Quality Trout Fisheries in Alberta

[Bigtoad]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

Well, at least you're consistent there.......SNAPPY!

I also do not support the creation of more C&R lakes simply to grow bigger fish.

But HunterDave, that is the purpose of C&R and delayed harvest regs. Bigger fish on average, generally means better fishing (for a multitude of reasons, not just to feel better about oneself). I don't see you slamming C&R in streams so why in stillwater? Should we open up the Bow to a 5 fish limit in a city of 1 million? Should we let the North Ram be a 5 fish limit? How about bonk 5 bullies of any size? The regs I just mentioned are all in place for one reason: to allow bigger fish to grow and more of them. If you took those regs away, you would devastate those fisheries...much like the stillwater fisheries are devastated.

I'm sure when the North Ram went from 5 (or whatever it was) to the current C&R there were guys like you complaining about it. I don't see anyone who fishes it now complaining about those regs. I don't see many people saying how easy it is to catch big fish there either. But if you work at it and know a few things, you can tie into some big fish. It's a great fishery, not an easy one, but a great one (like the Bow) and is that way because of the regs that are in place.

Why can't you see that similar regs would have the same effect on stillwater?

Cheers.

[gl2]

Originally Posted by Bigtoad

But HunterDave, that is the purpose of C&R and delayed harvest regs. Bigger fish on average, generally means better fishing (for a multitude of reasons, not just to feel better about oneself). I don't see you slamming C&R in streams so why in stillwater? Should we open up the Bow to a 5 fish limit in a city of 1 million? Should we let the North Ram be a 5 fish limit? How about bonk 5 bullies of any size? The regs I just mentioned are all in place for one reason: to allow bigger fish to grow and more of them. If you took those regs away, you would devastate those fisheries...much like the stillwater fisheries are devastated.

I'm sure when the North Ram went from 5 (or whatever it was) to the current C&R there were guys like you complaining about it. I don't see anyone who fishes it now complaining about those regs. I don't see many people saying how easy it is to catch big fish there either. But if you work at it and know a few things, you can tie into some big fish. It's a great fishery, not an easy one, but a great one (like the Bow) and is that way because of the regs that are in place.

Why can't you see that similar regs would have the same effect on stillwater?

Cheers.

in my opinion the bow river caters to fly fishermen, and is reflected on who fishes it. how many family guiding outfits on the bow ? how many fly fishing outfits? so if thats what you want is a stillwater program that is built for fly fishermn then i will gladly keep the regulations we currenlt have in place, and lots of others will too. i like going down to bow and i agree its a fabulous fishery but it does not reflect on what type of fishing the majority of albertans want and thus your plan has already failed.


nobody will tell me what lakes you want to change? you guys havent thought about it? jeez.......sounds like a solid plan to me.

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by goldscud

I hope next time some guys leave "the city" to go fishing that they bring extra stuff to suck up to the "rural" guys who apparently own and control all the lakes in Alberta. So much for sharing the resource. Maybe we should do an informal survey at Bullshead and Police Outpost this summer to make sure there is no rural guys there that are lost and confused wanting to catch to some bigger than average fish. Its quite interesting to find that everyone's so happy with the status quo and then you see the overflowing parking lots at Bullshead and Beaver, and the trail of tail lights heading to BC....

X2

Alberta fisheries are owned by all the people of Alberta...not just a few fishermen that live nearby. As such some changes that F&W need to consider will require input of all stack holders regardless of where they live. Obviously they will get input from people closer to the lakes being affected than further away. If there are not a lot of negative comments from users closer in relative to the other interested stakeholders/fishermen from further away then in some instances the majority rules.

Other regulations are imposed by F&W without consultation as a result of necessity to preserve and protect our fisheries. A case in point in decreasing the limits from 10 to 5. One guy on this site infers that he can poach now since he used to catch 10 before...that is a pile of equestrian droppings.

Anyone that thinks they have a primary right or ownership or selfish sense of entitlement to public fisheries in Alberta are morally reprehensible and their sense of fairness of compromise needs to be relearned by their parents. If they feel a strong need to own the fishery themselves...they should dig a dugout and stock it. Otherwise they need to understand that they don't own the lake...they don't rule the majority and NO they can not morally be justifiable in vandalizing property or the lake or the fishery to satisfy their own sense of moral superiority over the rest of Albertans that want action to improve fishing in the Province.

If there are lakes in Alberta that are broken and need repairs ...then if F&W sees an opportunity and a requirement to do so they should. They should not be afraid of a few wing nuts that are afraid of change. We can not be held ransom to the threats of some nut jobs to destroy our treasured fisheries if changes are made.

We have to look to reasonable attempts to increase the value to the fishermen for the taxes we pay and the licenses we buy. The government is the manager of the resource...we are the owner...together we can make things happen for the better. The Government of Alberta has the moral requirement and the fiduciary duty to ensure our fisheries are managed to the the highest quality possible. Living in the past is great if you have blinders on...you ignore the obvious while appreciating mediocre and all the while fearing any change.

IMHO.

[gl2]

Originally Posted by goldscud

I hope next time some guys leave "the city" to go fishing that they bring extra stuff to suck up to the "rural" guys who apparently own and control all the lakes in Alberta. So much for sharing the resource. Maybe we should do an informal survey at Bullshead and Police Outpost this summer to make sure there is no rural guys there that are lost and confused wanting to catch to some bigger than average fish. Its quite interesting to find that everyone's so happy with the status quo and then you see the overflowing parking lots at Bullshead and Beaver, and the trail of tail lights heading to BC....

bc has things alberta will never have for multiple reasons. if you think we go there to find water like the bullshead then all i can say is...

i dont know about the parking lots at these places but i can see how popular it is here....

