Quality Trout Fisheries in Alberta

[Speckle55]

Gary
they are Ponds Not Lakes

The two you mention one is in Switzer park by 3 campgrounds and has to make the year so i do not fish it although they are catching 14 inches last week and there is some 5 lbers there or more last year.. but one Brown trout has some problems with what i never saw but i just talk to the angler 1 hr ago again may be touch to much and lost slime got infected had problem or a otter ..

Trout pond we look after the local club ... i don,t go there alot i leave it for them the local kids and single Mom/ familys ...they put a bigger size stock in them i think

they put hens in as they do down there too..

if a 12 inch is $5 what is a 5 to 8 # cost

..i understand the put them in your lakes(south) too most of them just don,t put many.. and don,t tell us where

[chubbdarter]

Originally Posted by ishootbambi

they are trying to satisfy the wants, needs and desires of the majority of the people in this province based on the information they have. it is a tough job and no matter what there will never be 100% approval.




going back 51 pages to the original question, bullshead is the fishery i am most familiar with and i can assure you that it is far and away the most poular lake in the south. on any given day i can yak with guys from as far away as emdonton, claresholm or sundre (that has happened). i can promise you they arent making the trip to keep 1 fish for supper. it would be great to see a few more of these lakes exist so guys dont have to travel so far to enjoy a good thing.

now if we could just get the damn big game guys on board and save a wmu here and there for some trophy quality animals rather than maxing tags so everyone can shoot a runt.........

I'd rather have heard they were incompetant or on extended holidays if i was trying to prove most albertans want a change in fishery management.

[SNAPFisher]

Originally Posted by Speckle55

if a 12 inch is $5 what is a 5 to 8 # cost

Ask and you shall receive:

2011 Rainbow Trout Prices
Size Weight Price Each
4-6 " 23 g $1.45
6-8" 55 g $1.95
8-10" 120 g $2.95
10-12" 250 g $3.95

Hey Dave, why waste the money on gas. You can visit the fish farm directly and pay only $1.45 for your tiddlers....

[ishootbambi]

Originally Posted by chubbdarter

I'd rather have heard they were incompetant or on extended holidays if i was trying to prove most albertans want a change in fishery management.

the poll proves that....i was just answering a question as honestly as i could.

[Speckle55]

bambi

i want your runts up here.. or even your sheds.. lmao.. my friends saw your deer and they peed their pants.. we do have nice elk though at Rock Lake.. Moose 220 just above

Huntsfurfish you have my bio right.. not sure .. and how u can repost private message to someone else?

[Speckle55]

Snap .. thanks for cost

talked to girl selling fish for trout ponds rainbow
Edmonton Sportsman show the Friday last week and she said the biggest was 12 " and $5 and that the would grow and average 1 inch per month in a dugout

[packhuntr]

Originally Posted by chubbdarter

Im not offended....rarely do i get to that emotion.

But heres a question.

The Government has a staff of highly 'book' smart guys and gals.
Everyone on the quality side claims a simple solution to repairing the fishery.
Most claim its financially benificial to adopt the plan to save money in stocking.
Im assuming that because everyone says...'it long over due...and...its about time, that it didnt take a genius fortune teller to predict this issue.

so my question is what have the highly educated trained professionals in the fisheries related fields been doing?

I remain JUST a fisherman.

Boy, why couldnt I say it so smoothly all these years! Thats how you debate, right off the top rope! Good job man! Now stop seeing things so clearly, your gonna cause some people to all get poopy bum

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by SNAPFisher

Hey Dave, why waste the money on gas. You can visit the fish farm directly and pay only $1.45 for your tiddlers....

Driving 3 kms to the Morinville Rez doesn't cost much to catch tiddlers. Right now they are a nice eatin size at about 12". That's the problem with the attitudes of allot of Alberta anglers.........They figure that if you catch/keep smaller eatin sized fish that you are somehow less of an angler. My opinion is the complete opposite in that anglers that only want to catch/keep big fish are the problem.

If you figure yourself to be better for only catching big fish at Muir Lake than a fella that fishes smaller fish at a regular stocked lake then good for you. I don't see it that way and I'll NEVER be ashamed of fishing for "tiddlers" if I want to eat some trout so you can forget about rubbing my nose in that! If I happen to catch a big trout then it goes back into the lake and all that I'm left with are 12" "tiddlers". What an absolutely frickin novel idea!

