Quality Trout Fisheries in Alberta

[SNAPFisher]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

EXACTLY! Right now they aren't easier to catch! But the idea of a "quality" fishery is to make them easier to catch and take the challenge out of catching a big one. Wouldn't it be allot less sweet catching a 20" trout out of a "quality" fishery lake?

You just don't get it Dave. Even if I am at Muir and I catch an average of 18 inchers (nice!!), I'm still really after that monster 25 incher or bigger that is in there. You just seem to want to argue with yourself about the "easier" point of view. That isnt even a part of this discussion. Quality fisheries are managed in every province...and better in places like Manitoba or B.C. The hope here is that they can add a few more to the equation. Can you at least understand that???

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by chubbdarter

if thats the case....a huge remote lake must be chosen then..because i fear a lake like that will be shoulder to shoulder.....and boat to boat.

I knew that I'd reel ya in sooner or later.

Ya see, I live in a small town so allot of stuff gets around. If you live here long enough you hear about where the occasional whopper is caught. A few years ago someone caught a monster trout in Cardiff Pond! Based on my experience anywhere that has trout in it and there's no winter/summer kill has the potential to grow big fish. Maybe not allot of them but they are there.

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by SNAPFisher

You just don't get it Dave. Even if I am at Muir and I catch an average of 18 inchers (nice!!), I'm still really after that monster 25 incher or bigger that is in there. You just seem to want to argue with yourself about the "easier" point of view. That isnt even a part of this discussion. Quality fisheries are managed in every province...and better in places like Manitoba or B.C. The hope here is that they can add a few more to the equation. Can you at least understand that???

So you're not catching 18" trout easier in Muir over a non-"quality" fishing lake then?

I only know of one place in Manitoba and you have to pay to fish there. Are there other provincially funded "quality" fisheries there?

[chubbdarter]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

I knew that I'd reel ya in sooner or later.

Ya see, I live in a small town so allot of stuff gets around. If you live here long enough you hear about where the occasional whopper is caught. A few years ago someone caught a monster trout in Cardiff Pond! Based on my experience anywhere that has trout in it and there's no winter/summer kill has the potential to grow big fish. Maybe not allot of them but they are there.

lol.....i hate you cant edit at any time....ahhhahaahhaha

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by chubbdarter

pardon my ignorance or what ever other things you may call me....but if thats true and the majority dont want a 5 fish limit....then i must assume the majority are helping the cause by taking fewer or no fish at all....which then brings me to the point....will any proposed changes - change things?
simply put if the majority dont want a 5 fish limit...they must be self regulating themselfs and the minority are still keeping 5 fish.

Interesting point. Near as I can tell however the answer to your question comes from the finite nature of the resource. There are way more people taking their 5 fish daily limit than taking nothing. So the fish get depleted fast but not near as fast as if everyone took them all. People that release do help...but it does not stop the depletion problem in places. The other factor is some people are making lots of trips to harvest and in turn but that is their right under the 5 fish a day limit.

Those that want to just catch and release fish along with a great chance at bigger ones have few options compared to the norm of put and take fisheries. So far everyone wanting more options are not asking to eliminate put and take fisheries as they stand now.

It really comes down to fishing pressure...not all lakes get the same pressure. That is were F&W need to do their research when selecting which lakes should be put and take and which should be quality etc.

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

Interesting read Bigtoad and it obviously took you a bit of time to think it out and write it. You can certainly spin a good yarn.

Here's the downside to your story as I see it.

That scenario only applies to trophy "Quality" hunters that only want big bucks and not the average hunter. The average hunter, myself included, are meat hunters. If I want a deer to eat then I'll shoot a doe and I don't care about the antlers. It's like keeping the smaller eatin' sized fish.

It's nice to be able to shoot a big buck, don't get me wrong, and if the opportunity arises then I'm sure that every meat hunter would instantly become a trophy hunter. However, I'll bet that there are not too many of either type of hunter that would want to go out and shoot a penned deer that was grown to a big size. Ethics aside, the challenge just wouldn't exist nor would the feeling of accomplishing something truly noteworthy.