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by Tosh

in my opinion the bow river caters to fly fishermen, and is reflected on who fishes it. how many family guiding outfits on the bow ? how many fly fishing outfits? so if thats what you want is a stillwater program that is built for fly fishermn then i will gladly keep the regulations we currenlt have in place, and lots of others will too. i like going down to bow and i agree its a fabulous fishery but it does not reflect on what type of fishing the majority of albertans want and thus your plan has already failed.


nobody will tell me what lakes you want to change? you guys havent thought about it? jeez.......sounds like a solid plan to me.

You just sound like you are whining cause you can't catch any fish in the Bow. Clearly you are not part of the 5% that catches 95% of the fish (if you believe the stats)

You blame fly fishing which is just fishing doing it in a different style. Takes different skills that you might be afraid to try. I do all methods...try and expand your options then you won't feel left out.

One of my best friends uses a spinning rod and catches more fish than I do in the Bow. He has a great time. He can also fly fish but feels more comfortable catching them on a spin outfit. I am sad you can't but maybe with more practice you can.

Most flyfishermen started off spin fishing. For a variety of reasons most flyfishermen just find it a more fun way...maybe more challenging. Don't be afraid...try it.

Cheers

Sun

[chubbdarter]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

You just sound like you are whining cause you can't catch any fish in the Bow. Clearly you are not part of the 5% that catches 95% of the fish (if you believe the stats)

You blame fly fishing which is just fishing doing it in a different style. Takes different skills that you might be afraid to try. I do all methods...try and expand your options then you won't feel left out.

One of my best friends uses a spinning rod and catches more fish than I do in the Bow. He has a great time. He can also fly fish but feels more comfortable catching them on a spin outfit. I am sad you can't but maybe with more practice you can.

Most flyfishermen started off spin fishing. For a variety of reasons most flyfishermen just find it a more fun way...maybe more challenging. Don't be afraid...try it.

Cheers

Sun

HAHAHA....be careful what you type, before someone calls your big mouth and spanks your so called biologist azz on the water.

The only one whinning is the the people proposing a change....TO MAKE CATCHING BIG FISH EASIER!!!!!

[gl2]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

You just sound like you are whining cause you can't catch any fish in the Bow. Clearly you are not part of the 5% that catches 95% of the fish (if you believe the stats)

You blame fly fishing which is just fishing doing it in a different style. Takes different skills that you might be afraid to try. I do all methods...try and expand your options then you won't feel left out.

One of my best friends uses a spinning rod and catches more fish than I do in the Bow. He has a great time. He can also fly fish but feels more comfortable catching them on a spin outfit. I am sad you can't but maybe with more practice you can.

Most flyfishermen started off spin fishing. For a variety of reasons most flyfishermen just find it a more fun way...maybe more challenging. Don't be afraid...try it.

Cheers

Sun

nope i catch lots of fish on the bow and have use spining rods, but also catch lots on the fly rod. i said it was a great fishery but is in favor of one group more than the others. if you didnt understand that then you dont want to debate anymore and are grasping for any reason to look like this is a good idea.

you guys have avoided questions through out this whole debate, i have a pretty good idea that soon all the kool aid will wear off and you will be all by yourself.

so i ask again what lakes do you want to impose these ego stroking rules for?

[SNAPFisher]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

Well, at least you're consistent there.......SNAPPY!

My post comparing the regulations at FLIPPR lakes to the regulations at Alberta's "quality" lakes was to demonstrate the complete nonsensical thinking that is behind the creation of them and why they are not producing the trophy sized fish that people are complaining aren't there. You can point fingers at SRD for putting too many fish in or whatever. But the fact is, they are designed to grow fish to the legal length of 20" and be taken out. It's not rocket dentistry IMO? And these are what you fellas want to create more of?

I am totally against anything remotely similar to what Alberta's "quality" lakes are. I also do not support the creation of more C&R lakes simply to grow bigger fish. I also do not support anyone going out to rural areas and railroading either of those things on people that live there.

I would support the creation of more "quality" and C&R lakes in dead lakes and new bodies of water to a degree if the money was available to stock them. I would support the current "quality" lakes more if the regs were changed to something similar to FLIPPR but I would not support creating more of them by taking P&T lakes away from other anglers. I would support different management approaches as is needed for different lakes as required (ie collapse, etc) but not just to grow fish bigger. And, I don't think that ending all of your posts with something like, "Really not helping any credibilty you think in you mind you might have." makes you sound any smarter.

Did I miss anything?

Not a simple yes or no but of course it is a discussion. Heated at times...

Wow! Your actually making some sense to me now. So maybe you have changed through this post. Though...it is hard to say because I find all the redirections that have happened very hard to follow. But thanks nonetheless for clarifying this time.

Nothing has changed for me though. You and I want very similar experiences in the end...like I thought originally but maybe got caught up in the sidetracks a bit much. I would not be in favor of any regulation change that was not supported. I would like to go out on a day and fish to catch and keep something. Like you, it would be on the smaller size like a pan fry. Next time out I would like the choice to go to lake with more strict regulations to try and catch a real lunker and also experience an average fish size that is more appealing (i.e. not a pan size).

Lucky for me I've got that in the Edmonton area today. I'm definately in favor of more choices in the Edmonton area, where it makes sense, and to those areas in the province that would also welcome regulation/management changes.

Dave, on the credibility thing it is true. Sure you can redirect it back to me and that is fair. I have some strong wording at times . I didn't go off on side tangents about elitism, supposed failures, supposed fees that don't exist. You did. Reap what you sow.

Thanks again for clarifying your position though.

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by Tosh

in my opinion the bow river caters to fly fishermen, and is reflected on who fishes it. how many family guiding outfits on the bow ? how many fly fishing outfits? so if thats what you want is a stillwater program that is built for fly fishermn then i will gladly keep the regulations we currenlt have in place, and lots of others will too. i like going down to bow and i agree its a fabulous fishery but it does not reflect on what type of fishing the majority of albertans want and thus your plan has already failed.