If I only want to keep bigger fish it's only about 30 kms to the Muir Lake fish farm. That's what it's designed for. YIPPEE...........everyone gets to catch big fish!

[Pudelpointer]

What have all the bios been doing Chub asked. Well, for one they are not just managing the put and take trout lakes, in fact, that is not their primary concern. Their primary concern is the health and status of our native fish stocks, such as Walleye, Pike, Whitefish, Bull Trout, Burbot, Sturgeon, etc., etc.

Stocked trout lakes are not a concern at all when it comes to biology or management: dump in fish, keep the meat fishermen out of the Walleye fisheries, no problems.

Under funded, under staffed, under paid. And you wonder why they aren't out trying to improve upon our meagre non-native trout fisheries? Seriously, are you expecting them to go out and make more work for themselves, work that they can not even handle now?

The SRD fisheries section in the Crowsnest Pass consists of 2 people. That's it: 2 people. The area they are responsible for goes from Waterton to High River (IIRC) and includes Alpine mountain lakes, freestone streams, forest lakes, tailwaters, large reservoirs and rivers. In the area there are at least 7 stocked trout lakes - none of which are managed under "quality" regulations.

And if a bio DARES to suggest a change to the regulations to provide for increased opportunities for larger fish, they get screamed at like I previously described!

No, I am sorry to say that the chances of a SRD Fisheries biologist suggesting or undertaking (without extensive encouragement from rank and file fishermen) "quality trout management" at a stocked trout lake in this province are somewhere between slim and none.

Chub, IIRC you just stated you are retired. Since you have a lot of free time on your hands now, how about helping out your local SRD fish biologist by volunteering some hours? I am sure there are a number of projects you could help them out with.... but then again you seem sure they are all just too busy sitting around shining their diplomas to need your help.

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

There is no secret that I worked as a biologist...however the lack of money...long hours (800 hours of unpaid overtime each year)...2 weeks vacation...16 hours days sometimes...out of the city 8 months of the year...almost dying on the job had fate altered the circumstances slightly at least 6 times...I changed careers to have a life and a family.

Interesting choice of words. You'd think that you would have said something like "I'm a biologist but I work in the oil field now." So what was your degree in and field of expertise?

[chubbdarter]

Originally Posted by Pudelpointer

What have all the bios been doing Chub asked. Well, for one they are not just managing the put and take trout lakes, in fact, that is not their primary concern. Their primary concern is the health and status of our native fish stocks, such as Walleye, Pike, Whitefish, Bull Trout, Burbot, Sturgeon, etc., etc.

Stocked trout lakes are not a concern at all when it comes to biology or management: dump in fish, keep the meat fishermen out of the Walleye fisheries, no problems.

Under funded, under staffed, under paid. And you wonder why they aren't out trying to improve upon our meagre non-native trout fisheries? Seriously, are you expecting them to go out and make more work for themselves, work that they can not even handle now?

The SRD fisheries section in the Crowsnest Pass consists of 2 people. That's it: 2 people. The area they are responsible for goes from Waterton to High River (IIRC) and includes Alpine mountain lakes, freestone streams, forest lakes, tailwaters, large reservoirs and rivers. In the area there are at least 7 stocked trout lakes - none of which are managed under "quality" regulations.

And if a bio DARES to suggest a change to the regulations to provide for increased opportunities for larger fish, they get screamed at like I previously described!

No, I am sorry to say that the chances of a SRD Fisheries biologist suggesting or undertaking (without extensive encouragement from rank and file fishermen) "quality trout management" at a stocked trout lake in this province are somewhere between slim and none.

Chub, IIRC you just stated you are retired. Since you have a lot of free time on your hands now, how about helping out your local SRD fish biologist by volunteering some hours? I am sure there are a number of projects you could help them out with.... but then again you seem sure they are all just too busy sitting around shining their diplomas to need your help.

because i was already told im JUST a fisherman

[QUOTE=huntsfurfish;883961]The point is I was curious, some sound very knowledgeble. Some educated in a related field others just dedicated fishermen.

You on the other hand publically took the time to buff your diploma in public........why dont you become a free expert for the fisheries
[QUOTE=Pudelpointer;883564]Interesting.