Now if you go out fishing in Lake X and catch a 20" trout and tell your buddies they'd be impressed. However, if you go to Lake Y, a "Quality" fishery, and catch a 20" trout so what? The lake is full of them and people catch bigger ones than that everyday. I'm not suggesting that you only go out and catch big fish to impress your buddies, just pointing out the attitudes would change dependent on the level of difficulty.

I know that you keep saying that there are no lakes in Alberta, other than the "quality" fisheries, that hold +20" trout but I know that isn't true. They are there, they're just harder to catch than the smaller ones.

There are lots of hunting analogies kicking around but unfortunately they are not as relevant as I would hope. Simply because you can't employ shoot and release management.

Still, how about this one?

From a hunting perspective...if the Province stocked 1000 mule deer in an area and allowed 5 a day...and there was no restrictions to who can hunt...how long until there are no mule deer? This is one question and the second is if all mule deer are year olds and they never grow bigger...should the folks that want bigger deer have that option...being fair to all hunters and their preferences? Should people have to right to go to one place for small deer for the freezer and another for a larger 3, 4 or 5 point deer? Should everyone be forced to shoot only yearling?

[SNAPFisher]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

So you're not catching 18" trout easier in Muir over a non-"quality" fishing lake then?

I only know of one place in Manitoba and you have to pay to fish there. Are there other provincially funded "quality" fisheries there?

Wow! It is amazing to see your posts. Why can't you get off the "easy" train that you yourself started?

Manitoba is fast becoming a mecca for "quality" trout fisheries in one area of the province. They do have a ton of put and take as well. Just goes to show what variety in management can do:

http://www.flippr.ca/

Thinking of making the trip to Manitoba's Parkland one day. Looks to be worth it to me. Take a look through "Open the site" and read what they are doing. If you cannot see any advantage to having this kind of variety in fisheries then I'm afraid that you will never get it. Hopefully things can change for the better here through others.

When you look at something that they have done there is the other benefits of increased tourism and profile that most do not think about. Do you think that people are going to travel from all over to sample Alberta's 5 pygmy trout limit? Why do you think the Bow is so popular around the world? Is it because small fish are in abundance? Pull your head our of your you know what...

[chubbdarter]

okay im trying to be fair and learn something
its no secret Sun is a biologist and i believe specializing in fisheries
so one can assume he has a better understanding of this issue

so heres my question, with all sincerity.
Sun....if you could pick the lakes . Which ones would they be and no limit on how many you pick. Lakes your confident meet the enviromental qualifications.
Also....what would the specific regs be? bait? fly only? icefishing?
Also ....what would you want stocking rates be like?

i guess im trying to narrow this discussion down to specifics....and maybe we poop and get off the pot and just lay it all out there.
i have confidence if you want this so bad you can easily answer the above questions.

with respect
cd

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by SNAPFisher

Wow! It is amazing to see your posts. Why can't you get off the "easy" train that you yourself started?

Manitoba is fast becoming a mecca for "quality" trout fisheries in one area of the province. They do have a ton of put and take as well. Just goes to show what variety in management can do:

http://www.flippr.ca/

Thinking of making the trip to Manitoba's Parkland one day. Looks to be worth it to me. Take a look through "Open the site" and read what they are doing. If you cannot see any advantage to having this kind of variety in fisheries then I'm afraid that you will never get it. Hopefully things can change for the better here through others.

When you look at something that they have done there is the other benefits of increased tourism and profile that most do not think about. Do you think that people are going to travel from all over to sample Alberta's 5 pygmy trout limit? Why do you think the Bow is so popular around the world? Is it because small fish are in abundance? Pull your head our of your you know what...

Yeah, yeah, yeah. That's the one that I heard about. Not only is this a "quality" fishery but I believe that is also a "Private" fishery where you have to pay to fish. I'm pretty sure about it but not 100%.

