Quality Trout Fisheries in Alberta

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

I don't know if the Rez could grow 20" trout but I do know that they'll grow bigger than the 6" size that they are when they are put in. Right about now, they should be about the right eatin size so, yeah, maybe I will head out there for the day soon.

Hmmm.... First you say all stocked lakes have big ones...you just have to put the time in...now you say you ain't so sure...

Waffle...waffle...waffle.

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by Speckle55

We have a trout pond in Hinton and there is one in Edson by Millers lake they do put in some hens(5 to 9 lbers) every now and then. they just put some Browns in Wildhorse lake 2 falls ago 5 to 8 lbers so if the lake is dead and you catch some big ones SRD put some hens in , they are retiring some from the hatchery every now and then :-} those lake still get the stocking they normally get .. Check out www.Hintonfishandgame.ca then trout pond for ours

I like the idea of putting some big fish into the C&R lakes. It would never work for long in a regularly stock lake or a "quality" lake though with people wanting to keep big fish. The first fella that caught one of those big ones would be keeping it.

I could hear the conversation down at the C&R lake now..........

"I caught that big 10# trout today, you know, the one with the scar above the right eye?"

"Yeah, I caught him the other day and Timmy caught him last weekend."

"I wonder who'll catch him next?"

[Speckle55]

Yep I think there is one big brown in Wildhorse and one big rainbow left .. the SRD people are using teasers to keep us excited!! ha ha only in Red Neck Alberta good ploy

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

LOL but few took that option on this poll...obviously...that is what is confusing you.

Having that as the only option is the ONLY way you will get the results you want...

Poor fella... It must drive you nuts...

I didn't even vote for a limit of 5 with a good chance of catching 12" trout. Well, until I found out that there were bigger fish in the lake that I could catch and then I changed my vote to it.

Well, I hate to bring logic into a perfectly good.....hmmmm.......I don't have a word to describe it. "Fantasy" maybe?

Wouldn't it make sense to you that just by replacing the last option of "A limit of 5 with a chance of 12" trout" with mine, you would immediately have 40% of the votes from the people that voted for the last three options? Then there would be the fellas that would change their votes from one of the first two options. How many.........who knows but I bet you that some would.

What's the logic behind your statement?

No, nothing on here will ever drive me crazy. We had a saying in the Army....."You can't teach a Heinz pickle anything."

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

Hmmm.... First you say all stocked lakes have big ones...you just have to put the time in...now you say you ain't so sure...

Waffle...waffle...waffle.

"Big ones" is relative to what you consider them to be.

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by Speckle55

Yep I think there is one big brown in Wildhorse and one big rainbow left .. the SRD people are using teasers to keep us excited!! ha ha only in Red Neck Alberta good ploy

It's a conspiracy I tell ya!!! People that say that there are already big fish in our lakes are just tryin to undermine our efforts to make it easier to catch them!

THERE ARE NO BIG FISH IN OUR LAKES I TELL YOU!!!

[GaryF]

HD, in one post you say it might be possible for the local pond to grow 20" fish, but is doubtful, but in the next you want the option on a poll of 5 fish with a catch up to 20" being possible. The selections on this poll to me accurately reflect a standard stocked body of water such as morinville. So wouldn't giving a chance of a 20" with a harvest of 5 on a poll be misleading?

An interesting read, http://www.srd.alberta.ca/FishingHun...Feb09-2010.pdf

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by GaryF

HD, in one post you say it might be possible for the local pond to grow 20" fish, but is doubtful, but in the next you want the option on a poll of 5 fish with a catch up to 20" being possible. The selections on this poll to me accurately reflect a standard stocked body of water such as morinville. So wouldn't giving a chance of a 20" with a harvest of 5 on a poll be misleading?

An interesting read, http://www.srd.alberta.ca/FishingHun...Feb09-2010.pdf

Well, I suppose that it would be misleading in comparison to the Morinville Rez. But it wouldn't be misleading for some of the lakes that I fish. For example, in the post where I described a bunch of us going out to Peanut lake to catch some eatin sized trout for a bbq and the majority of the fish that we were catching were all big. We don't measure them and all that good stuff but they were similar in size, probably a bit bigger, to the fish shown by the fella in the canoe in the Clearwater photo.