I am an environmental consultant (what does that even mean???).

What it means is I have an extensive background and wide ranging experience in wildlife, fisheries, habitat and ecology.

In fish-related-experience, I have worked in a number of ocean fisheries, including monitoring the sea urchin and krill (Euphausiid) fisheries on the Pacific Coast, assisted with research on Coastal Cutthroat Trout, salmonid enhancement projects, environmental monitoring and site restoration associated with logging activities.

I also do some work with invasive species and species at risk, but lately it has been meetings, meeting, meetings...

[chubbdarter]

what your admitting to me is they are over worked and under staffed.....yet you have no problems with them investigating the feasability of proposed quality lakes and then monitoring the lakes success.

Your concerned they will get yelled at and not be paid well enough, like your sincerely concerned...BUT....yet your all balls to the wind to add more to their work load with this purposal.

Or are you suggesting we not include the Gov. Bio's in the changes?

Your all snuggy and warm to critisize everyone on here when they dont support you or ask anything. Everyone brings up the Alberta card!!!!!
Well here's one for you....Im a Albertan too and I have ever right to ask what the fishery people are up to and why this has gotten to the point you suggest. Furthur more i have every right to ask that those same Bio's do extensive studies on the purposed quality lakes before and after they are developed.

To prevent some fisheries people from getting yelled at .....this purposal should be tabled till sucha time we have the staffing to undertake the mission.

Im leaving this thread again for a while......when the self appointed pats on the back stop...i'll return when both pots are the same color.

[packhuntr]

Originally Posted by Pudelpointer

What have all the bios been doing Chub asked. Well, for one they are not just managing the put and take trout lakes, in fact, that is not their primary concern. Their primary concern is the health and status of our native fish stocks, such as Walleye, Pike, Whitefish, Bull Trout, Burbot, Sturgeon, etc., etc.

Stocked trout lakes are not a concern at all when it comes to biology or management: dump in fish, keep the meat fishermen out of the Walleye fisheries, no problems.

Under funded, under staffed, under paid. And you wonder why they aren't out trying to improve upon our meagre non-native trout fisheries? Seriously, are you expecting them to go out and make more work for themselves, work that they can not even handle now?

The SRD fisheries section in the Crowsnest Pass consists of 2 people. That's it: 2 people. The area they are responsible for goes from Waterton to High River (IIRC) and includes Alpine mountain lakes, freestone streams, forest lakes, tailwaters, large reservoirs and rivers. In the area there are at least 7 stocked trout lakes - none of which are managed under "quality" regulations.

And if a bio DARES to suggest a change to the regulations to provide for increased opportunities for larger fish, they get screamed at like I previously described!

No, I am sorry to say that the chances of a SRD Fisheries biologist suggesting or undertaking (without extensive encouragement from rank and file fishermen) "quality trout management" at a stocked trout lake in this province are somewhere between slim and none.

Chub, IIRC you just stated you are retired. Since you have a lot of free time on your hands now, how about helping out your local SRD fish biologist by volunteering some hours? I am sure there are a number of projects you could help them out with.... but then again you seem sure they are all just too busy sitting around shining their diplomas to need your help.

Your top paragraph. If this is the primary concern, boy have some people dropped the ball, and on a very high level.

[Pudelpointer]

Originally Posted by packhuntr

Your top paragraph. If this is the primary concern, boy have some people dropped the ball, and on a very high level.

Abso-freekin-lutely. And it starts at the Minister and it ends at the Premier. SRD has been gutted in the last few years. I just get tired of hearing everyone ****ing on the bottom guys.

As for Chub, sorry buddy, but you are JUST a fisherman. I am also JUST a fisherman. Sun is JUST a fisherman, and so are the rest of you. What my background is means jack-s**t, what my job is means squat - unless of course I was a fisheries biologist for SRD. In this discussion we are all fishermen. Some of us have a work background in dealing with fisheries issues, some of us don't. Either way, my opinion is only as valid as yours. My single voice has no more weight then yours. It is called a democratic society.

You seem to have a complex Chub. No one is saying they are smarter or better then you - you have come to that conclusion all on your own. I am sorry you are so sensitive.