You already have somewhere to go to like that in Alberta. I can't remember the name of it but it's a lake in the Rockies and I think that it starts with an "M".

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by SNAPFisher

Wow! It is amazing to see your posts. Why can't you get off the "easy" train that you yourself started?

Cuz that's what it's all about regardless of what you want to call it.

[SNAPFisher]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

Cuz that's what it's all about regardless of what you want to call it.

Its not. As many times as you can not hear it through that thick, dented skull of yours, it is about choice. We have little of it in Alberta compared to other provinces.

[SNAPFisher]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

Yeah, yeah, yeah. That's the one that I heard about. Not only is this a "quality" fishery but I believe that is also a "Private" fishery where you have to pay to fish. I'm pretty sure about it but not 100%.

You already have somewhere to go to like that in Alberta. I can't remember the name of it but it's a lake in the Rockies and I think that it starts with an "M".

Where does it say you have to pay in Manitoba? I've been reading about FLIPPR for awhile now and the Parkland area and have not ran into that. Please share your wealth of knowledge on how you know this.

P.S. Even if it was, I would still pay to go there. My choice, obviously not yours.

P.S.S. Taken from a review site:

The FLIPPR Lakes

The FLIPPR lakes are regulated to maintain a population of large fish, since all fish over 45 cm (18 inches) must be released. They are frequented by those wanting to hook a truly large fish for some photos and yet retain one for the frying pan.

Seems like a pretty good compromise to me. Almost like...common sense...

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by SNAPFisher

Where does it say you have to pay in Manitoba? I've been reading about FLIPPR for awhile now and the Parkland area and have not ran into that. Please share your wealth of knowledge on how you know this.

P.S. Even if it was, I would still pay to go there. My choice, obviously not yours.

Seems like a pretty good compromise to me. Almost like...common sense...

You're starting to "SNAP" SNAPFisher.

"A FLIPPR Year End Overview by Ray Frey by CEO Ray Frey"
CEO? Is that what they call the Minister of Natural Resources in Manitoba?

If you want to pay to catch big fish then by all means, fill your boots. If you want ME to fund your "quality" fishery with MY fishing licensing fees then take a hike over to Manitoba. Why should I give up my fishing opportunities so you can catch bigger fish?

Like I mentioned in an earlier post, there's already at least one such "private" fishery that I know of in Alberta. Pay the dues and enjoy catching all of the big fish that you want there.

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by chubbdarter

so heres my question, with all sincerity.
Sun....if you could pick the lakes . Which ones would they be and no limit on how many you pick. Lakes your confident meet the enviromental qualifications.
Also....what would the specific regs be? bait? fly only? icefishing?
Also ....what would you want stocking rates be like?

i guess im trying to narrow this discussion down to specifics....and maybe we poop and get off the pot and just lay it all out there.
i have confidence if you want this so bad you can easily answer the above questions.

with respect
cd

Very tough questions to answer straight up Chubdarter. There are so many variables that go into making any scientific fisheries management decision. Then there is tweaking after the fact as additional learning occur. However, if we don't start trying...nothing ever gets done. We can also move slow like a city parks and rec grounds mower...but again...stalling just delays making the necessary fixes.

I have not done the research on specific lakes nor do I have access to F&W data base. With that data...one could easily start making some choices.

Interesting thing about catch and release lakes is you don't need a lot of them to supply the demand as the fish don't disappear into freezers. We had some harvest here in Lake Sundance after the 200-300 larger trout were stocked. Some have definitely gone or released poorly but at least 100 remain and chasing them around the lake is a fun pasttime...not easy for everyone but definitely more fun that a 9 incher stocked in the Fall. As people learn proper catch and release methods that would save some...zero limit would of protected the balance. We can have a fair number fishing on the lake and catching and ours is a tiny lake relative to others.

