Go Back   Alberta Outdoorsmen Forum > Main Category > Fishing Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61  
Old 10-18-2017, 12:04 PM
huntsfurfish huntsfurfish is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Southern Alberta
Posts: 7,350
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bobalong View Post
Hard to compare angling now to the early 80's there was no GPS, no underwater cameras and almost no sonar. Most ice fishing holes were all drilled by hand, few if any ATV for traveling on the ice. Can't find the link now but I believe I read there were about 85K licensed anglers in 1982, now about 250K

In 1980 there were about 2 million people, now there are over 4 million. There were none or very few of the big 5th wheel trailers and boats and motors were fairly small limiting travel on the big water. There is more knowledge available to anglers on their home and other waters than ever before in history........hardly anyone ever gets skunked any more summer or winter. Rods, reels, line, cameras, lures, sonar, mapping, electric motors, ice huts, heaters, augers, all better improving efficiency.

Most all the improvements today since the early 80's have increased angler efficiency significantly and are all factors that have contributed to the decline of our fisheries. Not really news for anyone thats been around for a while, but something to think about.
True dat!
__________________
.
eat a snickers


made in Alberta__ born n raised.


FS-Tinfool hats by the roll.
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 10-18-2017, 12:04 PM
Kurt505 Kurt505 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Communist state
Posts: 13,245
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bobalong View Post
Hard to compare angling now to the early 80's there was no GPS, no underwater cameras and almost no sonar. Most ice fishing holes were all drilled by hand, few if any ATV for traveling on the ice. Can't find the link now but I believe I read there were about 85K licensed anglers in 1982, now about 250K

In 1980 there were about 2 million people, now there are over 4 million. There were none or very few of the big 5th wheel trailers and boats and motors were fairly small limiting travel on the big water. There is more knowledge available to anglers on their home and other waters than ever before in history........hardly anyone ever gets skunked any more summer or winter. Rods, reels, line, cameras, lures, sonar, mapping, electric motors, ice huts, heaters, augers, all better improving efficiency.

Most all the improvements today since the early 80's have increased angler efficiency significantly and are all factors that have contributed to the decline of our fisheries. Not really news for anyone thats been around for a while, but something to think about.

Never had a problem limiting out in the 80's, so a lower limit today would still mean less fish retained even if you can catch 100x more fish.

I think the number of licensed anglers in Alberta in the mid 80's was actually higher than today if I'm not mistaken??? I'm not positive but I think I read into that.
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 10-18-2017, 12:26 PM
Kurt505 Kurt505 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Communist state
Posts: 13,245
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by huntsfurfish View Post
Bet you kept your limit of huge perch each time you went out too.
So what if I did!!!

It's not your place to judge my legal activity so you had better smarten up.


OMG Kurt you really dont get it! Test netting once every 5 years versus every year or 2 costs money!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This is in part how they determine what to do!!!!!!!!!!! Throwing money cmon. Obviously it you arent clueing in.



Where's my money going? Why can other provinces have a fish management strategy that works? Do their licenses cost 5x that of ours? I don't need to hear the excuse that they don't have the fishing pressure we do because this is about balance, it's about sustaining a healthy fish population.

How much did it cost them to shut down the retention?

How long ago did they do that??

What have they done with the money since then???
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 10-18-2017, 12:31 PM
Brandonkop's Avatar
Brandonkop Brandonkop is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: BC/Alberta
Posts: 2,026
Default

Legal proceding occurs daily in Canada. Government is run by lawyers and judges, if you haven't noticed. To let a government policy go unchallenged when everyone sees a problem, just to avoid the legal pursuit, doesn't make sense to me.

It would sure help with accountability.



Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk
__________________

The Fishing Doctors Adventures - You May Watch More Than You Bargained For, haha!
https://www.youtube.com/TheFishingDoctorsAdventures
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 10-18-2017, 12:39 PM
SNAPFisher SNAPFisher is online now
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,439
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by huntsfurfish View Post
first fisheries collapses were walleye. Of coarse they worry about it. People pressured gov to fix it. They did. Few people showed concern about the other species till fairly recently. Walleye will continue to be a pretty high priority in this province because they are popular.
👏
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 10-18-2017, 12:53 PM
Kurt505 Kurt505 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Communist state
Posts: 13,245
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandonkop View Post
Legal proceding occurs daily in Canada. Government is run by lawyers and judges, if you haven't noticed. To let a government policy go unchallenged when everyone sees a problem, just to avoid the legal pursuit, doesn't make sense to me.

