing them down boost them up. Thoughts??
Common thought is that if a population is in decline, there is some limiting habitat factor. Adding more fish artificially just puts more competition on the remaining members of the population. The stocked fish will die, and maybe take the native fish with them by boosting predator numbers, eating the food, etc.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 09-28-2017, 09:14 AM
SNAPFisher SNAPFisher is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,277
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NUK SOO KOW View Post
What would your guys opinion be on re-stocking river systems that are in bad shape? Fish stocking of flowing waters was made illegal some years back and I'm not sure why. I was told by biologists that stocking non native species is against the law(ie brown/rainbow trout) even though they are already in many rivers reproducing. . Browns were stocked in the oldman river when the dam was built. There is a small self sustaining population but I always thought it could use a boost. Even try stocking browns or rainbows upstream from the weir in Lethbridge. There are several trout holding rivers that join the oldman anyway. My point is if cutties are hurting in a river system. Stock it. Bulls hurting... stock it. Instead of closing them down boost them up. Thoughts??
You are probably quoting our future plans here

I’m just re-reading trout fishing in Arizona and down there, Canyon Creek for example, the brown trout have taken and they do not stock them as they reproduce and thrive naturally. While, the rainbows have not. So, they stock 250 per week. That is correct, per week, during the months of Nov-Mar to keep the generally angling public happy. What is also interesting is the lower section has limits on any trout while the upper “blue ribbon” area is C&R and fly fish only.

Not that we can do exactly what AZ does as our weather patterns are a world apart but it is interesting to see how “pin point” managed some places are.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 09-28-2017, 09:31 AM
RavYak's Avatar
RavYak RavYak is online now
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: West Edmonton
Posts: 4,194
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NUK SOO KOW View Post
What would your guys opinion be on re-stocking river systems that are in bad shape? Fish stocking of flowing waters was made illegal some years back and I'm not sure why. I was told by biologists that stocking non native species is against the law(ie brown/rainbow trout) even though they are already in many rivers reproducing. . Browns were stocked in the oldman river when the dam was built. There is a small self sustaining population but I always thought it could use a boost. Even try stocking browns or rainbows upstream from the weir in Lethbridge. There are several trout holding rivers that join the oldman anyway. My point is if cutties are hurting in a river system. Stock it. Bulls hurting... stock it. Instead of closing them down boost them up. Thoughts??
AEP is completely against any non native species. Brook trout, brown trout etc. They must have some internal mandate to hate this species and only care about the fragile native species...

Time for AEP to move on. They were the ones that introduced those species and they aren't going to get rid of them now. Those species survive in some of our waterbodies better so leave them be...

As for stocking rivers I agree with doing so if a river is in tough shape. Ultimately it is primarily habitat destruction that is hurting these rivers. Many of them don't have great spawning or overwintering locations so if you want to boost fish populations they should be focusing on improving those locations. Once that is done stock a few fish to increase population quickly and wallah recovered fisheries...
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 09-28-2017, 09:41 PM
RavYak's Avatar
RavYak RavYak is online now
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: West Edmonton
Posts: 4,194
Default

Posted this in the fishing section but know there are some guys that don't always visit both so sharing here too.

I was just chatting with a buddy that has some inside information on this matter and he confirmed most of my thoughts about this situation.

Angling pressure has had little effect on many of these areas. The Clearwater had massive flood damage in 2013 and the Ram and Kakwa see limited fishing pressure due to tough access. Most of these rivers still have significantly better fishing then they have in recent years/decades and there is no reason for them to be closed.

The reason that angling closures have been proposed is because it is the easiest and only cost free avenue that makes AEP look like they are taking the proper steps to improving these waterbodies/fisheries... Fixing damaged habitat, improving spawning and wintering locations, fixing culverts etc all costs money but fishing bans are free... Sure they don't solve anything and they will create other issues but like in all politics the politicians need to pretend they are getting stuff done hence why these closures have been proposed...

I highly encourage everyone to register and vote no to these river closures. We didn't get a say on the Pembina closure(not that I was aware of anyways) but we can have our voices heard on these proposed closures. If we don't sway their minds then almost guaranteed there will be more closures in the coming years especially when the fishing pressure doubles and triples on the few remaining open bull trout rivers etc...