I would have to say Don is probably the most knowledgeable on what lakes he knows of that would make sense out of the 300 or so in the province to be strictly C&R. I would say 10 would be plenty not sure if Don would agree. 50 quality lakes seems like a reasonable number. Probably 100 lakes in strategic places for the put and take crowd would be ample (along with repeated stockings)...that leaves 140 in which F&W can try various 1 over 16 or 1 under 16, or 3 under 16 etc. or leave as a put and take lake to try and find a balance of fish to fishermen.

Trophy lakes (C&R) would have low stocking rates...no ice fishing...no bait...but allow spin fishing or fly fishing. Stocking rates would be monitored to ensure growth rates remain high. If enforcement was better in the Province to protect against poaching...I would not mind ice fishing although C&R in the Winter can increase mortality from frozen gills etc.

One has to realize that it does not take catching 50 - 10 lb rainbows to make the grade... Catching 1 or 2 a day would make anyone scream with excitement.

Sounds like some lakes like Struble could support trophy size fish with a limit or stay no limit so we have to keep all ideas on the table.

There is no easy choices off my head for do this and this and this specifically to make things better.

In a perfect world I would like to see a volunteer committee of fishermen from all types to get together to make some good yet sometimes hard decisions to make fishing better for fishermen...not solely politicians and a government bureaucracy.

Still we have to give credit to the changes F&W have tried and hope that more improvements can be made.

So in a nutshell...I don't have the data to lay out a plan.

Sun

[DuckBrat]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

Yeah, yeah, yeah. That's the one that I heard about. Not only is this a "quality" fishery but I believe that is also a "Private" fishery where you have to pay to fish. I'm pretty sure about it but not 100%.

You already have somewhere to go to like that in Alberta. I can't remember the name of it but it's a lake in the Rockies and I think that it starts with an "M".

Let me clarify there are over 20 lakes within an hour of Roblin (Parkland), Manitoba. I fished 10 of them last summer/fall, each which was aerated. I caught Rainbow, Brown, and Tiger trout to 31" (78.74 cm). The fish are there in both numbers and size. There is a lot of pressure on certain lakes that still produce the quality fish. They have 2 lakes right in the town of Roblin(East and West Goose), that see anglers every day and continue to produce large fish. Why? The residents know that by maintaining the fishery the anglers will bring their cash. Any one of of our Potholes could produce the same fishery as the waters are very similar. None of these lakes were private. The only thing I saw was a drop box at one location to collect for the operation of an aerator, which was optional.

They even allow for some harvest. Everyone wins, what is the trouble with understanding their success??????????


The only private water in the Alberta rockies is Chief Hector Pond.

[chubbdarter]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

Very tough questions to answer straight up Chubdarter. There are so many variables that go into making any scientific fisheries management decision. Then there is tweaking after the fact as additional learning occur. However, if we don't start trying...nothing ever gets done. We can also move slow like a city parks and rec grounds mower...but again...stalling just delays making the necessary fixes.

I have not done the research on specific lakes nor do I have access to F&W data base. With that data...one could easily start making some choices.

Interesting thing about catch and release lakes is you don't need a lot of them to supply the demand as the fish don't disappear into freezers. We had some harvest here in Lake Sundance after the 200-300 larger trout were stocked. Some have definitely gone or released poorly but at least 100 remain and chasing them around the lake is a fun pasttime...not easy for everyone but definitely more fun that a 9 incher stocked in the Fall. As people learn proper catch and release methods that would save some...zero limit would of protected the balance. We can have a fair number fishing on the lake and catching and ours is a tiny lake relative to others.

I would have to say Don is probably the most knowledgeable on what lakes he knows of that would make sense out of the 300 or so in the province to be strictly C&R. I would say 10 would be plenty not sure if Don would agree. 50 quality lakes seems like a reasonable number. Probably 100 lakes in strategic places for the put and take crowd would be ample (along with repeated stockings)...that leaves 140 in which F&W can try various 1 over 16 or 1 under 16, or 3 under 16 etc. or leave as a put and take lake to try and find a balance of fish to fishermen.