Originally Posted by Tosh

nope i catch lots of fish on the bow and have use spining rods, but also catch lots on the fly rod. i said it was a great fishery but is in favor of one group more than the others. if you didnt understand that then you dont want to debate anymore and are grasping for any reason to look like this is a good idea.

Soooo... You were complaining that the Bow River is a fly fishing river catering to flyfishermen yet you only really spin fish and have no trouble catching fish in the Bow. So you are really complaining about then??? The Bow River with all of its regulations is probably the most fished trout waters by fly fishermen and spin fishermen in all of Alberta. It is even classed as a blue ribbon stream and receives tourists from all over the world.

Thanks...that is all I wanted to know from my leading post. You answered exactly how I thought...disproving your theory that a lake with reasonable limits and regulations would be no better or no worse for catching trout regardless of using spinning or fly fishing gear.

Therefore your post is purely designed to either troll or you also don't understand what it is you are arguing against or for.

The thread is about improving fishing through changes to limits in Alberta...in case you forgot this late into the thread...

Catching larger than 9 inch trout on average makes sense. Improving the average size classes of fish creates more sport and more enjoyment for those that are honest about the topic.

IMHO.

LOL...Looks like I hooked Chubby into replying also.

[gl2]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

Soooo... You were whining that the Bow River is a fly fishing river catering to flyfishermen yet you only really spin fish and have no trouble catching fish in the Bow. So you are whining about???

Thanks...that is all I wanted to know from my leading post. You answered exactly how I thought...disproving your theory that a lake with reasonable limits and regulations would be no better or no worse for catching trout regardless of using spinning or fly fishing gear.

Therefore your post is purely designed to either troll or you also don't understand what it is you are arguing against or for.

The thread is about improving fishing through changes to limits in Alberta...in case you forgot this late into the thread...

Catching larger than 9 inch trout on average makes sense. Improving the average size classes of fish creates more sport and more enjoyment for those that are honest about the topic.

IMHO.

were you home schooled? jeez sun if you read the posts i catch lots fly fishing but am not gonna agree with any plan that plays to one group and not the other, regardless if i do it or not. thats your problem, you only care what you want and couldnt give a s*** about other people.

i dont need you or anybody to change anything to make my experiences better on the water, and the big fish i catch are that much better knowing that bed wetters like you cant do it.

diffrent people get diffrent things out of fishing, doesnt mean any one is better than others, in fact i would rather see a small kid catch a 9'' trout on a worm (even if it dies), than you and your buddies catch a 12''(big for you i am guessing)with a dry fly and releasing it safely.

maybe you should have another perch outting if you want to feel better about yourself. if you think people are gonna sit around and let you do it at the expense of others you are mistaken.

[HunterDave]

I guess that you figure that now that "THE QUESTION" is buried a couple of pages back that it's safe to re-emerge. You even have the audacity to start pointing fingers and telling people how bad they are.

It's not going away Sunshine so you might as well answer the question.

Now that we know that you think that it is morally wrong to put perch into a lake why not tell everyone if you think that it is morally wrong to railroad a "quality" fishery on people. And why?

[chubbdarter]

Im guessing this thread will go to the same place the K-lake thread went

Sure your numbers back you on this poll, but only Mickey Mouse is paying attention. Your presentation of your facts is so lame i doubt the opposition is bothering to even vote. Like the NDP promise a chicken in every pot knowing you'll never have to deliver

Answer the questions....What Lakes?

STOP saying everyone doesnt understand....They most certainly DO. Saying people dont have the ability or mental capacity to understand because they dont agree with you is SAD. Sure you type fast and spell better thats a fact....big whoopie! Lawyers and Politicians do too.

Im curious how many members of Lake Sundance back your plan to erraticate the perch......and i mean real numbers.
Not just your buddies....all the members.
And please be honest how many didnt bother to voice a opinion because they dont like talking to long winded people with a self centered agendas...or...just didnt bother voicing a oppinion because- it was like a NDP politician running for a seat.

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by Tosh

were you home schooled? jeez sun if you read the posts i catch lots fly fishing but am not gonna agree with any plan that plays to one group and not the other, regardless if i do it or not. thats your problem, you only care what you want and couldnt give a s*** about other people.

i dont need you or anybody to change anything to make my experiences better on the water, and the big fish i catch are that much better knowing that bed wetters like you cant do it.

diffrent people get diffrent things out of fishing, doesnt mean any one is better than others, in fact i would rather see a small kid catch a 9'' trout on a worm (even if it dies), than you and your buddies catch a 12''(big for you i am guessing)with a dry fly and releasing it safely.

maybe you should have another perch outting if you want to feel better about yourself. if you think people are gonna sit around and let you do it at the expense of others you are mistaken.

You don't understand...you proved that it doesn't matter what method you use to catch fish either goes. Destroys your theory this is all about catering to fly fishermen. I fly fish, spin fish, bait fish and unlike you I don't need to justify what I catch to others. Simply good enough that I fish and enjoy it. Also by point in fact your assumptions I am an "elitist" flyfisherman makes me laugh cause clearly I am just a fishermen pure and simple.

I am all about improving average sizes and options to fish sizes. Rather than catch a trout 9 inches long the day after it was stocked at 9 inches long in every put and take lake near large urban populations...why not have SOME lakes that allow fish to grow bigger on AVERAGE and provide more sport than hauling in a 9 inch minnow. While lakes off the beaten path are likely not as affected from over fishing...sometimes they are from over stocking. The argument that kids only want to catch 9 inch trout stems from the fact that is all you ever see...cause that is all that is in lakes for them to catch. You show me one kids that is happy to catch a 9 inch trout and I will show you 100 kids that will be screaming with joy to catch a 20 inch trout.