If you have direct knowledge of these fisheries or other thoughtful incites on why these bans should not happen then also email John Tchir at john.tchir@gov.ab.ca. I am told he is the man calling the shots on this program so we need to call their bluff and demand data to back up these closures and proof as to why fishing closures are the best and only way to improve these waterbodies. Fishing closures should be a last resort, not the first remedy tried...
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 09-28-2017, 09:53 PM
Quiksilverj76 Quiksilverj76 is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 66
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wind drift View Post
I find it odd that in the youtube video when they show the factors affecting Bull Trout that industry wasn't one of those....hmmm

As well on those possible closures, what about the possibility of the Ram River coal development that has been spoken of...makes me wonder
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 09-29-2017, 06:04 AM
1stLand 1stLand is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: @flyfishing.up.north
Posts: 162
Default cattle grazing the big culprits

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quiksilverj76 View Post
I find it odd that in the youtube video when they show the factors affecting Bull Trout that industry wasn't one of those....hmmm

As well on those possible closures, what about the possibility of the Ram River coal development that has been spoken of...makes me wonder
If they want to help save Bull Trout, they can start by eliminating Cattle Grazing on Crown Land.

Was fishing yesterday and the amount of green slime in the water was disgusting. Creek was full of Brookies. Harder to find Cutties which I am used to catching there. Can't imagine Bull Trout like swimming around in Slime.

Everywhere I step there is Cow S***
__________________
@flyfishing.up.north
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 09-29-2017, 08:36 AM
FlyTheory's Avatar
FlyTheory FlyTheory is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 1,020
Default

I agree cattle grazing is a huge culprit. I also think that introduced species should have as high of priority as natives. I love bull trout and Rockies. If I were to harvest fish, I would always harvest an introduced species before a native. So I'm on the opposite side as MK2720, because bull trout are amazing creatures and need the most help they can get. Along with grayling, athabows, and even mountain suckers.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 09-29-2017, 04:04 PM
smitty9 smitty9 is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 395
Default

Well, took the survey, answered yes to general questions about protecting fish, answered no to all of the specific reg changes.

Then I started typing on the feedback, last part after part or question #16.

I just kept typing, and typing....lol. Here's the repsonse:

"The AEP is trending in an extremely troubling direction. This department has been on the decline for a while, and this latest survey is exhibit A. (https://talkaep.alberta.ca/north-cen...gling-closures)
I have many objections:
1. I challenge the data and the methodology of determining the FSI's.
2. I demand public hearings and no more online surveys where biologists and department officials will actually ENGAGE with the angling public and listen to their concerns. Give us the numbers and provide evidentiary proof of diminishing populations, and then provide proof of correlation between angling pressure, the ineffectiveness of catch and release, and justify the closures on a cause and effect basis.
3. The AEP needs to be completely over-hauled in terms of its engagement policies with the angling public. They need to adopt a broad strategy of enlisting assistance from anglers while reminding themselves that they serve both the fish AND anglers’ needs. Currently, the Fisheries Round Tables, online surveys, etc., amount to nothing more than tokenism.
4. My strongest objection is the complete abdication of any sense of responsibility this department has in terms of serving what's best for fish. It is my belief that the biologists and officials have pre-determined outcomes and policies they are just going to implement without seriously looking at ALL the factors and variables that go into habitat degradation and diminishing fish populations. Why are anglers being punished for circumstances beyond their control? Why doesn’t the AEP issue directives, studies, policies, protocols, recommendations and reports detailing the incredible challenges facing all fish and fauna in the province with regards to industrial intrusion? Where is the AEP’s policy recommendations on aggressive logging practices, road densification, hanging culverts, improper allowances and setbacks, and habitat fragmentation? Is the AEP claiming that catch and release regulations are an ineffective management tool; and then using that as an excuse to close watersheds? Does the AEP anticipate fish population recovery will happen on the basis of removing anglers from the picture all while ignoring the aforementioned industrial impacts? Has the AEP anticipated the resulting increase in angling pressure during the next season, as more anglers are forced to fish fewer watersheds?

