Go Back   Alberta Outdoorsmen Forum > Main Category > Fishing Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-22-2018, 09:25 AM
Gulo gulo Gulo gulo is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 60
Default 2018 fishing regs??

Hi all,
Just wondering when the new regs and walleye draw information is coming out?
Thanks in advance
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 03-22-2018, 09:59 AM
RavYak's Avatar
RavYak RavYak is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: West Edmonton
Posts: 5,174
Default

The new regs are usually out by mid march but I assume they had to modify them because of the late changes to the river closures.

Considering they take affect April 1st they should be made available soon at least online.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 03-23-2018, 07:54 AM
swampy45's Avatar
swampy45 swampy45 is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Spruce Grove
Posts: 368
Default

Really hope they get something sorted out quick. I've got a lot of plans to be fishing well into April.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 03-23-2018, 05:13 PM
fish99's Avatar
fish99 fish99 is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: pigeon lake
Posts: 1,570
Default

received email today from relm regs are up .
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 03-23-2018, 09:53 PM
huntsfurfish huntsfurfish is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Southern Alberta
Posts: 7,350
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fish99 View Post
received email today from relm regs are up .
License for 2018 available, but regs not up yet.
__________________
.
eat a snickers


made in Alberta__ born n raised.


FS-Tinfool hats by the roll.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 03-23-2018, 10:02 PM
Soiler's Avatar
Soiler Soiler is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Falun
Posts: 465
Default

They're out now.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 03-23-2018, 10:03 PM
calgarygringo calgarygringo is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: calgary
Posts: 3,005
Default

Their up //https://mywildalberta.ca/fishing/regulations/default.aspx
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 03-23-2018, 10:20 PM
huntsfurfish huntsfurfish is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Southern Alberta
Posts: 7,350
Default

I stand corrected, checked wrong site.
__________________
.
eat a snickers


made in Alberta__ born n raised.


FS-Tinfool hats by the roll.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 03-23-2018, 10:23 PM
Sea Hawk Sea Hawk is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 290
Default

Hard to make sense of that chart but looks to me that utikema and rock island are done for walleye.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 03-23-2018, 10:41 PM
DiabeticKripple's Avatar
DiabeticKripple DiabeticKripple is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Blackfalds
Posts: 6,935
Default

That new chart is stupid. Way harder to read.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 03-23-2018, 10:47 PM
huntsfurfish huntsfurfish is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Southern Alberta
Posts: 7,350
Default

Think they missed the South Saskatchewan River.

Done fer now, look again tomorrow.
__________________
.
eat a snickers


made in Alberta__ born n raised.


FS-Tinfool hats by the roll.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 03-23-2018, 10:47 PM
calgarygringo calgarygringo is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: calgary
Posts: 3,005
Default

Sorry guys better link now from my laptop phone sucked....https://mywildalberta.ca/fishing/reg...s/default.aspx
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 03-23-2018, 10:47 PM
huntsfurfish huntsfurfish is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Southern Alberta
Posts: 7,350
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DiabeticKripple View Post
That new chart is stupid. Way harder to read.
I like it.
__________________
.
eat a snickers


made in Alberta__ born n raised.


FS-Tinfool hats by the roll.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 03-23-2018, 10:53 PM
Sea Hawk Sea Hawk is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 290
Default

I think the new chart is crap.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 03-23-2018, 11:15 PM
coors04 coors04 is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 181
Default

Not a fan of the chat but I will get used to it. Not like I have a choice lol.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 03-23-2018, 11:56 PM
wind drift wind drift is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: YEG
Posts: 716
Default

I like the new format! Makes it waaay easier to see what fish species are present and find special regs.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 03-24-2018, 07:38 AM
Penner's Avatar
Penner Penner is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 2,100
Default

to the chart. Way easier to interpret IMHO. I also like that Pike are now getting as much attention as Walleye in terms of closures and limits in recent years.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 03-24-2018, 07:59 AM
pikeman06 pikeman06 is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,615
Default

Look out saskatchewan....here we come! Get those filleting knives sharpened up and the cast iron frying pan seasoned.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 03-24-2018, 08:26 AM
Pikebreath Pikebreath is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,257
Default

Regs haven't gotten any simpler, that is for sure,,,

Increased protection for pike may help some of the protected lakes recover and perhaps grow larger pike in the next few years ,,, but lakes with harvest will still likely see population declines as angling harvest pressure shifts towards the open waterbodies.

Varying minimum size limits between "open for harvest lakes" will likely increase angler confusion and non-compliance.