People try to make this about something other than improving fishing. They try to pit families against adults, kids against flyfishermen, flyfishermen against baitfisher...blah blah blah. Just misdirection cause there is something missing in their understanding of the subject.

You seem to extrapolate that improving fishing means blanket regulation changes. While we have one end of the spectrum that wants ZERO changes...one end that wants all changed...I have said repeatedly for me this all about options. Just like I am sure you would not want a province full of only goldeye...you like diversity and options of different water and species to catch. The SAME applies to fish sizes. Why cater to ONLY those few individuals that scream I want only small fish when the facts are most lakes near major urban centers get fished out quickly. Also over stocking to supply the put and take lake market in other lakes means poor growth rates.

Why not make some lakes 1 over 20 inch...some lakes 3 under 16, some lakes 5 a day, some lakes catch and release? Why not? Why do you feel so strongly that YOUR WAY IS THE HIGHWAY?

Why not share, compromise and be fair to ALL fishermen.

You try and make this about me wanting it MY WAY. Clearly many people want changes. Why should EVERYTHING stay the same?

You get your answers...you are just selectively reading or hearing. You guys love saying drink the coolaid. Fortunately for me I can see and read and be smart enough to not drink it. You are living in the dark and not listening...be very careful what some guys are trying to spoon feed you to the negative.

IMHO.

Cheers

[gl2]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

You don't understand...you proved that it doesn't matter what method you use to catch fish either goes. Destroys your theory this is all about catering to fly fishermen. I fly fish, spin fish, bait fish and unlike you I don't need to justify what I catch to others. Simply good enough that I fish and enjoy it. Also by point in fact your assumptions I am an "elitist" flyfisherman makes me laugh cause clearly I am just a fishermen pure and simple.

I am all about improving average sizes and options to fish sizes. Rather than catch a trout 9 inches long the day after it was stocked at 9 inches long in every put and take lake near large urban populations...why not have SOME lakes that allow fish to grow bigger on AVERAGE and provide more sport than hauling in a 9 inch minnow. While lakes off the beaten path are likely not as affected from over fishing...sometimes they are from over stocking. The argument that kids only want to catch 9 inch trout stems from the fact that is all you ever see...cause that is all that is in lakes for them to catch. You show me one kids that is happy to catch a 9 inch trout and I will show you 100 kids that will be screaming with joy to catch a 20 inch trout.

People try to make this about something other than improving fishing. They try to pit families against adults, kids against flyfishermen, flyfishermen against baitfisher...blah blah blah. Just misdirection cause there is something missing in their understanding of the subject.

You seem to extrapolate that improving fishing means blanket regulation changes. While we have one end of the spectrum that wants ZERO changes...one end that wants all changed...I have said repeatedly for me this all about options. Just like I am sure you would not want a province full of only goldeye...you like diversity and options of different water and species to catch. The SAME applies to fish sizes. Why cater to ONLY those few individuals that scream I want only small fish when the facts are most lakes near major urban centers get fished out quickly. Also over stocking to supply the put and take lake market in other lakes means poor growth rates.

Why not make some lakes 1 over 20 inch...some lakes 3 under 16, some lakes 5 a day, some lakes catch and release? Why not? Why do you feel so strongly that YOUR WAY IS THE HIGHWAY?

Why not share, compromise and be fair to ALL fishermen.

You try and make this about me wanting it MY WAY. Clearly many people want changes. Why should EVERYTHING stay the same?

You get your answers...you are just selectively reading or hearing. You guys love saying drink the coolaid. Fortunately for me I can see and read and be smart enough to not drink it. You are living in the dark and not listening...be very careful what some guys are trying to spoon feed you to the negative.

IMHO.

Cheers

sun,

this poll has clearly, with out a doubt told everyone that no changes are wanted in alberta by the way the turnout in your guys poll. do not be mad that very few phone calls are made and little letters are sent.

you say that it is guys like me that pit bait fishermen against fly fishermen??
you did that with a bait ban rule. plain and simple.

as to what kids want i can tell you they just want to catch fish...THATS ALL.
i dont care if your kids are catch all the fish in the world on the fly, most people do not know the life cycles of insects in alberta, and they shouldnt have to. buy a lisense, bag of worms,rod,reel and go. these people make up the largest part of revenue in fishing in alberta.

now here is a real qustion... how can you ask people to support you when you avoid fair questions, have no answers to others and clearly have no plan at all, exept you want bigger fish in some lakes but you dont know where or how it will impact others?

if you keep at it at this rate sun soon everybody will stop listening to you as most of us have. it is clear you guys that want things your way or the hi way, i just wanted to know what lakes were being choosen. i now wish i could take my name off the k lakes list as i realize that you are all about your own agenda rather than making things better in alberta and i am sure the people dowm at srd know this too. do you think they are getting sick and tired of letters from you and maybe a couple others out to put forth their own agenda every week on diffrent bodies of water?

[SNAPFisher]

Originally Posted by Tosh

so i ask again what lakes do you want to impose these ego stroking rules for?

I love these kind of questions on a public message board. Some people on here may have some in mind but do you really think there is an easy answer to this question. I certainly have my suggests but I would need real facts to back it up, and support. I'm no biolgist.

Tosh or Chubbdarter, can you tell me what answer to this question will do? Are you saying that it is okay to establish a trophy trout fishery but it depends on where to you? I.e. not in my neighborhood. I'm not asking to be ignorant, I'm just wanting to know.

Sun, from what I read several posts back, just wanted choices for our fisheries. Pure and simple to me but then it seems to go 12 different directions again.

I would hope as anglers that we are all really looking for the simliar experiences and the rest is just bickering on how we get there. Changes to management practices is a good thing. I have no doubt that further changes and trials are coming. That what we humans do, we try things out. Good and bad.