It would sure help with accountability.

Exactly!

Where is the accountability for the money we spend on conservation?
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 10-18-2017, 12:55 PM
SNAPFisher SNAPFisher is online now
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,439
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bobalong View Post
Hard to compare angling now to the early 80's there was no GPS, no underwater cameras and almost no sonar. Most ice fishing holes were all drilled by hand, few if any ATV for traveling on the ice. Can't find the link now but I believe I read there were about 85K licensed anglers in 1982, now about 250K

In 1980 there were about 2 million people, now there are over 4 million. There were none or very few of the big 5th wheel trailers and boats and motors were fairly small limiting travel on the big water. There is more knowledge available to anglers on their home and other waters than ever before in history........hardly anyone ever gets skunked any more summer or winter. Rods, reels, line, cameras, lures, sonar, mapping, electric motors, ice huts, heaters, augers, all better improving efficiency.

Most all the improvements today since the early 80's have increased angler efficiency significantly and are all factors that have contributed to the decline of our fisheries. Not really news for anyone thats been around for a while, but something to think about.
x10
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 10-18-2017, 01:57 PM
Walleyedude Walleyedude is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,702
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurt505 View Post
Exactly!

Where is the accountability for the money we spend on conservation?
If you actually think lawyers are the answer, then there's no hope for our fisheries...
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 10-18-2017, 01:58 PM
huntsfurfish huntsfurfish is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Southern Alberta
Posts: 7,350
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurt505 View Post
So what if I did!!!

It's not your place to judge my legal activity so you had better smarten up.


OMG Kurt you really dont get it! Test netting once every 5 years versus every year or 2 costs money!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This is in part how they determine what to do!!!!!!!!!!! Throwing money cmon. Obviously it you arent clueing in.



Where's my money going? Why can other provinces have a fish management strategy that works? Do their licenses cost 5x that of ours? I don't need to hear the excuse that they don't have the fishing pressure we do because this is about balance, it's about sustaining a healthy fish population.

How much did it cost them to shut down the retention?

How long ago did they do that??

What have they done with the money since then???
Face palm
__________________
.
eat a snickers


made in Alberta__ born n raised.


FS-Tinfool hats by the roll.

Last edited by huntsfurfish; 10-18-2017 at 02:16 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 10-18-2017, 02:00 PM
huntsfurfish huntsfurfish is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Southern Alberta
Posts: 7,350
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandonkop View Post
Legal proceding occurs daily in Canada. Government is run by lawyers and judges, if you haven't noticed. To let a government policy go unchallenged when everyone sees a problem, just to avoid the legal pursuit, doesn't make sense to me.

It would sure help with accountability.



Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk

Put money where I think its needed or I will sue you.

Money well spent. Next group sues because you got a change then the next and the next. Careful what you wish for.
__________________
.
eat a snickers


made in Alberta__ born n raised.


FS-Tinfool hats by the roll.
Reply With Quote
  #71  
Old 10-18-2017, 02:04 PM
huntsfurfish huntsfurfish is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Southern Alberta
Posts: 7,350
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Walleyedude View Post
If you actually think lawyers are the answer, then there's no hope for our fisheries...
Agree.
__________________
.
eat a snickers


made in Alberta__ born n raised.


FS-Tinfool hats by the roll.
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 10-18-2017, 02:18 PM
Kurt505 Kurt505 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Communist state
Posts: 13,245
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Walleyedude View Post
If you actually think lawyers are the answer, then there's no hope for our fisheries...
I didn't realize I had that much pull.....

I think you mean I f we keep up with the current plan our fisheries have no hope, because that is a fact.

Your handle says it all.

Save the walleye! Screw the rest! Nobody should be eating my playmates!


What you don't seem to realize is that there is more than one type of fisherman sharing the pond.

If the biologists are only getting paid to do netting once every 5 years, what are they doing the other 4 years? Playing ping pong?