Perhaps replacing the middle option with what I suggested would lead to a more realistic poll. But regardless of where you put the option, I'm sure that the fellas voting for 5 x 12" and 3 x 16" will migrated to it.

[Speckle55]

hey Gary i hope that family of 4 otters don,t move into you test lake(they did In Dunn/Perrie Gary 2/ oooppps or when you open lake and the first three guys tell their three friends and so on so on so on .. when you added in the mortality of catch and release on small lakes.. 10 years of closed lakes .. after 2 years you still only have 1 or two fish that make 27 inches or more which is what happens now .. and still you will have 10% of the anglers catching 90% of the fish .. Miskiki 40 cm limit spent 5 days there average 1 legal fish per day. some days would be better for some of those 10 % anglers but i bet not many.. was supposed to help quality.. in study 10% make 50 cm of 500 fish so that is 50 fish times by 2000 anglers per year on small lake.. each staying for two days average.. now thats being nice !!! lmao good luck on keeping those 50 alive

[greylynx]

I don't know how old most of you posters are, but I have to tell you that the fisheries in Alberta have collapsed.

There was a period in the mid to late 80's when a sustainable recreational fishery could have been maintained. There were a set of plans to create one, but politics got involved.

All plans and attempts to rescue the fisheries of Alberta were destroyed when Don Getty was premier.

All you see now is a band-aid program to stock a little here, close a little there.

Until some brutal fish management programs come about, kiss good fishing in Alberta away.

Unfortunately, I see the same thing also coming in British Columbia.

But what do I know.

[SNAPFisher]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

How can you compare the challenge of catching a big fish in a regularly stocked lake to the challenge of catching a big fish at a fish farm? No, it doesn't seem like the same experience to me at all!

The experience I'm comparing, though maybe not clear enough in my post, is that it is the same experience catching a big fish. The really big fish in Muir are just as hard to catch a really big fish in whatever lake you fish. The difference is, as others have already stated, that the avg size while trying to catch an elusive big fish is better than most lakes (in a quality fishery). You and I are after the same experience. At least that is how I see it.

No problem on admitting I like to catch big fish. I would also like it easier and to have more choices than just Muir. No break through revelation Dave.

[SNAPFisher]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

Yeah, well if pike are as sexy as trout as you are suggesting, then how come people aren't trying to turn 30% of our lakes into "quality" pike fisheries? There are currently 17 "quality" trout fisheries and some people still want more. Why aren't they fighting to get "quality" pike fisheries instead?

Once again Dave your information is behind the times. I thought you were an old geezer?

Seibert is not the only one. Cow lake is also 1 over 100 cm. Pigeon is as well but no so much for quality purposes. I'll bet there are more. And, I would be happy to see more quality pike fisheries in AB. There are ton of lakes with small pike in them. Like trout, we could stand to have a few more without the tiddlers that you like.

Also, what do you think trophy status lakes were for for in the past? Quality fisheries. They have been around a long time and are not going anywhere.

[gl2]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

UKL and LKL have not been changed to "quality fisheres" as in a delayed harvest.

As for bait ban...some lakes will remain tiddler catch and kill...others like Bullshead however proved that bait fishermen can catch a mess on a bobber and fly. In fact often catching more than they ever did before.

Don't underestimate the power of doing it differently. My kids from the age of 3 onwards caught a mess of fish on a bobber and fly...no bait.

As for thinking this is about making ego stroking...LOL...you clearly are on the wrong side of the fence insofar as trying to improve fishing overall. Trying to simply increase the average size of trout in a lake has nothing to do with egos...but everything to do with common sense. Why expect less when you can expect more out of the resource. Why artificially impose limits and regulations on purpose that detracts from the fishery? The fish are small because we make them small on purpose. It just does not make any sense and is the old approach. The old is no longer working on its own merits.