[Pudelpointer]

Holy smokes. Lots of defensiveness and name calling going on. Too bad. This is an important conversation to have, but it appears some people can not deal with the fact that others see the world in a different way.

This is not about urban vs. rural, bait/gear vs. fly, modernists vs. traditionalists, the elite vs. the great unwashed, or whatever imaginary groups you want believe are out there to ruin your life. It is about providing different options for different people (yes, people different then you, who pay their taxes, raise their kids, and hope to find happiness in the rare few days they manage to get away from work each year.... just like you).

Yikes.

Okay, I will bite. You ask "which lakes?". How about this: 10% of ALL WATERS in the province of AB are C&R ONLY; 25% of ALL WATERS in AB are managed for larger sized fish with good populations of breeding adults (see below) and 65% of ALL WATERS in AB are managed for maximum catch opportunity.

In the C&R waters (<10%):
Do I really have to explain it? This should be limited to a few of the "blue ribbon" waters that we have, i.e. PORTIONS of the Bow, Crowsnest, Oldman, N.Raven, etc. and a handful of lakes.

In the "quality" waters (category 2 - 25%):

For Trout you could keep 2 fish per day under 16" in lakes (some may have to be adjusted to 18") and 1 per day under 14" in streams and rivers (variation for brook [5] bull [0] etc.).
For Walleye you could keep 1 under 50 cm per day.
For Pike you could keep 2 under 65 cm per day.
etc. for other species (maybe we could actually let the bios figure these out themselves)

In the maximum catch waters (65%):
3 Trout - any size
2 Walleye - any size
2 Pike - any size
etc.

There. 90% of all waters in the province would allow anglers to kill fish. The big changes would be to the sizes of fish that they could take. Happy? I doubt it.

Some of you want to know Specific Lakes; that shows the true nature of your NIMBY attitude. That attitude is why the only 2 "quality lakes" for trout in the south are an hour (or more) from the population centres they are supposed to serve.

There are already a large number of "quality fisheries" in AB, they are called walleye (>55cm) and pike (>65 cm) lakes, and there are lots of them. All the trout guys are asking for is a few more trout lakes to provide a different experience then fishing in the hatchery's trout pond.

We all want clean waters to fish in, healthy fish to (possibly) catch, and enough room to not be in each others space. That is the biggest reason for creating more "quality" opportunities as far as I am concerned; to spread out the pressure on our water resources.

[chubbdarter]

Originally Posted by SNAPFisher

I love these kind of questions on a public message board. Some people on here may have some in mind but do you really think there is an easy answer to this question. I certainly have my suggests but I would need real facts to back it up, and support. I'm no biolgist.

Tosh or Chubbdarter, can you tell me what answer to this question will do? Are you saying that it is okay to establish a trophy trout fishery but it depends on where to you? I.e. not in my neighborhood. I'm not asking to be ignorant, I'm just wanting to know.

Sun, from what I read several posts back, just wanted choices for our fisheries. Pure and simple to me but then it seems to go 12 different directions again.

I would hope as anglers that we are all really looking for the simliar experiences and the rest is just bickering on how we get there. Changes to management practices is a good thing. I have no doubt that further changes and trials are coming. That what we humans do, we try things out. Good and bad.

the question is important to prove they have done their studies and home work that prove the proposals have a chance of success. Its possible the habitat cant grow big fish no matter what reg changes are done.
I WANT that info first or this discussion is simply a excercise in the training of a vacumcleaner salesman. You cant blindly plant elephants in aberta either and later finding out Alberta doesnt have enough wild peanuts to make Big Elephants

Also if they state the lakes , its possible more excate info will be posted. For example if its lake xyz, its likely fisherman that fish and know lake xyz will speak up.Thats key info and its info that holds merit. Straight from the horses mouth.....just as i would accept any info you provided about a lake your intimate with.

Your not getting us old fuggers to change anything without FACTS. This is not like going to the 1 buck bargain bin at the fishin store and grabbing 2 hooks and saying 'oh well its only 2 bucks if they dont work'

[Bigtoad]

Boys, boys, boys. Relax, put your feet up, take another beer out of the fridge and lets get back to the discussion instead of calling each other names (you idiots!)

Tosh, the Bow doesn't cater to kids and families as much because it's a big freaking river that although holds more fish per km than any other river in Alberta, and bigger fish, it can be really difficult to catch something if you don't know what you're doing. (Let me also use this as my evidence that bigger fish and more of them does not necessarily mean easier fishing (you listening HunterDave?)) Lakes and smaller creeks are much easier with families. It has little, to nothing, to do with the regulations that are put on the Bow; but good try

I find it interesting also that you say the Bow is a great fishery? It has big fish, and lots of them so isn't it too easy for you boys? Why can you admit the Bow is a great fishery (which it absolutely is) but not believe the same would be true for stillwater with more restrictive regs? Suddenly you're crying: "too easy" and complaining? Seems like a double standard there guys? We want something comparative to the Bow, North Ram, Stauffer, Praire, Crow, etc, etc, but in the world of stillwater fishing. I don't think I'm being elitist or trying to kill fishing for families by wanting a few more accessible lakes with "good" fishing. The way you guys are carrying on, you'd think I'm suggesting all stocked lakes should be C&R, which I'm not. I'm not being unreasonable, or selfish. I'm just tired of driving up to Valleyview for some good fishing and then when I get there, realizing the fishing isn't as good as it used to be because everyone is bonking the 5 biggest fish they can

And as for naming lakes to change, I'm not a biologist but I'd start with Swan Lake and a one under 18" regulation there. I'd also start with more remote(ish) lakes that are still easily accesible, but don't see the fishing pressure of a town pond or a place like Strubel.

Goldeye, Tay, Beauvias, would be good places to start. They need to be of descent size as well. Ironside by Rocky is a good start but a few boats and it gets crowded fast. And these quality lakes do get crowded....hmmmm....tell you anything?