Since that other guy can't answer my question, maybe you can?

How long has it been since they shut down retention?

What have they learned since then? Other than closing off retention of walleye has had a detrimental effect on sustaining a healthy balance of fish species in our lakes?

It's all wonderful if you're a walleye tournament fisherman I suppose, but what about the others?
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 10-18-2017, 02:21 PM
Kurt505 Kurt505 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Communist state
Posts: 13,245
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by huntsfurfish View Post
Face palm
That's about as much information as I suspected from you.

Glad you don't disappoint.
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 10-18-2017, 02:27 PM
huntsfurfish huntsfurfish is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Southern Alberta
Posts: 7,350
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurt505 View Post
I didn't realize I had that much pull.....

I think you mean I f we keep up with the current plan our fisheries have no hope, because that is a fact.

Your handle says it all.

Save the walleye! Screw the rest! Nobody should be eating my playmates!


What you don't seem to realize is that there is more than one type of fisherman sharing the pond.

If the biologists are only getting paid to do netting once every 5 years, what are they doing the other 4 years? Playing ping pong?

Since that other guy can't answer my question, maybe you can?

How long has it been since they shut down retention?

What have they learned since then? Other than closing off retention of walleye has had a detrimental effect on sustaining a healthy balance of fish species in our lakes?

It's all wonderful if you're a walleye tournament fisherman I suppose, but what about the others?
Nice to see you have learned nothing in this thread or the last 2 threads.

You want answers, but if you dont agree with them you seem to ignore them.

Each bio rotates the water bodies in their area. They each get test netted about once every 5 years. More testing requires more techs. Quite simple.


Coming up with suggestions and questions is easy. The rest is harder.
__________________
.
eat a snickers


made in Alberta__ born n raised.


FS-Tinfool hats by the roll.

Last edited by huntsfurfish; 10-18-2017 at 02:35 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 10-18-2017, 02:29 PM
huntsfurfish huntsfurfish is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Southern Alberta
Posts: 7,350
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurt505 View Post
That's about as much information as I suspected from you.

Glad you don't disappoint.
Where is your information? You seem to ignore what is said anyway.
__________________
.
eat a snickers


made in Alberta__ born n raised.


FS-Tinfool hats by the roll.
Reply With Quote
  #76  
Old 10-18-2017, 02:38 PM
Walleyedude Walleyedude is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,702
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurt505 View Post
I didn't realize I had that much pull.....

I think you mean I f we keep up with the current plan our fisheries have no hope, because that is a fact.

Your handle says it all.

Save the walleye! Screw the rest! Nobody should be eating my playmates!


What you don't seem to realize is that there is more than one type of fisherman sharing the pond.

If the biologists are only getting paid to do netting once every 5 years, what are they doing the other 4 years? Playing ping pong?

Since that other guy can't answer my question, maybe you can?

How long has it been since they shut down retention?

What have they learned since then? Other than closing off retention of walleye has had a detrimental effect on sustaining a healthy balance of fish species in our lakes?

It's all wonderful if you're a walleye tournament fisherman I suppose, but what about the others?
Kurt505,

I apologize for quoting your post in my response. That was not my intent. I merely meant to comment on the lunacy of thinking lawyers were the best solution to our fisheries management issues in general.

I have absolutely zero desire to engage with you in any conversation, and I will not respond any further, I learned my lesson the first time around.

In the future, please DO NOT put words in my mouth or attempt to speak for me or represent my position on the issue in any way.

Thanks.
Reply With Quote
  #77  
Old 10-18-2017, 02:50 PM
Kurt505 Kurt505 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Communist state
Posts: 13,245
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Walleyedude View Post

In the future, please DO NOT put words in my mouth or attempt to speak for me or represent my position on the issue in any way.

Thanks.
Ha, ironic.

It was because you misquoted me that I responded to you.

I was talking about accountability, you are the one who brought lawyers in the mix.
Reply With Quote
  #78  
Old 10-18-2017, 03:26 PM
bobalong bobalong is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,130
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurt505 View Post

Since that other guy can't answer my question, maybe you can?

I am not sure if this was directed at me but I will answer.


