Amateur walleye slay and rant

[Brandonkop]

Walleye fishing can be entertaining as they are a very aggressive predator and often take various sorts of presentations. After they have eaten everything in the lake they also become very easy to catch. This occurs is some lakes across their range, but especially in Alberta where fisheries biologists have determined that walleye now takes precidence above all else, even where it was not naturally found. Once walleye have decimated the bait fish population, including perch, the pike also die off. Soon you're left with a lake full of stunted walleye. Since these walleye are competing for minimal food source they become very easy to catch. Most anyone can catch them, but legally only treaty natives and special tag holders can harvest the fish.

I've done some reading and research on usa fisheries and they manage their populations much better for size and diversity. They actually often increase walleye catch limits and decrease or increase the size or slot restrictions. Regulation changes are dynamic on a year to year basis depending or surveys and test netting. Imagine that. Fisheries that actually consider biodiversity! I'm pretty sure my biology 101 expressed the importance of biodiversity and predator prey relationships better than we have seen demonstrated in the great Province of Alberta.

Anyways during the course of this day out with my family we easily caught many walleye. Using these techniques though you will likely be able to catch walleye anywhere they swim. Good luck.

https://youtu.be/lJKImVbrOuc

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk

[HowSwedeItIs]

Yeah I can think of a few lakes that can be written off in the near future for exactly that reason. It makes you wonder, why? What's the point of ruining a fishery like that? The only guys who benefit are the ones stretching their nets out every weekend

That all being said, looks like it was a nice day out on the water

[pikeman06]

Bang on Brandon. Sad state of affairs in alberta management wise. I find the walleye lakes with lots of private docks and cabins are starting to come around. Thanks to all the locals whacking the odd walleye and sneaking them home. If that's the kind of management that works then so be it. Waste of breath complaining about it anymore, it's way too late to establish a decent brood stock of pike or perch in most of these lakes.

[The Spank]

So start keeping them and eating them!

[Brandonkop]

Originally Posted by The Spank

So start keeping them and eating them!

Haha, as much as I would love to sometime I just can't bring myself to cross the line an enter the realm of poacher. I'd rather try to influence people and government to take a second look at what is happening. Maybe I'll write a letter to the minister.

[Jigger]

Originally Posted by Brandonkop

Walleye fishing can be entertaining as they are a very aggressive predator and often take various sorts of presentations. After they have eaten everything in the lake they also become very easy to catch. This occurs is some lakes across their range, but especially in Alberta where fisheries biologists have determined that walleye now takes precidence above all else, even where it was not naturally found. Once walleye have decimated the bait fish population, including perch, the pike also die off. Soon you're left with a lake full of stunted walleye. Since these walleye are competing for minimal food source they become very easy to catch. Most anyone can catch them, but legally only treaty natives and special tag holders can harvest the fish.

I've done some reading and research on usa fisheries and they manage their populations much better for size and diversity. They actually often increase walleye catch limits and decrease or increase the size or slot restrictions. Regulation changes are dynamic on a year to year basis depending or surveys and test netting. Imagine that. Fisheries that actually consider biodiversity! I'm pretty sure my biology 101 expressed the importance of biodiversity and predator prey relationships better than we have seen demonstrated in the great Province of Alberta.

Anyways during the course of this day out with my family we easily caught many walleye. Using these techniques though you will likely be able to catch walleye anywhere they swim. Good luck.

https://youtu.be/lJKImVbrOuc

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk

Great post! My favorite lake has been ruined by walleye, unless you like catching 50 18inch walleye a day and releasing them all.

[Fishwhere]

Couldnt agree more. Some minor upsides to getting the kids and new fisherman into some walleye easily, but on the grand scale a waste and mismanagment indeed. Wabamun being the saddest... how to demolish a trophy pike lake in 5 years 101.

Nice post

Ps i like your vids - nice job!

[Kurt505]

Originally Posted by Brandonkop

Walleye fishing can be entertaining as they are a very aggressive predator and often take various sorts of presentations. After they have eaten everything in the lake they also become very easy to catch. This occurs is some lakes across their range, but especially in Alberta where fisheries biologists have determined that walleye now takes precidence above all else, even where it was not naturally found. Once walleye have decimated the bait fish population, including perch, the pike also die off. Soon you're left with a lake full of stunted walleye. Since these walleye are competing for minimal food source they become very easy to catch. Most anyone can catch them, but legally only treaty natives and special tag holders can harvest the fish.