You are certainly correct in stating that you have every right to hold government officials to task for what they do. They do work for you and me, and almost every one that I have met has taken that role seriously. I just find it funny for you to ask sarcastic, rhetorical questions about people you do not appear to have taken the time to talk to, accusing them of not doing their jobs. Take the time to have a chat with your area bio, I am sure he will share with you all the projects they would LOVE TO DO, but have no budget or manpower for.

Stones. Glass houses.


It must be nap time.

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

Interesting choice of words. You'd think that you would have said something like "I'm a biologist but I work in the oil field now." So what was your degree in and field of expertise?

Zoology Degree.

Worked as a fisheries technician then moved up to fisheries biologist. I also did water quality work, a little air quality, mammal research for bighorn, caribou, deer, elk and moose...oh and a little archeology on the side.

I am happy you say I write interesting words.

Cheers

Sun

[chubbdarter]

Originally Posted by Pudelpointer

Abso-freekin-lutely. And it starts at the Minister and it ends at the Premier. SRD has been gutted in the last few years. I just get tired of hearing everyone ****ing on the bottom guys.

As for Chub, sorry buddy, but you are JUST a fisherman. I am also JUST a fisherman. Sun is JUST a fisherman, and so are the rest of you. What my background is means jack-s**t, what my job is means squat - unless of course I was a fisheries biologist for SRD. In this discussion we are all fishermen. Some of us have a work background in dealing with fisheries issues, some of us don't. Either way, my opinion is only as valid as yours. My single voice has no more weight then yours. It is called a democratic society.

You seem to have a complex Chub. No one is saying they are smarter or better then you - you have come to that conclusion all on your own. I am sorry you are so sensitive.

You are certainly correct in stating that you have every right to hold government officials to task for what they do. They do work for you and me, and almost every one that I have met has taken that role seriously. I just find it funny for you to ask sarcastic, rhetorical questions about people you do not appear to have taken the time to talk to, accusing them of not doing their jobs. Take the time to have a chat with your area bio, I am sure he will share with you all the projects they would LOVE TO DO, but have no budget or manpower for.

Stones. Glass houses.


It must be nap time.

hahhahahhahaahha lol bahahawa......thats too funny i had to reply.

i have a problem with people who add sparkle to them selfs
[QUOTE=Pudelpointer;883564]Interesting.

I am an environmental consultant (what does that even mean???).

What it means is I have an extensive background and wide ranging experience in wildlife, fisheries, habitat and ecology.

In fish-related-experience, I have worked in a number of ocean fisheries, including monitoring the sea urchin and krill (Euphausiid) fisheries on the Pacific Coast, assisted with research on Coastal Cutthroat Trout, salmonid enhancement projects, environmental monitoring and site restoration associated with logging activities.

I have no complex...i like being just a fisherman.....note i dont add sparkle by saying.....What it means is I have an extensive background and wide ranging experience.......hahhhhhahahaha......toot toot.....thats a complex!!!!!!.....i dont really care how much smarter you suggest you are. I only believe in awards and compliments given by others not the self appointed ones. p.s i didnt care when speckle called himself a master either.

i dont need to spend time with the alberta bio's to NOW know they failed in their duties....you and others have told me they failed the trout fisheries program and you want changes. Sorry im not sympathetic they get yelled at, if they cant handle the sand box take your pail and go home.

I want to know if your so concerned about the people getting yelled at why your proposing adding to their workload and their personal trama. lol hahahhhhhaaahahaahh...in your words....im sorry they are so sensitive.

Who is going to conduct the feasabilty studies...pre and post to every quality fishery?.....You because you have...extensive blah blah blah?

Im not in total disagreemet with the purposal....in fact ive come to see the facts of both sides and have loosened my opinion alot. Most have not budged.

I do have issue with purposals that are set forth like a kids christmas wish list.......THERE IS NO SANTA CLAUS!!!!!!!!..... therefore you best have a plan how to make the plan work. No one wants the elfs getting yelled at.

FACTS!!!!!!!!! PLANS!!!!!!!!!!

[Speckle55]

chubbdarter ... thanks for not caring that i called my self a Master Angler but i earn that in 1984 check the books AFGA ../.

check out post 691 and help your Bio out he may tweak that.. but it will take a weekend and a bit..