How long has it been since they shut down retention?
There was lots of discussion and anger when F/W started talking about making walleye catch and release only. Campgrounds were concerned that anglers would not come to their lake if they could not keep walleye, costing them big money.
I am only familiar with the lakes around Edmonton and to the north but walleye closures and big reductions I believe began in the mid 90's. Pigeon, Lac. St. Anne, Lac La Nonne, South Buck (min size) Pine.

What have they learned since then? Other than closing off retention of walleye has had a detrimental effect on sustaining a healthy balance of fish species in our lakes?
One of the things they have learned is that if people want to keep fish to eat and can't keep walleye, they will keep pike, perch whitefish etc.

They also learned that virtually stopping all stocking of walleye in Alberta from 1999 to 2006 did not help recovery........but it didn't cost them anything either.

The province of Alberta still stocks very few lakes in Alberta with walleye. In 2006 when I sat on the Fisheries Roundtable of Alberta they were spending about 6 million dollars a year on trout stocking and 200k on walleye, even though they admitted then that walleye was by far the most popular game fish. That was 11 years ago and even now not much has changed with regard to government planning, the Bios knew what needed to be done but were not given money to do it, in fact through some of those years their budgets were cut.

My observation over the past 50 years or so of fishing in this province is that sustaining fish in our province in the lakes close to a large city will take consistent and long term stocking of walleye, pike and perch. Imagine the improvement if they spent 6 million a year even now and every year for stocking these 3 species. That would be a commitment to our fisheries and the Alberta Government has not done that for decades, so they have a lot of catching up to do.
Reply With Quote
  #79  
Old 10-18-2017, 03:42 PM
Kurt505 Kurt505 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Communist state
Posts: 13,245
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bobalong View Post
I am not sure if this was directed at me but I will answer.


How long has it been since they shut down retention?
There was lots of discussion and anger when F/W started talking about making walleye catch and release only. Campgrounds were concerned that anglers would not come to their lake if they could not keep walleye, costing them big money.
I am only familiar with the lakes around Edmonton and to the north but walleye closures and big reductions I believe began in the mid 90's. Pigeon, Lac. St. Anne, Lac La Nonne, South Buck (min size) Pine.

What have they learned since then? Other than closing off retention of walleye has had a detrimental effect on sustaining a healthy balance of fish species in our lakes?
One of the things they have learned is that if people want to keep fish to eat and can't keep walleye, they will keep pike, perch whitefish etc.

They also learned that virtually stopping all stocking of walleye in Alberta from 1999 to 2006 did not help recovery........but it didn't cost them anything either.

The province of Alberta still stocks very few lakes in Alberta with walleye. In 2006 when I sat on the Fisheries Roundtable of Alberta they were spending about 6 million dollars a year on trout stocking and 200k on walleye, even though they admitted then that walleye was by far the most popular game fish. That was 11 years ago and even now not much has changed with regard to government planning, the Bios knew what needed to be done but were not given money to do it, in fact through some of those years their budgets were cut.

My observation over the past 50 years or so of fishing in this province is that sustaining fish in our province in the lakes close to a large city will take consistent and long term stocking of walleye, pike and perch. Imagine the improvement if they spent 6 million a year even now and every year for stocking these 3 species. That would be a commitment to our fisheries and the Alberta Government has not done that for decades, so they have a lot of catching up to do.
It wasn't directed at you Bob, but your response is much appreciated, educated, and makes a lot of sense.

You also inadvertently answered my question of where the money goes, and backed up both Brandon's and my position on it. We can keep throwing all the money we want towards conservation, but unless there is accountability for that money, it's not going to matter one bit. Some folks don't get it.

If people stopped buying fishing licenses I think they'd get the message.

Last edited by Kurt505; 10-18-2017 at 03:59 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #80  
Old 10-18-2017, 04:43 PM
huntsfurfish huntsfurfish is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Southern Alberta
Posts: 7,350
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Walleyedude View Post
Kurt505,

I apologize for quoting your post in my response. That was not my intent. I merely meant to comment on the lunacy of thinking lawyers were the best solution to our fisheries management issues in general.

I have absolutely zero desire to engage with you in any conversation, and I will not respond any further, I learned my lesson the first time around.

In the future, please DO NOT put words in my mouth or attempt to speak for me or represent my position on the issue in any way.