I've done some reading and research on usa fisheries and they manage their populations much better for size and diversity. They actually often increase walleye catch limits and decrease or increase the size or slot restrictions. Regulation changes are dynamic on a year to year basis depending or surveys and test netting. Imagine that. Fisheries that actually consider biodiversity! I'm pretty sure my biology 101 expressed the importance of biodiversity and predator prey relationships better than we have seen demonstrated in the great Province of Alberta.

Anyways during the course of this day out with my family we easily caught many walleye. Using these techniques though you will likely be able to catch walleye anywhere they swim. Good luck.

https://youtu.be/lJKImVbrOuc

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk

I brought up the same facts earlier this summer and was ridiculed by a few members here who figure its best just to go with zero retention, or to keep the limit at sizes nearly unattainable size, not realizing there can be a stunted population.

Nice to see there is some on board who realize the need for diversity in our lakes, and how diversity is managed.

[SNAPFisher]

Originally Posted by Kurt505

I brought up the same facts earlier this summer and was ridiculed by a few members here who figure its best just to go with zero retention, or to keep the limit at sizes nearly unattainable size, not realizing there can be a stunted population.

Nice to see there is some on board who realize the need for diversity in our lakes, and how diversity is managed.

What I recall is that you were called for other things and ideas that you no longer seem to support. Now you just twist the argument back to something we can all agree on, biodiversity is good indeed but that doesn't mean a 1 fish keep limit everywhere makes biodiversity . Since you keep continuously bringing up these so called arguments, I thought it was worth recanting why it might of went a bit off the rails for you.

I don't know of anyone on this board that doesn't want more diversity and anyone who would want stunted fish. You seem to think these members exist somewhere but I don't know of any.

So we agree on biodiversity. Maybe not exactly on how to manage it on every point but agree on a better end state of things.

[Kurt505]

Originally Posted by SNAPFisher

What I recall is that you were called for other things and ideas that you no longer seem to support. Now you just twist the argument back to something we can all agree on, biodiversity is good indeed but that doesn't mean a 1 fish keep limit everywhere makes biodiversity . Since you keep continuously bringing up these so called arguments, I thought it was worth recanting why it might of went a bit off the rails for you.

I don't know of anyone on this board that doesn't want more diversity and anyone who would want stunted fish. You seem to think these members exist somewhere but I don't know of any.

So we agree on biodiversity. Maybe not exactly on how to manage it on every point but agree on a better end state of things.

I think you have a problem with your recall button, and like last time I see no use in trying to explain things to you because there seems to be a problem with your comprehension button. Honestly, if you showed any possibility of compression I would gladly discuss the topic with you, but you have once again proven that's just not in the cards for you.

Maybe this thread will spawn a glimmer of hope for you.

[SNAPFisher]

Originally Posted by Kurt505

I think you have a problem with your recall button, and like last time I see no use in trying to explain things to you because there seems to be a problem with your comprehension button. Honestly, if you showed any possibility of compression I would gladly discuss the topic with you, but you have once again proven that's just not in the cards for you.

Maybe this thread will spawn a glimmer of hope for you.

Such anger and hurt... someone needs a hug.

I'm sorry we agree on better fishing and biodiversity. Have a nice day.

[huntsfurfish]

Originally Posted by SNAPFisher

What I recall is that you were called for other things and ideas that you no longer seem to support. Now you just twist the argument back to something we can all agree on, biodiversity is good indeed but that doesn't mean a 1 fish keep limit everywhere makes biodiversity . Since you keep continuously bringing up these so called arguments, I thought it was worth recanting why it might of went a bit off the rails for you.

I don't know of anyone on this board that doesn't want more diversity and anyone who would want stunted fish. You seem to think these members exist somewhere but I don't know of any.

So we agree on biodiversity. Maybe not exactly on how to manage it on every point but agree on a better end state of things.