If the lake couldn't support big fish, then I think it should be kept as a limit of 5 (or 3). And there would be lots of the 300 currently stocked lakes that wouldn't fit the criteria, but there might be 10 that do, and that would be a really great start. 10 current lakes moved to stricter regs, and another 10 new lakes stocked and aerated (if needed) by 2013. If I ran the world....

Unreasonable? Why?

[pipco]

[

QUOTE=Tosh;864091]sun,

this poll has clearly, with out a doubt told everyone that no changes are wanted in alberta by the way the turnout in your guys poll.
[/QUOTE]

I beg to differ with you. The poll results from my perspective CLEARLY show that people want change. It is time for us to move from the dark ages and do away with archaic, close minded thinking in regards to our fisheries.

If you fear change for the better it only indicates your ignorance, selfish, narrow mindedness. There will be more "quality" lakes in the near future as people that care about our fisheries make changes regardless of what a few thoughtless people believe.

As for the poll, if you can't do simple addition, it is difficult to take any of your statements seriously. People taking time to submit a vote to the poll clearly want change.

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by SNAPFisher

I love these kind of questions on a public message board. Some people on here may have some in mind but do you really think there is an easy answer to this question. I certainly have my suggests but I would need real facts to back it up, and support. I'm no biolgist.

Tosh or Chubbdarter, can you tell me what answer to this question will do? Are you saying that it is okay to establish a trophy trout fishery but it depends on where to you? I.e. not in my neighborhood. I'm not asking to be ignorant, I'm just wanting to know.

Sun, from what I read several posts back, just wanted choices for our fisheries. Pure and simple to me but then it seems to go 12 different directions again.

I would hope as anglers that we are all really looking for the simliar experiences and the rest is just bickering on how we get there. Changes to management practices is a good thing. I have no doubt that further changes and trials are coming. That what we humans do, we try things out. Good and bad.

X2.

I am NOT F&W. I am NOT everyone. You give me WAY more credit than I was expecting and I am blushing...cause all I am saying is we have to think about ways to better the fisheries in Alberta. I DON'T have a list of places to change. I DON'T have an agenda. I just want F&W to look at the data...look at the 300 lakes and tell US if there are places where changes can be made to give us OPTIONS on what size of fish are available taking into account distance to major Population centers. I know the edmonton guy says trout fishing life is peachy...others in Edmonton say fishing is poor with the excpetion of some water with delayed harvest regs. While not perfect...it has improved and can continue to be improved.

Down in Calgary...lets list a few local put and take lakes with reasonable driving time less than 2 hours...

Allen Bill Pond
McLean Pond
Upper Champion
Lower Champion
Emerson Pond
Chain Lakes
Strathmore Children's Pond
Airdrie Pond
Dewitt's Pond
Crossfield Trout Pond
Clark's Reservoir
Midway Reservoir
Dickson Trout Pond
Winchell Lake
Sibbald Lake
Sibbald Meadows Pond
Mount Lorette Ponds
Kananaskis Village Ponds
Phylis Lake
Stuble Lake
Mitchell Lake
Alford Lake
Fiesta Lake
Beaver Lake
Yellowhead Lake
Birch Lake
Ironside Pond
Rocky Children's Pond
Twin Lakes
Rat Lake
Elk Creek Pond
Peppers Lake
Grotto Mountain Pond
Stenton Lake
Upper Kan
Lower Kan
Burns Lake
Talus Lake
Granum Pond
Keenex Coulee Reservoir
Mcvinnie Reservoir
Nicolas Sheran
Riverstone Pond
Enchant Pond
Bow City East Pond
Brook Aquaduct Pond
Blood Indian Creek Reservoir
Helmer Reservoir
Michichi Reservoir
Anderson Dam
Severen Creek Reservoir
Midway Reservoir
Braconnier Reservoir
Fyten Reservoir
Bennett Pond
Kraft Pond
Hillers Reservoir
Cipperleys Reservoir
Hugh Bower Pond
etc. I am missing a bunch.

Tosh...not trying to be redundant...but along the lines of your question I believe other asked previously which I thought my opinions were obvious...let's say F&W identified 1 or 2 or 3 lakes out of 5, in an area or 3, 4 or 6 lakes out of 10 or 15 stocked lakes in an area and wanted to change the regs from a mix of 1 over 20 and 3 under 16 and 1 under 16 and alter the stocking rates to increase the overall average size of fish that are caught from 9-12 inches to 16 - 20 inches. Still leaving other lakes in the area for people that want five 9-12 inchers to take home.

Is this a bad thing? Would you endorse this generally and why? Would you disagree and why specifically?

Thanks

Sun

[gl2]

Originally Posted by pipco

[

QUOTE=Tosh;864091]sun,

this poll has clearly, with out a doubt told everyone that no changes are wanted in alberta by the way the turnout in your guys poll.

I beg to differ with you. The poll results from my perspective CLEARLY show that people want change. It is time for us to move from the dark ages and do away with archaic, close minded thinking in regards to our fisheries.

If you fear change for the better it only indicates your ignorance, selfish, narrow mindedness. There will be more "quality" lakes in the near future as people that care about our fisheries make changes regardless of what a few thoughtless people believe.

As for the poll, if you can't do simple addition, it is difficult to take any of your statements seriously. People taking time to submit a vote to the poll clearly want change.

[/QUOTE]



i am not going to write the numbers out again but if you read the whole thing instead of just the last page you will see my previous post.

numbers of lisensed anglers + number of members on ao = how many votes on the poll . people are either against it or cant be bothered, if they supported it they would vote. maybe you should do the research and get your calculator out.