[chubbdarter]

Originally Posted by Speckle55

chubbdarter ... thanks for not caring that i called my self a Master Angler but i earn that in 1984 check the books AFGA ../.

check out post 619 and help your Bio out he may tweak that.. but it will take a weekend and a bit..

nah i believe you...thanks for telling us
p.s. a 20 year+ belated congrats

[gl2]

so nobody is going to be doing any studies on these changes? and if it is its gonna be one of those last minute friday afternoon things?. this plan just got better. i am no biologist and dont work with the goverment but if i cant\dont do my job properly then i get fired.....just saying thats how it works in the real world.

[Speckle55]

Originally Posted by chubbdarter

nah i believe you...thanks for telling us
p.s. a 20 year+ belated congrats

sorry chubbdarter.. i am dex 691 page 24

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by chubbdarter

i dont need to spend time with the alberta bio's to NOW know they failed in their duties....you and others have told me they failed the trout fisheries program and you want changes. Sorry im not sympathetic they get yelled at, if they cant handle the sand box take your pail and go home.

Howdy Chubby.

I respect your position. I would however note that most of the problems occurred by past fisheries custodians (ie biologists) and that slowly but surely there is a new paradigm in town. The old guard is leaving and new faces with new ideas tested in other places in Canada are coming into their own. They are also listening to fishermen versus to their own personal ideals of fishing. Regardless what HD says about the survey for Bullshead or Police...when in the past were any of us EVER consulted period. Never...until recently actual fishermen where in a take or leave it category. Now we are take it or change it...which for me is awesome!

The most important point to note is that fishing forums have given some direct insights into what people want. I am sure they don't make policy based upon it...but they do take notice and then they do the research and test the waters to see if they are meeting the expectations of the voting fishing public...cause it is US that pays their salary.

So to that regard...let's hope for some interesting and positive ideas...and hey...let's keep the dialog going on not just the topic of quality fisheries...but walleye, perch, cutts, bulls, tiger trout, splake, or what have you.

Let's hope they keep watching and motivated to make our fisheries the best it can be!

Cheers

Sun

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by Tosh

so nobody is going to be doing any studies on these changes? and if it is its gonna be one of those last minute friday afternoon things?. this plan just got better. i am no biologist and dont work with the goverment but if i cant\dont do my job properly then i get fired.....just saying thats how it works in the real world.

Not sure where you got this from...probably the same guy that told you the oilers would win?

LOL

Anyhow...who said F&W biologists don't review the data before making a decision. They reviewed it for Bullshead...it met the requirement and is a huge success. They did it for Police...it is looking good...fish should be becoming harvestable this year and their average size was going up. While they need the stocking rates reviewed...that is minor. Some locals and salivating at the sight of larger than average fish and want a feeding frenzy...some locals and looking forward to the best recreational fishery in the area.

What else it to come...2 trout limits and more quality fisheries in well thought out locations.

Cheers

Sun

[chubbdarter]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

Howdy Chubby.

I respect your position. I would however note that most of the problems occurred by past fisheries custodians (ie biologists) and that slowly but surely there is a new paradigm in town. The old guard is leaving and new faces with new ideas tested in other places in Canada are coming into their own. They are also listening to fishermen versus to their own personal ideals of fishing. Regardless what HD says about the survey for Bullshead or Police...when in the past were any of us EVER consulted period. Never...until recently actual fishermen where in a take or leave it category. Now we are take it or change it...which for me is awesome!

The most important point to note is that fishing forums have given some direct insights into what people want. I am sure they don't make policy based upon it...but they do take notice and then they do the research and test the waters to see if they are meeting the expectations of the voting fishing public...cause it is US that pays their salary.

So to that regard...let's hope for some interesting and positive ideas...and hey...let's keep the dialog going on not just the topic of quality fisheries...but walleye, perch, cutts, bulls, tiger trout, splake, or what have you.

Let's hope they keep watching and motivated to make our fisheries the best it can be!

Cheers

Sun

thanks Sun for a ray of hope...i was getting that hopeless feeling.
Its like everytime i say i want my own helicopter ....but i never find one in my price range on E-Bay and Santa never listens.

Sun how the heck do the Americans have such sucess with planting fish like Kokanee in all sorts of lakes....mountain, desert and prairie.

Mackinaws too.....they plant them everywhere.

Am i misguided that most fish need specific water to survive?

Travers is big and deep.............