Agree. You got it right. And if Brandon wants to get things changed he should try and get more money for them.

[Kurt505]

Without naming names I flushed them out.

Thanks guys.

Now tell him your master plan

SNAP, get over it, enough of the grade school pm's. If you want to pick a fight come on out and give your plan in detail instead of your "ya butch, ya butch, whatever he said is my plan" response. If I thought you could keep up to speed with a discussion and actually give a response that was on topic I would engage with you, but spawning whitefish in Manitoba, or brook trout on the eastern slopes, have nothing to do with walleye retention in northern Alberta.

[huntsfurfish]

Originally Posted by Kurt505

Without naming names I flushed them out.

Thanks guys.

Now tell him your master plan

SNAP, get over it, enough of the grade school pm's. If you want to pick a fight come on out and give your plan in detail instead of your "ya butch, ya butch, whatever he said is my plan" response. If I thought you could keep up to speed with a discussion and actually give a response that was on topic I would engage with you, but spawning whitefish in Manitoba, or brook trout on the eastern slopes, have nothing to do with walleye retention in northern Alberta.

How little you learned.

Sorry OP. last post. All yours Kurt.

[dmcbride]

I don't know enough about this topic to make an informed opinion.

I will say, I dislike walleye stocking. I use to like fishing pigeon lake for pike. Caught a 26lb. 20 years ago. Now it is nothing but pike under 6lb. and walleye around 5lb. Might as well go to a fish farm.

[sns2]

Play nice boys. Derailing threads is an infraction. I suggest you acquaint yourselves with the ignore function. It will save us all a headache.

[Kurt505]

Originally Posted by huntsfurfish

How little you learned.

Sorry OP. last post. All yours Kurt.

By all means, enlighten us. You and snap seem to have it figured out, but you haven't come out and said your master plan. I haven't heard anything other than "let's just keep it as catch and release".

When another poster came on here with a case study that proves slot sizes work, you guys denied it could work in Alberta....

So other than throwing money at bio's and throwing all the fish back, what's your secret plan because I'd love to hear it.

[huntsfurfish]

Originally Posted by Kurt505

By all means, enlighten us. You and snap seem to have it figured out, but you haven't come out and said your master plan. I haven't heard anything other than "let's just keep it as catch and release".

When another poster came on here with a case study that proves slot sizes work, you guys denied it could work in Alberta....

So other than throwing money at bio's and throwing all the fish back, what's your secret plan because I'd love to hear it.

Then you were not listening.

Start a new thread. We were warned.

sorry once again Brandon.

[Kurt505]

We were asked to be respectful and not to derail, if you can't do it on this thread, it won't matter how many threads I start.

Read my first post.

I was agreeing with the system Brandon brought up, agreeing about the failed attempts at fish management in Alberta that have in the process both stunted fish and destroyed populations of other native game fish that were deemed not important by the guys making the rule book. I told him I was happy to see that there were others on the forum who shared that pov.

I don't mind discussing things, but from our last discussion on the matter it's obvious that even proof is no match for a closed mind, that's why I see no sense in discussing it with some members.

If you have a plan, I'd love to hear about it. If your going to deny facts and case studies that actually work, then there's no sense in having a discussion.

[huntsfurfish]

Originally Posted by Kurt505

We were asked to be respectful and not to derail, if you can't do it on this thread, it won't matter how many threads I start.

Read my first post.

I was agreeing with the system Brandon brought up, agreeing about the failed attempts at fish management in Alberta that have in the process both stunted fish and destroyed populations of other native game fish that were deemed not important by the guys making the rule book. I told him I was happy to see that there were others on the forum who shared that pov.

I don't mind discussing things, but from our last discussion on the matter it's obvious that even proof is no match for a closed mind, that's why I see no sense in discussing it with some members.

If you have a plan, I'd love to hear about it. If your going to deny facts and case studies that actually work, then there's no sense in having a discussion.

You really need to go revisit that other thread. You do remember that the case that was brought up by the other poster. They decided to go with albertas policy because what they were doing(slots) wasnt working.

Much of what you are complaining about is being addressed now.

Throwing money at it is not only what is required, but would go a long way to help with making changes that you want.