Trophy lakes (C&R) would have low stocking rates...no ice fishing...no bait...but allow spin fishing or fly fishing. Stocking rates would be monitored to ensure growth rates remain high. If enforcement was better in the Province to protect against poaching...I would not mind ice fishing although C&R in the Winter can increase mortality from frozen gills etc.

One has to realize that it does not take catching 50 - 10 lb rainbows to make the grade... Catching 1 or 2 a day would make anyone scream with excitement.

Sounds like some lakes like Struble could support trophy size fish with a limit or stay no limit so we have to keep all ideas on the table.

There is no easy choices off my head for do this and this and this specifically to make things better.

In a perfect world I would like to see a volunteer committee of fishermen from all types to get together to make some good yet sometimes hard decisions to make fishing better for fishermen...not solely politicians and a government bureaucracy.

Still we have to give credit to the changes F&W have tried and hope that more improvements can be made.

So in a nutshell...I don't have the data to lay out a plan.

Sun

Fair and Thank You
with all respect can you please tell us...Don's background for us that arent familiar

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

If you want to pay to catch big fish then by all means, fill your boots. If you want ME to fund your "quality" fishery with MY fishing licensing fees then take a hike over to Manitoba. Why should I give up my fishing opportunities so you can catch bigger fish?

HunterDave... I am sure you don't mean to say that all the people that want fishing options and pay their licencing fees should be forced to only follow what you want. That goes to my early question you would not answer.

Still...if that is your opinion it is a tiny minority when compared to the poll results.

I would say if you want to protect Carson as a put and take lake...then as part of any future discussions, that could very well be the case. But another lake may make better sense as a trophy or quality lake or another regulation as suggestions in this poll.

Any thoughts?

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by chubbdarter

Fair and Thank You
with all respect can you please tell us...Don's background for us that arent familiar

I can't give a bio on him...just from reputation he has put tons of time into trying to improve fishing in the province as an avid outdoorsman and volunteer. Mega years of fishing experience.

How does that sound Don?

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

HunterDave... I am sure you don't mean to say that all the people that want fishing options and pay their licencing fees should be forced to only follow what you want. That goes to my early question you would not answer.

Still...if that is your opinion it is a tiny minority when compared to the poll results.

I would say if you want to protect Carson as a put and take lake...then as part of any future discussions, that could very well be the case. But another lake may make better sense as a trophy or quality lake or another regulation as suggestions in this poll.

Any thoughts?

Well if you're sure that is not what I meant then why mention it?

The majority of anglers want to be able to catch fish, not just big fish, but fish. They want to go out and enjoy a day of fishing just to enjoy the outdoors, spend time with their families, yadda, yadda, yadda. It doesn't matter that I happen to agree with the majority.

And what makes you think that people should be forced to follow your way as opposed to my way anyway? Is it somehow different to force people to chose your way because you think that it is better or that's what you want?

Awhile back you went on a huge campaign to try to get Kananaskis changed to a "quality" fishery yet you only managed to get a total of 283 signatures on the petition. So what, if anything, did you learn from that?

If you want to refer to the attached poll to prove your point how about starting a poll that will give you accurate results. How many people would have voted for this one:

Limit of 5 any size with a good chance of fish over 20"

Not possible? Yeah, it is, because some of us have that choice now. And you want me to give that up so it's easier for you to catch bigger fish? All that I can say to that is..............

[HunterDave]

You city boys down south ought to try to hold on to the easy fishin' lakes that you already have before you start trying to change anything else to a "Quality" fishery. You're welcome.

Quality Fishing Regulation Under Review for Police Lake: Action Requested

http://www.nlft.org/2011/02/25/quali...ion-requested/

A recent posting on Fly Fish Alberta is calling for public input on the Quality Fishery at Police Lake in Southern Alberta. This lake currently has special regulations, but there is a proposal to revert back to the old rules. Special rules are also in place at Muir Lake to help improve and sustain the quality of the fishery. Help influence the decision for Police Lake and other Quality Fisheries by sending a message to Terry as per the message below.