[Speckle55]

Mackinaws ==== Lake Trout i think

[chubbdarter]

Originally Posted by Speckle55

Mackinaws ==== Lake Trout i think

i beleive they are the same...look identicle to me

[gl2]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

Not sure where you got this from...probably the same guy that told you the oilers would win?

LOL

Anyhow...who said F&W biologists don't review the data before making a decision. They reviewed it for Bullshead...it met the requirement and is a huge success. They did it for Police...it is looking good...fish should be becoming harvestable this year and their average size was going up. While they need the stocking rates reviewed...that is minor. Some locals and salivating at the sight of larger than average fish and want a feeding frenzy...some locals and looking forward to the best recreational fishery in the area.

What else it to come...2 trout limits and more quality fisheries in well thought out locations.

Cheers

Sun

lol. i really thought the oilers had that one in the bag, but i have been wrong before and i am sure it wont be the last.


i would expect studies done on any lake that is going to be changed well before changes are made but, our enviromental consultant said there is nobody with enough time.

[chubbdarter]

Originally Posted by Tosh

lol. i really thought the oilers had that one in the bag, but i have been wrong before and i am sure it wont be the last.


i would expect studies done on any lake that is going to be changed well before changes are made but, our enviromental consultant said there is nobody with enough time.

I will donate the Kleenex

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by chubbdarter

thanks Sun for a ray of hope...i was getting that hopeless feeling.
Its like every time i say i want my own helicopter ....but i never find one in my price range on E-Bay and Santa never listens.

Sun how the heck do the Americans have such success with planting fish like Kokanee in all sorts of lakes....mountain, desert and prairie.

Mackinaws too.....they plant them everywhere.

Am i misguided that most fish need specific water to survive?

Travers is big and deep.............

Fisheries departments everywhere have at one point or another gone on a stocking tangent they regretted. The stocking of lakers in various lakes that have bull trout and other sensitive species have cost them lots of time and money. Yellowstone Lake for instance.

As a result...you will find the current generally accepted practice North American wide of not stocking non natives unless sterile.

While I am an advocate for options of all sorts including fish species...they do have to be careful. Still...splake and tiger trout would be a great start to try...put em in some of the ruined rainbow trout put and take lakes with perch. Theory goes that they predate very well on them.

I wonder if the water that they put kokanee in have a place for them to spawn or if it is yearly stocking. That would be very expensive. A lake like Travers would not work. The Oldman Res would work but it is hard to say the impact on the native bulls. Given their size and the fact there are browns and rainbows there already...I would suspect the bull would eat kokanee if they could catch them. As filter feeder however...there is maybe not enough food for them.

They would probably do okay in Cold Lake. They stocked Coho in Cold Lake years ago but they obviously did not work.

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by Tosh

lol. i really thought the oilers had that one in the bag, but i have been wrong before and i am sure it wont be the last.


i would expect studies done on any lake that is going to be changed well before changes are made but, our enviromental consultant said there is nobody with enough time.

LOL...Flames have nothing in the bag...luck is needed now...not skill.

The work to be done involves mostly literature reviews on the lakes involved. Lots of work has been done on lots of water bodies in the Province...they just need to pull it together...not a huge job.

Data such as lake aerial size/surface area, depth, volume, winterkill/summerkill concerns/existing species/location/productivity etc. are all standard stuff.

I would say where F&W lacks staffing would be to studies each lake in the entire province regardless of species for an independent species review to see if any lake specific regulations are required. Then reviewed regularly for changes. That is time consuming and requires data gathering and there are not enough man hours to do it all. Hence...damage control as they come up.

[huntsfurfish]

Originally Posted by chubbdarter

thanks Sun for a ray of hope...i was getting that hopeless feeling.
Its like everytime i say i want my own helicopter ....but i never find one in my price range on E-Bay and Santa never listens.

Sun how the heck do the Americans have such sucess with planting fish like Kokanee in all sorts of lakes....mountain, desert and prairie.

Mackinaws too.....they plant them everywhere.

Am i misguided that most fish need specific water to survive?

Travers is big and deep.............

Yup, Americans have lots of sucess stories

Like snakehead and carp to name but a few

It appears that SRD is highly unlikely to add "non-residents" to the mix now, or anytime in the near future. That would include bass as well.