Thanks.
Smartest man on this thread so far.
__________________
.
eat a snickers


made in Alberta__ born n raised.


FS-Tinfool hats by the roll.
Reply With Quote
  #81  
Old 10-18-2017, 05:04 PM
Kurt505 Kurt505 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Communist state
Posts: 13,245
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by huntsfurfish View Post
Smartest man on this thread so far.

Ha! That's your answer? You keep slinging insults instead of information?



What do you have to say about Bobs post you arrogant..... member you. You keep yapping about throwing more money to the bios, when someone comes on here and tells you where that money isn't going and you still come on here with your cheap shots and no info?


You can't see past your own nose it's up so high!

85,000 licenses in 1980 say, 5 fish limit = 425,000 fish per limit, say they limit out 8 times per season = 3.5million fish.

300,000 licensed anglers today, 1 fish limit, = 300,000 fish, say they limit out 8 times per season, 2.4million fish.

Even with over 3x the amount of anglers it would still be over 1million less fish retained.

I don't expect you to understand there are other ways of creating a healthy, sustainable fish population other than thowing money out and hoping a zero retention will work, but I know there are a lot of people who do.
Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 10-18-2017, 05:25 PM
huntsfurfish huntsfurfish is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Southern Alberta
Posts: 7,350
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurt505 View Post
Ha! That's your answer? You keep slinging insults instead of information?



What do you have to say about Bobs post you arrogant..... member you. You keep yapping about throwing more money to the bios, when someone comes on here and tells you where that money isn't going and you still come on here with your cheap shots and no info?


You can't see past your own nose it's up so high!

85,000 licenses in 1980 say, 5 fish limit = 425,000 fish per limit, say they limit out 8 times per season = 3.5million fish.

300,000 licensed anglers today, 1 fish limit, = 300,000 fish, say they limit out 8 times per season, 2.4million fish.

Even with over 3x the amount of anglers it would still be over 1million less fish retained.

I don't expect you to understand there are other ways of creating a healthy, sustainable fish population other than thowing money out and hoping a zero retention will work, but I know there are a lot of people who do.
I dont know what to say anymore. Except Walleyedude was right.

PS/edit: sorry if I offended you.
__________________
.
eat a snickers


made in Alberta__ born n raised.


FS-Tinfool hats by the roll.

Last edited by huntsfurfish; 10-18-2017 at 05:32 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 10-18-2017, 08:21 PM
pikeman06 pikeman06 is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,615
Default

You can argue all you want boys but if you think all these walleye "factories" are a good thing or that it will lead to a healthy sustainable fishery you just don't know so don't try to tell us albertans that grew up and fished these lakes over the past 20 or 30 years that what we have now is good. Just because you pull out your boat twice a year and hammer the half starved and frozen minnow fed wallies like there's no tomorrow doesn't mean you are a fish catching machine. I miss the schools of little perch when you launched your boat and the little jackfish scooting out of the weeds when you pull up on shore. Those fish were the future and keeping a few perch or a pike or two made sense because the lake was alive with them. Tell me what you see now? Nothing. Wallies ate em all and they ain't coming back. Sheez done. Wabamum is the proof in the pudding. On a zero retention lake with no winter kill it's just like pigeon now. Can't blame that one on the anglers. I hope the natives net the be jeezus out it. Shame to see such a big fertile water body reduced to a toilet bowl full of look alike wallies starving to death.
Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old 10-18-2017, 08:50 PM
Kurt505 Kurt505 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Communist state
Posts: 13,245
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pikeman06 View Post
You can argue all you want boys but if you think all these walleye "factories" are a good thing or that it will lead to a healthy sustainable fishery you just don't know so don't try to tell us albertans that grew up and fished these lakes over the past 20 or 30 years that what we have now is good. Just because you pull out your boat twice a year and hammer the half starved and frozen minnow fed wallies like there's no tomorrow doesn't mean you are a fish catching machine. I miss the schools of little perch when you launched your boat and the little jackfish scooting out of the weeds when you pull up on shore. Those fish were the future and keeping a few perch or a pike or two made sense because the lake was alive with them. Tell me what you see now? Nothing. Wallies ate em all and they ain't coming back. Sheez done. Wabamum is the proof in the pudding. On a zero retention lake with no winter kill it's just like pigeon now. Can't blame that one on the anglers. I hope the natives net the be jeezus out it. Shame to see such a big fertile water body reduced to a toilet bowl full of look alike wallies starving to death.