What lake are you concerned about improving the fish size on?

some lakes will be left as tiddler catch and kill?, so how many lakes do you propose to change?.I am glad to hear you kids catch them on the fly...does it mean kids who digs up worms for bait arent as good?....NO. kids just dont care about this stuff,they are there for one reason only, to have fun and i think some adults could take a page from their book. this survey seems to me to be more about grown men who cant catch a 20'' fish than to improve the overall experience for everyone. maybe the problem is that you arent acually a very good fisherman?. There are days on the lake I get my butt kicked but not once do I think that its someone else's fault.

the proposal/poll just seems to me like i am getting railroaded by a used car salesman......want a answer but with very little information or facts to base it off of.

[Gust]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

The same results occur on another forum as well. It is not unique to AOF.

Excluding the Bow which is not a lake...for rainbows in publically stocked lakes within 5 mins of Calgary...I have to call you on that. There are no public rainbow trout lakes with 24 inch rainbows within 5 minutes of Calgary. If you are changing the discussion from is the Bow River a quality fishery...yes. But what we are lacking is quality trout fisheries for rainbows in lakes.

Your licence count is probably a ways off. BC had 345414 licences last year. They spread out over tons more water however. Our anglers are concentrated on fewer water bodies.

Spring...when does Spring come. Please let it be soon. The ice is soooo thick...it is going to take weeks longer to melt if we don't get a few good rains.

Cheers

Sun

I was stating an all round fishery (rivers/streams and lakes) and I'm sad to say yes to trout lakes but you'll have to PM me,,, and you know where they are and they aren't bonavista, et al... My stat was from an old afga write up that we got by belonging to the afga/agt club

If a Bow River ran through Edmonton, I doubt we'd be having this discussion.

And a late Spring makes for some stunning fishing

and anytime you edmontonians and the likes are passing thru cowtown, drop me a line and I'll send you some honeyholes on the Bow

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by GustavMahler

I was stating an all round fishery (rivers/streams and lakes) and I'm sad to say yes to trout lakes but you'll have to PM me,,, and you know where they are and they aren't bonavista, et al... My stat was from an old afga write up that we got by belonging to the afga/agt club

If a Bow River ran through Edmonton, I doubt we'd be having this discussion.

And a late Spring makes for some stunning fishing

and anytime you edmontonians and the likes are passing thru cowtown, drop me a line and I'll send you some honeyholes on the Bow

I'd keep those spots in your back pocket if I were you. Someone might be too lazy to fish them but not too lazy to tell other people about them.

I was under the impression that this "quality" fishery idea was more for the fellas down south. We have allot of good lakes up Edmonton way so it shouldn't be much of an issue here if someone wants to make the effort.

[Gust]

I'm not on my own computer right now and am a bit confused on this one, anyhooo,,,,

Alberta stats for 2010, still a pretty big number;

..... and 211,666 licensed anglers. With the addition of unlicensed senior and youth anglers, the total number is estimated at 287,511 anglers.

So this is about a 1 in 10 of total population, thereaboots?

My Dad has friends who took up fishing at retirement so the senior numbers are probably a lot higher

[Gust]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

I'd keep those spots in your back pocket if I were you. Someone might be too lazy to fish them but not too lazy to tell other people about them.

I was under the impression that this "quality" fishery idea was more for the fellas down south. We have allot of good lakes up Edmonton way so it shouldn't be much of an issue here if someone wants to make the effort.

Seriously, the fishing down this way is fine, takes a bit of work but they are here.

Do we need to create some more regs to keep the fishery strong? maybe at lake a but not lake b and maybe a little tweek to lake c.

I'm not sure whats up with upper or lower Kananaskis (haven't fished either in years) but from what I see on here, people are catching and releasing some stunning specimens,, like big'uns.

What is an unreasonable amount of time to travel for the fish? I don't know but right now I max at 2 hours as my Dad is my fishing partner and the days of longer road trips and hoofing are long gone. We have bigger than average dinkers to keep and an 1 hour away. Good challenging fishing 45 minutes away,, great challenging fishing 90 minutes away and all lakes and trout. Quality fish? Damn right!!!

I don't like the assumption that people who keep fish are hoarders and need education,, sometimes I keep fish other times I don't as goes for every fisherman I know.