Police Outpost Lake. Review of Quality Fishing Regulation. Public/Stakeholder Input requested.

Proposal #1 Keep the current regulations (1 Trout Limit over 50 cm; Bait Ban; Closed November 1 to March 31)
Proposal #2 Go back to the previous regulations (5 Trout Limit; No Size Restrictions; No Bait Ban; Open Year Round)

You can send your opinion to:

Terry Clayton
Senior Fisheries Biologist ASRD Fish and Wildlife Division
2nd Floor, YPM Place
530-8 Street South
Lethbridge, Alberta
T1J 2J8
Fax: (403) 381-5723
Email: Terry.Clayton@gov.ab.ca

Terry will be accepting letters, faxes and emails up until Tuesday may 31, 2011 at 3:00 p.m. No phone calls will be accepted and only one response per angler, please. Please put “Police Lake Regulations” in the email subject line and feel free to indicate the reasons for your choice.
Alberta Sutainable Resource Development, Fisheries Management Division, appreciates your feedback and will consider your input when making a final management decision.

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

You city boys down south ought to try to hold on to the easy fishin' lakes that you already have before you start trying to change anything else to a "Quality" fishery. You're welcome.

Quality Fishing Regulation Under Review for Police Lake: Action Requested

http://www.nlft.org/2011/02/25/quali...ion-requested/

A recent posting on Fly Fish Alberta is calling for public input on the Quality Fishery at Police Lake in Southern Alberta. This lake currently has special regulations, but there is a proposal to revert back to the old rules. Special rules are also in place at Muir Lake to help improve and sustain the quality of the fishery. Help influence the decision for Police Lake and other Quality Fisheries by sending a message to Terry as per the message below.

Police Outpost Lake. Review of Quality Fishing Regulation. Public/Stakeholder Input requested.

Proposal #1 Keep the current regulations (1 Trout Limit over 50 cm; Bait Ban; Closed November 1 to March 31)
Proposal #2 Go back to the previous regulations (5 Trout Limit; No Size Restrictions; No Bait Ban; Open Year Round)

You can send your opinion to:

Terry Clayton
Senior Fisheries Biologist ASRD Fish and Wildlife Division
2nd Floor, YPM Place
530-8 Street South
Lethbridge, Alberta
T1J 2J8
Fax: (403) 381-5723
Email: Terry.Clayton@gov.ab.ca

Terry will be accepting letters, faxes and emails up until Tuesday may 31, 2011 at 3:00 p.m. No phone calls will be accepted and only one response per angler, please. Please put “Police Lake Regulations” in the email subject line and feel free to indicate the reasons for your choice.
Alberta Sutainable Resource Development, Fisheries Management Division, appreciates your feedback and will consider your input when making a final management decision.

Thanks for posting. I just sent in my vote.

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

Well if you're sure that is not what I meant then why mention it?

The majority of anglers want to be able to catch fish, not just big fish, but fish. They want to go out and enjoy a day of fishing just to enjoy the outdoors, spend time with their families, yadda, yadda, yadda. It doesn't matter that I happen to agree with the majority.

And what makes you think that people should be forced to follow your way as opposed to my way anyway? Is it somehow different to force people to chose your way because you think that it is better or that's what you want?

Awhile back you went on a huge campaign to try to get Kananaskis changed to a "quality" fishery yet you only managed to get a total of 283 signatures on the petition. So what, if anything, did you learn from that?

If you want to refer to the attached poll to prove your point how about starting a poll that will give you accurate results. How many people would have voted for this one:

Limit of 5 any size with a good chance of fish over 20"

Not possible? Yeah, it is, because some of us have that choice now. And you want me to give that up so it's easier for you to catch bigger fish? All that I can say to that is..............