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by chubbdarter

the question is important to prove they have done their studies and home work that prove the proposals have a chance of success. Its possible the habitat cant grow big fish no matter what reg changes are done.
I WANT that info first or this discussion is simply a excercise in the training of a vacumcleaner salesman. You cant blindly plant elephants in aberta either and later finding out Alberta doesnt have enough wild peanuts to make Big Elephants

Also if they state the lakes , its possible more exact info will be posted. For example if its lake xyz, its likely fisherman that fish and know lake xyz will speak up.Thats key info and its info that holds merit. Straight from the horses mouth.....just as i would accept any info you provided about a lake your intimate with.

Your not getting us old fuggers to change anything without FACTS. This is not like going to the 1 buck bargain bin at the fishin store and grabbing 2 hooks and saying 'oh well its only 2 bucks if they dont work'

Excellent post...I agree 100%. I want to see the same facts and have the same discussion. F&W are the ones we hired to make these final decisions...but asking them to look into is OUR right. If enough want the research done...F&W should be tasked accordingly.

If F&W can show enough people want the regs changed to allow for more quality fishing...then the next step is to find those waters, consult with all users and find the right mix to satisfy the majority of people. While you can't help all the people all the time...they should try and make our fishing resource the best they can, for what they can, for who is using it.

IMHO

You and are in in agreement chubby!

I am shocked.

[chubbdarter]

Originally Posted by pipco

[

QUOTE=Tosh;864091]sun,

this poll has clearly, with out a doubt told everyone that no changes are wanted in alberta by the way the turnout in your guys poll.

I beg to differ with you. The poll results from my perspective CLEARLY show that people want change. It is time for us to move from the dark ages and do away with archaic, close minded thinking in regards to our fisheries.

If you fear change for the better it only indicates your ignorance, selfish, narrow mindedness. There will be more "quality" lakes in the near future as people that care about our fisheries make changes regardless of what a few thoughtless people believe.

As for the poll, if you can't do simple addition, it is difficult to take any of your statements seriously. People taking time to submit a vote to the poll clearly want change.

[/QUOTE]

Then CLEARLY this is done issue. With all respect to AO i hope you dont think this poll is a CLEAR indication of the opinion of Alberta fisherman..if so your the ignorant and narrow minded one CLEARLY!
No one here fears change....we are asking to be lead to the light not lead into the dark without scientific facts. Im sorry your hurt because no one believes you ..just because you say it will work. How many bottles of snake oil have you bought in your life?

Seeing as you know it all.....what food base is required to have aquality fishery per fish?
What lakes have the ability to accomplish the proposed poll?
Whats the economic benefit of your proposal?


Sorry i tryed to quote and reply to pipco

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by Tosh

I beg to differ with you. The poll results from my perspective CLEARLY show that people want change. It is time for us to move from the dark ages and do away with archaic, close minded thinking in regards to our fisheries.

If you fear change for the better it only indicates your ignorance, selfish, narrow mindedness. There will be more "quality" lakes in the near future as people that care about our fisheries make changes regardless of what a few thoughtless people believe.

As for the poll, if you can't do simple addition, it is difficult to take any of your statements seriously. People taking time to submit a vote to the poll clearly want change. [/LEFT]

i am not going to write the numbers out again but if you read the whole thing instead of just the last page you will see my previous post.

numbers of lisensed anglers + number of members on ao = how many votes on the poll . people are either against it or cant be bothered, if they supported it they would vote. maybe you should do the research and get your calculator out.[/QUOTE]

Tosh...what you fail to see is that this is a subset. AOF may have 10,000 members. 5000 maybe fishermen...but maybe only 500 actively watch the site every day... In which case this poll has huge return numbers but I challenge anyone to say we are not in the correct demographic to be asking this question. I would laugh it off along with you if this was a fishing poll taken at a golf course. But a fishing poll on a fishing website...so be it. If you send out a letter or email requesting voting on a subject and get 2-5% back...you are happy as stink.

In the end...no one is debating if this prove decisively...however even with a large...massive margin of error...it STRONGLY points in the direction that people want change.

If you miss that...you are not looking at the big picture and that is a shame.

Sun

[chubbdarter]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

Excellent post...I agree 100%. I want to see the same facts and have the same discussion. F&W are the ones we hired to make these final decisions...but asking them to look into is OUR right. If enough want the research done...F&W should be tasked accordingly.

If F&W can show enough people want the regs changed to allow for more quality fishing...then the next step is to find those waters, consult with all users and find the right mix to satisfy the majority of people. While you can't help all the people all the time...they should try and make our fishing resource the best they can, for what they can, for who is using it.

IMHO

You and are in in agreement chubby!

I am shocked.

hahahaha Sun ive always respected your vigor to discuss and respect your a well schooled man. You fling and take cheap shots well..i respect that.
I just want facts.....i dont want a herd of starving elephants in Alberta

[gl2]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

X2.

I am NOT F&W. I am NOT everyone. You give me WAY more credit than I was expecting and I am blushing...cause all I am saying is we have to think about ways to better the fisheries in Alberta. I DON'T have a list of places to change. I DON'T have an agenda. I just want F&W to look at the data...look at the 300 lakes and tell US if there are places where changes can be made to give us OPTIONS on what size of fish are available taking into account distance to major Population centers. I know the edmonton guy says trout fishing life is peachy...others in Edmonton say fishing is poor with the excpetion of some water with delayed harvest regs. While not perfect...it has improved and can continue to be improved.

Down in Calgary...lets list a few local put and take lakes with reasonable driving time less than 2 hours...