Some fisheries have BIG FISH, and sometimes that big fish is 18" or 15" and sometimes 30",,, we know what to expect from the lakes we fish.

I'm done

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by trainerdave

Do any of you know if there would be the possibility of splitting some lakes with a geographical boundary? For example - Chain lakes; have the south 1/2 "open season" and the north 1/2 baitless c&r under 50cm. Now what do you think of that scenario or one like it...surely some big fish would survive without wandering - and would provide increased opportunities to everybody-including the "all fish are good small or not crowd",when they wander south.

The C&R 1/2 of the lake could act as a nursery with fish growth in mind while developing stock quality and perhaps an understanding by both sides.It does take time to grow big fish.
Stewardship.You want little stocked bows for you and the kids/etc. Sure. Fish south of point x. You want to tackle the big ones, catch and release. Let em go-let em grow.Sure.Fish north of point x.

Some big fish will go South due to the nature of fish movement and the fact that they will be allowed to develop to that size. The c&r people up north will still have little pests hitting their gear which they can release. Most of these eventually swim south to be kept anyway, as fish do move about. A few may develop in to very large fish and be caught and released several times within the north region before moving on. They would then be replaced by smaller ones-which have moved in to start the whole process up again.

Sort of a FISHTOPIA. Just food for thought- I know it seems simple but will get complicated in a hurry...D.

That's what's already happening in the lakes that I fish now, without the "quality" fishery regs. Not all of the fish that are stocked are caught on the same year as they are put in. Rainbows grow relatively fast and lakes do normally hold trout that are 2 or 3 years old. I know that 20" trout are in those lakes and I don't understand why bigger fish couldn't be in there.

You take a few eatin sized fish out if you're hungry and you put the 20" ones back. It's not that hard a concept to understand. Why people insist on only keeping the big fish is beyond me.

[tacklerunner]

I've been attempting to follow this thread. It's certainly is entertaining and informative. I'm by no means qualifed to comment on anything as I am unfamiliar with the history and stats you all are posting. However, I diligently practice conservation methods like proper fish handling and C&R etc.

My question is this:

We are some pretty hardcore sportsmen/women and anglers on this forum. I suspect many recreational anglers and the "average joe" and his or her family who get out now and then to some stocked trout waters in order to have the satisfaction of catching their dinner probably don't spend any time reading this forum or surfing fishing as a topic on the internet in general.

Do you outspoken posters who show great passion regarding this topic think that the results of the Poll might be skewed based on the nature of AO forum members who are voting?

Surely we must have a well above average amount of catch and release members on the forum proportionately as compared to the 200,000+ licensed anglers.

I could be wrong but am curious.

[Gust]

Originally Posted by tacklerunner

I've been attempting to follow this thread. It's certainly is entertaining and informative. I'm by no means qualifed to comment on anything as I am unfamiliar with the history and stats you all are posting. However, I diligently practice conservation methods like proper fish handling and C&R etc.

My question is this:

We are some pretty hardcore sportsmen/women and anglers on this forum. I suspect many recreational anglers and the "average joe" and his or her family who get out now and then to some stocked trout waters in order to have the satisfaction of catching their dinner probably don't spend any time reading this forum or surfing fishing as a topic on the internet in general.

Do you outspoken posters who show great passion regarding this topic think that the results of the Poll might be skewed based on the nature of AO forum members who are voting?

Surely we must have a well above average amount of catch and release members on the forum proportionately as compared to the 200,000+ licensed anglers.

I could be wrong but am curious.

I think you summed it up.

[Doc]

Originally Posted by Tosh

some lakes will be left as tiddler catch and kill?, so how many lakes do you propose to change?

Change "some" lakes to "most" lakes will be...
I honestly can't remember the percentage that SRD had given at the last round table meeting I attended a few years back, it was either 10% or 20% (Mr Anderson?) of all stocked lakes in the province will be targeted as quality lakes. Unfortunately, very few of those will be existing put and take trout lakes. There are so many lakes that only produce small trout and don't see much usage that could be turned into decent fisheries (like Chickakoo). When I was a young lad I used to catch 5lb brookies out of that lake on a regular basis and today you're lucky to see a trout get to 15 inches due to yearly winterkill. What an aerator alone could do for Chickakoo. There are just to many of these trout fisheries around, especially near major centers.