Can I get an Amen!

Like I pointed out earlier, if they had set the retention limit to 1 per person per day and went with that for a while and see where that got them. If they didn't see an improvement in the first 3-5yrs, add a slot size to the lakes that weren't doing well and bump up the limit on the lakes that were doing good.

Nature is about balance, and if you create a man made imbalance and expect it to solve the problem, you're a fool. Predators need prey, and despite what some may think, prey needs the predators. Not only did Alberta create a man made imbalance on most lakes, they caused excessive angling pressure on the lakes they didn't screw up, in turn wrecking the lakes that prior to the big closures, had no problems.

What happens when people can't keep fish out of one lake? They go to one they can. The concept is rocket science to some, but fortunately not all. Open up retention with a slot size to start, and I bet you'll see lakes across Alberta start to improve. Sure, a 5 fish per person might have been a bit excessive, but a zero retention on walleye has been just as detrimental to the health of our lakes imo. Except for the people who like to catch and release 75 walleye a day without a care in the world for the rest of the game fish in the lake.

Do you think they'll have the budget to add a pike restocking program, or one for perch?



Not likely!!!
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old 10-18-2017, 09:53 PM
SNAPFisher SNAPFisher is online now
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,439
Default

Somewhat related to this topic but more so on rearing other types of fish than just walleye. Looks like Wisconsin puts a little more $$$ into stocking. Or at the very least a variety of species. Just a couple of the top of a quick search:

http://spoonerhatchery.com/how-we-grow-fish/

http://www.taallakehatchery.com/

Those are some big numbers of fish to feed muskies. We probably wouldn't have a enough prey fish left to feed them in AB

I wonder if the Cold Lake fish hatchery is or could be setup to handle pike and perch? I'm asking as I don't know. No doubt it could at least handle minnows and other smaller prey fish.
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old 10-19-2017, 12:06 AM
npauls's Avatar
npauls npauls is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Lethbridge, Alberta
Posts: 4,060
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurt505 View Post
It's all wonderful if you're a walleye tournament fisherman I suppose, but what about the others?
What you fail to realize is that if a lake/reservoir goes to a zero keep or tag system then walleye tournaments are no longer able to receive permits to have an event on that body of water. So closing a lake doesn't help tournament anglers at all.

Our province has the highest anglers per water capita in all of Canada and right up there for all of north America. A simple slot system just won't work like it does in other provinces and states. The retention rate is too high.

I agree that we need test netting done more often and for f&w to be proactive instead of reactive when it comes to the up and down fazes of our fisheries.

A good example of miss management is Chin reservoir in the south. There is major talks of shutting it down because of test net results from 8 YEARS AGO! That is how long it roughly takes a walleye to reach maturity. So there is a whole new crop of fish in that lake and 8 full spawning seasons since the last results but because those results from 8 years ago were bad they want to shut it down. A lot of the anglers in southern Alberta have known about this plan to shut down all the reservoirs in the south on a 5 year rotation.

If you ask around the south. Chin is one of the best if not the best year class fishery around. You can catch pretty much every year class pretty much every day out there. There are tons of reservoirs in way worse shape than chin but it is the next one up on the hit list that they have for an agenda.
Reply With Quote
  #87  
Old 10-19-2017, 12:52 AM
bobalong bobalong is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,130
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by npauls View Post
What you fail to realize is that if a lake/reservoir goes to a zero keep or tag system then walleye tournaments are no longer able to receive permits to have an event on that body of water. So closing a lake doesn't help tournament anglers at all.
With the exception of Pinehurst Lake it is a tag lake and still holds tournaments.
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old 10-19-2017, 02:00 AM
ROA ROA is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Under your stairs
Posts: 633
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pikeman06 View Post
You can argue all you want boys but if you think all these walleye "factories" are a good thing or that it will lead to a healthy sustainable fishery you just don't know so don't try to tell us albertans that grew up and fished these lakes over the past 20 or 30 years that what we have now is good. Just because you pull out your boat twice a year and hammer the half starved and frozen minnow fed wallies like there's no tomorrow doesn't mean you are a fish catching machine. I miss the schools of little perch when you launched your boat and the little jackfish scooting out of the weeds when you pull up on shore. Those fish were the future and keeping a few perch or a pike or two made sense because the lake was alive with them. Tell me what you see now? Nothing. Wallies ate em all and they ain't coming back. Sheez done. Wabamum is the proof in the pudding. On a zero retention lake with no winter kill it's just like pigeon now. Can't blame that one on the anglers. I hope the natives net the be jeezus out it. Shame to see such a big fertile water body reduced to a toilet bowl full of look alike wallies starving to death.