You talk a great line...but you don't answer simple questions which seems to me you just love the attention.

You say you can catch lots of big fish and small fish in the lakes you fish in Alberta. Great that you can and nobody else can. If you are lucky enough to be near a stocked lake with little to no fishing pressure that could explain it however.

You stated I seem to want everyone to follow my way? All I have asked for is choices. Still keeping put and take lakes but asking for options. Just like this poll shows others want the same. You want everyone to follow you.

Big difference. Hope people read and see that.

Cheers

Sun

[Don Andersen]

In order to understand where we're going we must understand where we were.
From the 49th to the Edmonton area I've had the good fortune of catching trout over 5 lbs. with most of the larger fish caught some years ago. That was Quality Fishing.

Now if I traveled the same route I might get a chance in one single lake of a 5 lbs. fish. Obviously not a Quality fishery.

Now some folks want to return this Province to what it was and the few, by looking @ the poll - very few are saying that they don't want to catch decent sized fish.

The real question is - if the few want a lake where they can kill @ their hearts content - lets give them a few - maybe 10 or being a little magnanimous - maybe 20.


But no - in order to entertain the 12" fish crowd, we make every lake but 2 crap fisheries.

Is this ass-backwards or what.


Don

[Outcast 1100]

The problem is that alberta doesnt have enough lakes, i mean good sized lakes. i dont think C&R is good thing being that fish dont live very long, so there is no point to that unless it is a new fishery being started. you need a over under size limit to make it work properly. i would really like to see 5 any size a thing of the past, there is simply to much fishing pressure at some lakes to sustain a good fish population so everybody can have a chance at catching some nice sized fish, being a lake white or a rainbow trout. Take a picture its the catch you remember not the meal. personally most of the fish arent that great eating anyways, so i dont mind putting back the fish i catch. sea bass, grouper, red snapper, mahi mahi, those are good eating fish. LOL

[chubbdarter]

Sun....as a biologist are you in contact with other biologists in other provinces that everyone claims have so much better fishing?
Do you work for the Government fisheries?
Im not pointing fingers. For many reasons things may have not gone as well as desired...eg funding.
But here is my question to you a biologist.....the one group claims fishing is far from desireable and reminisses about days gone by. So when did the biologists see this happening? Is or Was it a matter of funding that allowed it to become a fishery the group is complaining about?
This is no way a direct bash towards you Sun....but when i repair anything in life i like to know why it broke and how to prevent it from happening again.

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by chubbdarter

Sun....as a biologist are you in contact with other biologists in other provinces that everyone claims have so much better fishing?
Do you work for the Government fisheries?
Im not pointing fingers. For many reasons things may have not gone as well as desired...eg funding.
But here is my question to you a biologist.....the one group claims fishing is far from desireable and reminisses about days gone by. So when did the biologists see this happening? Is or Was it a matter of funding that allowed it to become a fishery the group is complaining about?
This is no way a direct bash towards you Sun....but when i repair anything in life i like to know why it broke and how to prevent it from happening again.

I have not been in fisheries since 1995 except volunteering here and there when I can...but I still read what I can and try NOT to lose what I learned over the years. It is no secret on this forum that I work for an oil company and not in an environmental capacity.

I don't really have any contacts left from when I was there...lots of turn over during those years. Fun times...hard work...sometimes hard to come by...low pay...unpaid overtime...danger and lots of travel.