Originally Posted by Tosh

I am glad to hear you kids catch them on the fly...does it mean kids who digs up worms for bait arent as good?....NO. kids just dont care about this stuff,they are there for one reason only, to have fun and i think some adults could take a page from their book.

I think the point Sun was trying to make is in response to kids having fun fishing for little fish. The kids may have just as much fun catching bigger fish and almost as many with different techniques and set-ups.

Originally Posted by Tosh

this survey seems to me to be more about grown men who cant catch a 20'' fish than to improve the overall experience for everyone. maybe the problem is that you arent acually a very good fisherman?. There are days on the lake I get my butt kicked but not once do I think that its someone else's fault.

Or, maybe folks are just getting tired of catching a bazillion tiddlers all day? I know I get tired of it quick.

Originally Posted by Tosh

the proposal/poll just seems to me like i am getting railroaded by a used car salesman......want a answer but with very little information or facts to base it off of.

Want answers? Ask away.

[gl2]

Originally Posted by Doc

Change "some" lakes to "most" lakes will be...
I honestly can't remember the percentage that SRD had given at the last round table meeting I attended a few years back, it was either 10% or 20% (Mr Anderson?) of all stocked lakes in the province will be targeted as quality lakes. Unfortunately, very few of those will be existing put and take trout lakes. There are so many lakes that only produce small trout and don't see much usage that could be turned into decent fisheries (like Chickakoo). When I was a young lad I used to catch 5lb brookies out of that lake on a regular basis and today you're lucky to see a trout get to 15 inches due to yearly winterkill. What an aerator alone could do for Chickakoo. There are just to many of these trout fisheries around, especially near major centers.



I think the point Sun was trying to make is in response to kids having fun fishing for little fish. The kids may have just as much fun catching bigger fish and almost as many with different techniques and set-ups.



Or, maybe folks are just getting tired of catching a bazillion tiddlers all day? I know I get tired of it quick.



Want answers? Ask away.

okay.

what lakes will be choosn to have reg changes?
why were these lakes picked?
how long till they are self sustaining?and if they are will they be rules be relaxed after a large population of spawners is reached?
where are the fish that are being re located going? and why was this spot picked?
is there going to be special regs like no ice fishing?
has this worked before(more than 2 examples in alberta)?
has anybody surveyed the area around the changing areas about what the locals think (they might already be catching big fish and want you to leave it alone)?

i have more questions but have a feeling you cant answer all of these.

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by tacklerunner

My question is this:

We are some pretty hardcore sportsmen/women and anglers on this forum. I suspect many recreational anglers and the "average joe" and his or her family who get out now and then to some stocked trout waters in order to have the satisfaction of catching their dinner probably don't spend any time reading this forum or surfing fishing as a topic on the internet in general.

Do you outspoken posters who show great passion regarding this topic think that the results of the Poll might be skewed based on the nature of AO forum members who are voting?

Well of course they are skewed. I think that you already know that though and you'd just like to amuse yourself with the answers that you read.

[gl2]

Originally Posted by tacklerunner

I've been attempting to follow this thread. It's certainly is entertaining and informative. I'm by no means qualifed to comment on anything as I am unfamiliar with the history and stats you all are posting. However, I diligently practice conservation methods like proper fish handling and C&R etc.

My question is this:

We are some pretty hardcore sportsmen/women and anglers on this forum. I suspect many recreational anglers and the "average joe" and his or her family who get out now and then to some stocked trout waters in order to have the satisfaction of catching their dinner probably don't spend any time reading this forum or surfing fishing as a topic on the internet in general.

Do you outspoken posters who show great passion regarding this topic think that the results of the Poll might be skewed based on the nature of AO forum members who are voting?

Surely we must have a well above average amount of catch and release members on the forum proportionately as compared to the 200,000+ licensed anglers.

I could be wrong but am curious.

200 000+ licensed + 22 500 ao members = 218 votes on the poll.......lol

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by Tosh

200 000+ licensed + 22 500 ao members = 218 votes on the poll.......lol

Some of us didn't just fall off the turnip truck yesterday.