I would agree 30-40 years ago but not 10-20 years ago range for most lakes. The fact is by the 2000 (that was 17 years ago remember ). lots of lakes were fished out pretty bad and will never be what they were in the 70's and 80's. It's not just the walleye that kill all the other fish it's the crazy fishing pressure.

There is one lake in know of that has never came around on the numbers of walleye like most of the other lakes every one is talking about and the perch and pike fishing there is worse than ever. If it were loaded with walleye right now everyone would be blaming that but it not. It's loaded with every day of the week fisherman. The schools of 1000"s of perch I remember seeing are gone, all the little pike up in the reeds you speak of are gone and it's not because of the walleye as they never did come back. It's the thousands and thousands of fishing hours the lake sees.



Any one else remember when lakes like slave only had pike and we would catch no walleye? That lake is loaded with fish now, it went way over to the walleye side of things to the point you would hardly ever catch a pike. Now look at it it is staring to balance its self out and large pike are now being caught at a rate I have never seen. The kicker is that lake is still polluted with walleye and yet the trophy pike fishing has come around in the last 5 years suddenly. Why? I don't know but it could start happening in other lakes as well especially now the commercial fishing has been shut down. The story is not over, there is more going on than people understand and things will change.
Reply With Quote
  #89  
Old 10-19-2017, 07:07 AM
Kurt505 Kurt505 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Communist state
Posts: 13,245
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ROA View Post

Any one else remember when lakes like slave only had pike and we would catch no walleye? That lake is loaded with fish now, it went way over to the walleye side of things to the point you would hardly ever catch a pike. Now look at it it is staring to balance its self out and large pike are now being caught at a rate I have never seen. The kicker is that lake is still polluted with walleye and yet the trophy pike fishing has come around in the last 5 years suddenly. Why? I don't know but it could start happening in other lakes as well especially now the commercial fishing has been shut down. The story is not over, there is more going on than people understand and things will change.

Slave lake is, and has been open for general size limit retention all along.
What lake is it that you speak of that has collapsed?

npauls, thanks for that info, I didn't know that about tournament fishing.
Reply With Quote
  #90  
Old 10-19-2017, 08:03 AM
SNAPFisher SNAPFisher is online now
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,439
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by npauls View Post
What you fail to realize is that if a lake/reservoir goes to a zero keep or tag system then walleye tournaments are no longer able to receive permits to have an event on that body of water. So closing a lake doesn't help tournament anglers at all.

Our province has the highest anglers per water capita in all of Canada and right up there for all of north America. A simple slot system just won't work like it does in other provinces and states. The retention rate is too high.

I agree that we need test netting done more often and for f&w to be proactive instead of reactive when it comes to the up and down fazes of our fisheries.

A good example of miss management is Chin reservoir in the south. There is major talks of shutting it down because of test net results from 8 YEARS AGO! That is how long it roughly takes a walleye to reach maturity. So there is a whole new crop of fish in that lake and 8 full spawning seasons since the last results but because those results from 8 years ago were bad they want to shut it down. A lot of the anglers in southern Alberta have known about this plan to shut down all the reservoirs in the south on a 5 year rotation.

If you ask around the south. Chin is one of the best if not the best year class fishery around. You can catch pretty much every year class pretty much every day out there. There are tons of reservoirs in way worse shape than chin but it is the next one up on the hit list that they have for an agenda.
Interesting on tournament fishing. Great info on Chin and South as well. Thanks.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:53 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.