I believe in Brandons OP he mentioned that the States(not sure which one he is referring too) test net yearly. Here I believe it is a 5 year rotation. Cant do that without money. Be darned if I will support something(slots) that would risk the fishery with 5 year intervals. That would/could lead to crashes
that would have recovery periods in excess of 10 years. Pressured lakes might be able to handle some tags(a slot) because of limited numbers.
Distant lakes with little to no pressure might be ok, but 5 years might be to long there as well.

Allowing fish to spawn once before removal may/may not be the best solution but it is with the current testing.

Years ago walleye anglers yelled the loudest. They got the grease.
But from what I have seen that is being corrected now and they are looking towards other species that have suffered.

Most of this was covered in the other threads.

The issue I have with them is the slow reaction with limits. Would be better imho to reduce limits much quicker(preemptive) rather than reactive.

[Kurt505]

Originally Posted by huntsfurfish

You really need to go revisit that other thread.

Much of what you are complaining about is being addressed now.

There is actually quite a bit more I agree with in your last post than I expected, however I strongly agree with these points I did revisit the last thread, and I suggest you do too just for a refresher.


The fact that much of what I was complaining about is finally now being addressed should tell you that maybe my points are valid!

Don't be surprised if they find some of my ideas as being valid solutions.

[huntsfurfish]

Originally Posted by Kurt505

There is actually quite a bit more I agree with in your last post than I expected, however I strongly agree with these points I did revisit the last thread, and I suggest you do too just for a refresher.


The fact that much of what I was complaining about is finally now being addressed should tell you that maybe my points are valid!

Don't be surprised if they find some of my ideas as being valid solutions.

Your primary point if I remember is/was slots.

What was the name of the other thread?

[Kurt505]

Originally Posted by huntsfurfish

Your primary point if I remember is/was slots.

What was the name of the other thread?

I don't remember the name, I searched it using the word Manitoba!!! Lol!

I suggested opening up walleye retention province wide to a slot size to help take the pressure off of the few lakes that allow general retention. After seeing that there was like 4 lakes in southern Alberta, admittedly I have never fished southern Alberta, I figured a tag system was probably best there.

The premise of my thoughts are that the walleye in a lot of lakes in Alberta are over populated and need to be thinned out in order to have a healthy balance of species, with a proper growth rate (not stunted).

[huntsfurfish]

Originally Posted by Kurt505

I don't remember the name, I searched it using the word Manitoba!!! Lol!

I suggested opening up walleye retention province wide to a slot size to help take the pressure off of the few lakes that allow general retention. After seeing that there was like 4 lakes in southern Alberta, admittedly I have never fished southern Alberta, I figured a tag system was probably best there.

The premise of my thoughts are that the walleye in a lot of lakes in Alberta are over populated and need to be thinned out in order to have a healthy balance of species, with a proper growth rate (not stunted).

Found them. Now you can reread them.

http://www.outdoorsmenforum.ca/showthread.php?t=327829

http://www.outdoorsmenforum.ca/showthread.php?t=325613

[Kurt505]

Originally Posted by huntsfurfish

Found them. Now you can reread them.

http://www.outdoorsmenforum.ca/showthread.php?t=327829

http://www.outdoorsmenforum.ca/showthread.php?t=325613

I read them

Did you read EVERYONE'S posts?

Sometimes guys only select the posts they want to read.

[huntsfurfish]

Originally Posted by Kurt505

I read them

Did you read EVERYONE'S posts?

Sometimes guys only select the posts they want to read.

Hmm. Thats exactly what I was thinking about you. lol

[Kurt505]

Originally Posted by huntsfurfish

Hmm. Thats exactly what I was thinking about you. lol

At least we're finally finding common ground.

My suggestion is to open up more walleye retention with an attainable slot size limit, at lakes like south buck, pigeon, wabamun (if they're not toxic), lac ate Anne, lac la none, just to name a few.

What's yours?

[huntsfurfish]

Could maybe open to Tags.

[Kurt505]

Originally Posted by huntsfurfish

Could open to Tags.

More retention?

I'm glad to hear that

[huntsfurfish]

Pigeon and Lac St Anne are on tags already. so you are part way there already.