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by Doc

Or, maybe folks are just getting tired of catching a bazillion tiddlers all day? I know I get tired of it quick.

Get yer butt out of the city to a lake that that has bigger fish in it. What are you going to stock when you get tired of catching a bazillion big trout all day.....frickin killer whales?

[Doc]

Originally Posted by Tosh

okay.

what lakes will be choosn to have reg changes?
why were these lakes picked?
how long till they are self sustaining?and if they are will they be rules be relaxed after a large population of spawners is reached?
where are the fish that are being re located going? and why was this spot picked?
is there going to be special regs like no ice fishing?
has this worked before(more than 2 examples in alberta)?
has anybody surveyed the area around the changing areas about what the locals think (they might already be catching big fish and want you to leave it alone)?

i have more questions but have a feeling you cant answer all of these.

Almost all the lakes chosen will be either new bodies of water reclaimed like the pits up near Edson or lakes that currently had no sport fish in them like Muir. In some cases they have or will change the regs on an existing stocked lake but that comes from pressure from active anglers wanting a quality lake in their neck of the woods where none would exists otherwise (Beaver, Bullshead and Police Outpost).

Without an inlet or outflow none of these lakes will be self sustaining as trout can not spawn without moving water and even then you would need a stream with decent spawning habitat.

Not sure what you mean about being relocated.

Quality lakes will have special regs, some with no ice fishing, no bait, and size restrictions regarding retention. It all depends on what SRD feels is necessary for that fishery.

Muir Lake, Ironside Pond, Bullshead are three lakes and Beaver was doing well but SRD dropped the ball on that one and didn't alter the regs and it's stocking rates accordingly as it just became to popular.

Other than Muir & Bullshead where anglers had somewhat of a say, SRD is responsible for picking the lakes (possibly Police and Ironside as well).

[gl2]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

Get yer butt out of the city to a lake that that has bigger fish in it. What are you going to stock when you get tired of catching a bazillion big trout all day.....frickin killer whales?

maybe we could get demon fish like on river monsters here!!!!!! catch and release with a full bait ban of coarse........hahahahahahahaha

[gl2]

Originally Posted by Doc

Almost all the lakes chosen will be either new bodies of water reclaimed like the pits up near Edson or lakes that currently had no sport fish in them like Muir. In some cases they have or will change the regs on an existing stocked lake but that comes from pressure from active anglers wanting a quality lake in their neck of the woods where none would exists otherwise (Beaver, Bullshead and Police Outpost).

Without an inlet or outflow none of these lakes will be self sustaining as trout can not spawn without moving water and even then you would need a stream with decent spawning habitat.

Not sure what you mean about being relocated.

Quality lakes will have special regs, some with no ice fishing, no bait, and size restrictions regarding retention. It all depends on what SRD feels is necessary for that fishery.

Muir Lake, Ironside Pond, Bullshead are three lakes and Beaver was doing well but SRD dropped the ball on that one and didn't alter the regs and it's stocking rates accordingly as it just became to popular.

Other than Muir & Bullshead where anglers had somewhat of a say, SRD is responsible for picking the lakes (possibly Police and Ironside as well).

so none will be self sustaining? this is just for bigger stockers every year? sun said lakes need fewer stocked fish to let a percent of others grow bigger, so i assume if you reduce the number of fish stocked at lake x then you need to dump them in lake y?

no ice fishing??? how do you tell a guy with ice fishing gear sorry buddy no fishing we are trying to save the bigguns for all the fly fishers in the summer? I fly fish and even I know that is a load of bull ****.If thats the way then completly close a body of water, dont pick favorites.

i think if the srd did any homework at all they would not support changes like this.

[Speckle55]

Doc bring your C & R buds up to Maligne Lake in June u will have a Blast .. u will catch lots of 20 inch plus Brookies and Rainbows and will have that chance of catching your big fish .. and if you want to eat one, enjoy they are the best eating trout in the Province .. just remember you are in a high mountain lake in June be prepared for the worst weather and you will be ok!! man always tries to change Mother Nature/The Great Spirit/God's work why is that ?