Allen Bill Pond
McLean Pond
Upper Champion
Lower Champion
Emerson Pond
Chain Lakes
Strathmore Children's Pond
Airdrie Pond
Dewitt's Pond
Crossfield Trout Pond
Clark's Reservoir
Midway Reservoir
Dickson Trout Pond
Winchell Lake
Sibbald Lake
Sibbald Meadows Pond
Mount Lorette Ponds
Kananaskis Village Ponds
Phylis Lake
Stuble Lake
Mitchell Lake
Alford Lake
Fiesta Lake
Beaver Lake
Yellowhead Lake
Birch Lake
Ironside Pond
Rocky Children's Pond
Twin Lakes
Rat Lake
Elk Creek Pond
Peppers Lake
Grotto Mountain Pond
Stenton Lake
Upper Kan
Lower Kan
Burns Lake
Talus Lake
Granum Pond
Keenex Coulee Reservoir
Mcvinnie Reservoir
Nicolas Sheran
Riverstone Pond
Enchant Pond
Bow City East Pond
Brook Aquaduct Pond
Blood Indian Creek Reservoir
Helmer Reservoir
Michichi Reservoir
Anderson Dam
Severen Creek Reservoir
Midway Reservoir
Braconnier Reservoir
Fyten Reservoir
Bennett Pond
Kraft Pond
Hillers Reservoir
Cipperleys Reservoir
Hugh Bower Pond
etc. I am missing a bunch.

Tosh...not trying to be redundant...but along the lines of your question I believe other asked previously which I thought my opinions were obvious...let's say F&W identified 1 or 2 or 3 lakes out of 5, in an area or 3, 4 or 6 lakes out of 10 or 15 stocked lakes in an area and wanted to change the regs from a mix of 1 over 20 and 3 under 16 and 1 under 16 and alter the stocking rates to increase the overall average size of fish that are caught from 9-12 inches to 16 - 20 inches. Still leaving other lakes in the area for people that want five 9-12 inchers to take home.

Is this a bad thing? Would you endorse this generally and why? Would you disagree and why specifically?

Thanks

Sun

well sun this little plan is starting to look better with even a little bit of facts but what are you taking away from others? now some guy enjoying lake x cant, so he goes to lake y, then the people at lake y are mad because pressure went up on lake y by 30 percent. do you think this is fair? people already complain they dont have enough fish and this will make the problem worse. why not like dave said from the beggining re claim old lakes? it would take nothing from anybody and you would have everything to gain. so to ask if i would support this plan? i would still need specific facts. what resources you take away from the public in my opinion should be very, very small.

[Pudelpointer]

I would like to clear something up here, there seems to be a poor understanding of what is responsible for growing "big fish". First, let me say that I have a solid biology background and have worked with a variety of fisheries. I have an intimate knowledge of the factors that go into a given lake's productivity.

Let's just make this clear: almost every single waterbody in the province has the potential to grow big fish. There are no nutrient limitations in (almost) any of our lakes and streams, in fact, there is a reservoir in southern AB that has the highest natural growth rates of any water body in Canada, possibly North America (IIRC). The limiting factors for big fish in AB are mostly oxygen (winter kill) and competition. IF a water body does not winter kill, then it can grow big fish, provided competition does not limit growth. Some seem to think that the put and take lakes do not grow big fish because the nutrients are not there - wrong. The reason the fish do not grow big is often due to competition; either from their own species or from others.

Now, the amount of available food in a given water body is limited at any given time. If you introduce 50,000 fish to eat 100kg of available biomass per week the fish can only gain 2 grams per week in mass (I am greatly oversimplifying here, to make a point), however, if you only introduce 1000 fish then they can potentially gain 100 grams per week. In that sense, yes, nutrients can be a limiting factor in our waters.

So, applying this to the discussion at hand (that being small to medium sized stocked trout lakes with no natural reproduction) the number of fish you put into the lake will determine the potential size of the resulting fish. In a practical sense, the fewer fish you put in a lake, the faster and larger those fish will grow, the more fish you introduce, the slower and smaller they will be.

If you look at the stocking reports for lakes in AB you will see that some of them receive a very high number of fish. IIRC, Beauvais receives hundreds of thousands of fish (mostly 'bows) of varying sizes each year. Catching a large rainbow (>16") on that lake is a rare occurrence because the insect life the trout feed upon is limited and competition for food is high. Brown trout, however, feed on the same items as 'bows when young, but, when faced with heavy competition from other species will turn piscivorous, thus shifting there food source away from the insects the rainbows are eating to the rainbows themselves. There are some big browns (>10 Lbs) in that lake. However, if the lake was made C&R but stocking continued at the same rate - nothing would change. There would still be no big rainbow trout.

On the other hand, if SRD changed the way they stocked the lake, by reducing the annual stocking to <10,000 fish per year, whether or not they changed the retention limits, there would be some large (>20") rainbows in the lake within a few years, but that is not how the lake is managed.

Hopefully that informs the conversation.

[gl2]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

i am not going to write the numbers out again but if you read the whole thing instead of just the last page you will see my previous post.

numbers of lisensed anglers + number of members on ao = how many votes on the poll . people are either against it or cant be bothered, if they supported it they would vote. maybe you should do the research and get your calculator out.

Tosh...what you fail to see is that this is a subset. AOF may have 10,000 members. 5000 maybe fishermen...but maybe only 500 actively watch the site every day... In which case this poll has huge return numbers but I challenge anyone to say we are not in the correct demographic to be asking this question. I would laugh it off along with you if this was a fishing poll taken at a golf course. But a fishing poll on a fishing website...so be it. If you send out a letter or email requesting voting on a subject and get 2-5% back...you are happy as stink.

In the end...no one is debating if this prove decisively...however even with a large...massive margin of error...it STRONGLY points in the direction that people want change.

If you miss that...you are not looking at the big picture and that is a shame.

Sun[/QUOTE]

if you think that this poll is what you need to get the changes you are requesting then all i can say is

[chubbdarter]

So is it in the proposal to use the 10 most food abundant lakes in Alberta?

[Pudelpointer]

Originally Posted by chubbdarter

So is it in the proposal to use the 10 most food abundant lakes in Alberta?

What proposal are you talking about? Who are you asking?