Funding is not the root of the problem IMHO but rather failure to act appropriately to changing demographics of increasing anglers and harvest. To give people the quick fish in the pan as natural population depleted they created IMHO a revolving door of stock and remove...stock and remove. The door swings so quickly that fish often don't stay in the water longer than days (like Mount Lorette ponds for example). The rate of remove varies depending upon fishing pressure and water body size. Those lakes closest to major centers see the fastest depletion of stocked fish...those out of the way lakes fair better. F&W was IMHO mainly promoting a meat fishery and not a recreational fishery. I have said that before and I met some of them in the past. Typical thinking of the day was pay $40 in gas...bring home $40 worth of fresh fish. With a finite supply of fish and limited waters to fish...fishing pressure is just too high and that leads to over harvest even under the current regulations. F&W has not had the budget in which to staff biologists and technicians to specifically monitor fish recruitment and harvest but the biggest problem besides that was a delay in stopping population crashes before they happened. If anyone says to you that over fishing has not been a problem...well populations that have crashed include walleye, sturgeon, grayling, and many local populations of trout, pike, perch etc. Even mountain whitefish is IMHO way down in numbers and they are critical to feeding the larger predators like bull trout. I don't think a lack of money stopped a fix from being implemented sooner but rather the mentality of the time and maybe a fear of a backlash for reducing limits. Some people may tend to feel they have a right to a historical disproportionate share of resource as the numbers of people increase. But that is neither fair nor sustainable.

In the past...fish had a chance to grow as harvest was not as high and stocking was not the end all be all fix it.

Don A. may also shed some light on this and maybe even share with us a different opinion. Others may also reminise.

I am not so sure I would blame a general budget on our problems as our stocking program is massive compared to say BC. BC however has many more lakes such that fishing pressure is better balanced and spread out...not to mention better control on limits.

When I was younger...limits for trout were 10 a day...not 5 a day...now probably it should be 1 a day...just purely on population demographics.

I think you are a smart man to ask the important question...what broke it. That way the problem is not repeated.

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

Thanks for posting. I just sent in my vote.

No problem. I also sent an email to Terry giving him the heads up that I posted the information on here so he could expect to receive a higher than average volume of emails.

I too supported Police Lake staying a "quality" fishery. I did however go on to explain to him that my position was for entirely selfish reasons. I figure if Police Lake stayed a "quality" fishery there would be less likelihood that another one would open up near me.

It kind of makes me wonder how many "quality" fisheries that you boys down south want/need though.

[chubbdarter]

Im willing to support some changes if some basic provisions can be met
1- the choosen lake have other lakes relatively near by that remain governed by the regulations present now. This allows the other group to keep fishing as they please.
2- if possible a days fished log is estimated or kept. Sadly in some cases this method isnt fair but it is the era of if you dont use it be prepared to lose it. Im by no means suggesting killing every project lake, especially if successful.


i appreciate everyones....well you remember way back when stories.....but the fact is things change in life and many things cant be reversed.
i still know of some very good quality trout waters in alberta...thats a fact
do i lock all my doors of my truck when i go fishing.....yes....back 15 years ago...no...thats a fact. And i know i'll have to till the day im dirt dust.
Are the waters i claim as quality as good as the lakes i fish in B.C. ...NO...but they never were.
This has been a standing discussion for a long time, be honest the last thread was very similar in nature....so similar you'd need a biologist to examine both threads to separate them.
Maybe after all of this ...im not against the idea...with proper research...maybe im convinced with the amount of fisherman we have now the proposed project is doomed and not possible.
I think also the cart is before the horse. Tales of people hauling stringers of walleye from Travers and PCR....make me wonder
Compare your propossal to striking gold, who and what protects that gold now?

[chubbdarter]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

No problem. I also sent an email to Terry giving him the heads up that I posted the information on here so he could expect to receive a higher than average volume of emails.

I too supported Police Lake staying a "quality" fishery. I did however go on to explain to him that my position was for entirely selfish reasons. I figure if Police Lake stayed a "quality" fishery there would be less likelihood that another one would open up near me.

It kind of makes me wonder how many "quality" fisheries that you boys down south want/need though.

I absolutely hated the ice fisherman getting the boot of the lake....but as you can see in my other post....i agree with you now....spread a few around

[goldscud]

So south of Calgary we have Police and Bullshead for limited harvest and a few tiny lakes in Kananaskis. The choices for quality fishing are endless