My recommendations, instead of using (and the pretending to act upon this ludicrous survey) is to do the following:

1) Before changing any regulations – especially related to reducing angling opportunities and closing watersheds - how about dramatically increasing the enforcement, not only on recreational users, but industry too? Increased enforcement can be partially funded by the fines imposed. I see gross violations of industry frequently when I fish.
2) Identify the TRUE root causes of pressured or diminished fish populations, and then PRIOTIZE the needs to get them addressed. Most of the skepticism and outrage that I have heard from fellow anglers is that angling has been identified as a primary cause. I – and others – highly doubt this. I have fished many watersheds that have been catch and release since the last regulations were over-hauled, and the fishing has improved over the past 20 years. I’d venture to say based on my anecdotal observations that fishing is more impacted by industry, improper trail penetration, and erosion right now along watersheds that are already catch and release.

3) The AEP and other suitable government agencies should put pressure on industry groups to comply with policies outlined by the AB government as it currently reviews BOTH industrial and recreational usage along the Eastern Slopes. Issues related to fish populations recovery are far beyond the scope of just one single variable (angling pressure).

4) The Alberta Government overall should, plainly and simply, get their act together and develop an over-arching plan to ensure that riparian areas, fish and animal habitats, and water quality are going to be preserved for future generations. There is far too much fragmentation, segregations, and a stunning lack of coordination between various gov’t departments.

Anglers have become the easy, knee jerk targets for the AEP to take the simplest way out in attempting to manage fish populations. It’s both bad science and bad policy. And the AEP needs a serious look in the mirror: something needs to happen to shake this department out of its bureaucratic entrenchment and self-internalized feedback loop.

Otherwise, I fear all we are left with is nowhere left to fish, and no fish left."


This IS a slippery slope folks. Only the Bow river is protected because of it's economic value to the city's economy and the fly shops. Otherwise, it could be "open season" for angling closures.

Please, I encourage you to speak up:

John Tchir: John.Tchir@gov.ab.ca

And, consider cc'ing the following people:

Dave Park: dave.park@gov.ab.ca,
Shannon Phliips: AEP.Minister@gov.ab.ca,
Premier Notley: edmonton.strathcona@assembly.ab.ca , premier@gov.ab.ca,
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 09-29-2017, 04:20 PM
SNAPFisher SNAPFisher is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,277
Default

Woah, both barrels


I gave it a quick read. For me, I stopped at just disagreeing with the approach presented and not AEP itself. Hopefully they do not dismiss it or something annoying like that. It would be kind of humorous if you got a letter back that simply said, "That would be one "no" or against the proposed change."

Regardless,
thanks for speaking out.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 09-29-2017, 08:35 PM
SamSteele's Avatar
SamSteele SamSteele is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 1,145
Default

Emailed John Tchir earlier today with my concerns. Hope more do the same.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
"To be glad of life because it gives you the chance to love and to work and to play and to look up at the stars- to be satisfied with your possessions but not content with yourself until you have made the best of them...to think seldom of your enemies, often of your friends, and every day of Christ; to spend as much time as you can in God's out-of doors- these are the little guideposts on the footpaths to peace."

-Henry Van Dyke

Instagram: @mharder80
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 09-30-2017, 05:06 PM
Myles's Avatar
Myles Myles is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 120
Default

Survey completed. Next up, meeting with my MLA.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 10-01-2017, 07:56 AM
Don Andersen Don Andersen is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Central Alberta
Posts: 1,137
Default

For those interested in why the closures are proposed would be wise to read

http://issuu.com/esrd/docs/fish_cons...110136/8768768

This document, in spite of my input, doesn't reflect allocations of fish to all users or impacts.
Logging, oil/gas, mining, power generation, OHV riding etc are not mentioned. Only Angler's are ID'd as users.

Angler's will pay the price.

Don
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 10-12-2017, 07:52 AM
SamSteele's Avatar
SamSteele SamSteele is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 1,145
Default

Has anyone received a response to their e-mails or phone calls on this? I know that I have not to date.

SS
__________________
"To be glad of life because it gives you the chance to love and to work and to play and to look up at the stars- to be satisfied with your possessions but not content with yourself until you have made the best of them...to think seldom of your enemies, often of your friends, and every day of Christ; to spend as much time as you can in God's out-of doors- these are the little guideposts on the footpaths to peace."

-Henry Van Dyke

Instagram: @mharder80
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 10-13-2017, 01:47 PM
jasonrpeck jasonrpeck is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 63
Default

An incredibly thoughtful response. Please read.

http://flyfishalberta.com/jensenflyf...ng-mgt-survey/
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:14 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.