Overall, the prospect of reasonable opportunities to catch larger pike in more lakes in Alberta has me rather excited about the next few years and I have to applaud that , but I am concerned that we are going to be sacrificing other lakes to achieve this.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 03-24-2018, 08:49 AM
deschambault deschambault is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 385
Default

I am fine for protecting populations and changing regs over time but all of this work seems to be taking place from Central Alberta north. The Southern reservoirs (which are full of pike and walleye) are subject to a blanket zero retention. As such, I have to agree with the previous comment - head to Saskatchewan if you want to eat a fish. Can't F&W try some more innovative ideas between 3 over 63 and zero. How about rotating reservoirs with a limit of 1 in the specified reservoir and the others zero retention or issuing 10 tags with each license to be used on specified reservoirs at a rate of 1 per week. Try opening for retention of 1 fish 2 days per month. I find it amazing that on a body like Crawling Valley where the catch rate is about 1 per 10 minutes or less that there is absolutely no available harvest. And last year they dropped the number of class A tags for Newell in half. Sorry for the rant but its back to Tobin again.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 03-24-2018, 09:12 AM
Pikebreath Pikebreath is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,257
Default

A couple of good articles by DR Sullivan,,,, particularly The Carrot Hypothesis

Anglers pushing for slots should take note that slots with out restrictions on total harvest within the allowed slot likely will not work with Alberta's high angling pressure. The Amisk Lake experiment with slots certainly shows that,,, There are several other lakes where slots have been tried and results have been the same he could have mentioned as well (Fork Lake for one).
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 03-24-2018, 10:56 AM
Sundancefisher's Avatar
Sundancefisher Sundancefisher is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Calgary Perchdance
Posts: 18,776
Default

Lake whitefish and burbot limits are way too high.
__________________
It is not the most intellectual of the species that survives; it is not the strongest that survives; but the species that survives is the one that is able best to adapt and adjust to the changing environment in which it finds itself. Charles Darwin
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 03-24-2018, 11:58 AM
huntsfurfish huntsfurfish is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Southern Alberta
Posts: 7,350
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sundancefisher View Post
Lake whitefish and burbot limits are way too high.
Agree.

Should also note to anglers "a prussian carp no limit", keep all you want page.
__________________
.
eat a snickers


made in Alberta__ born n raised.


FS-Tinfool hats by the roll.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 03-24-2018, 12:15 PM
DiabeticKripple's Avatar
DiabeticKripple DiabeticKripple is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Blackfalds
Posts: 6,935
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by deschambault View Post
I am fine for protecting populations and changing regs over time but all of this work seems to be taking place from Central Alberta north. The Southern reservoirs (which are full of pike and walleye) are subject to a blanket zero retention. As such, I have to agree with the previous comment - head to Saskatchewan if you want to eat a fish. Can't F&W try some more innovative ideas between 3 over 63 and zero. How about rotating reservoirs with a limit of 1 in the specified reservoir and the others zero retention or issuing 10 tags with each license to be used on specified reservoirs at a rate of 1 per week. Try opening for retention of 1 fish 2 days per month. I find it amazing that on a body like Crawling Valley where the catch rate is about 1 per 10 minutes or less that there is absolutely no available harvest. And last year they dropped the number of class A tags for Newell in half. Sorry for the rant but its back to Tobin again.
Yes!

I have no problem catching 50+ walleye a night in the summer, of all sizes. From 6” to 28” in a night. At least put some tags on the southern reservoirs.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 03-24-2018, 01:01 PM
RavYak's Avatar
RavYak RavYak is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: West Edmonton
Posts: 5,174
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pikebreath View Post
A couple of good articles by DR Sullivan,,,, particularly The Carrot Hypothesis

Anglers pushing for slots should take note that slots with out restrictions on total harvest within the allowed slot likely will not work with Alberta's high angling pressure. The Amisk Lake experiment with slots certainly shows that,,, There are several other lakes where slots have been tried and results have been the same he could have mentioned as well (Fork Lake for one).
Of course slots with no limit within slot wouldnt work... That seems like a no brainer...

Just like when you ask bios about slots and they say they tried reverse slots in the past and they didnt work... Duh...

Slots have worked well on the lakes that they have tried it on. So what do they do about the slot limits working on those lakes? They changed it away from slots of course...

If its not broken change it... Must be one of fisheries mottos based on some of their decisions...
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 03-24-2018, 01:13 PM
huntsfurfish huntsfurfish is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Southern Alberta
Posts: 7,350
Default

......
__________________
.
eat a snickers


made in Alberta__ born n raised.


FS-Tinfool hats by the roll.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 03-24-2018, 02:08 PM
pinelakeperch's Avatar
pinelakeperch pinelakeperch is offline
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Alberta
Posts: 2,445
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by deschambault View Post
I am fine for protecting populations and changing regs over time but all of this work seems to be taking place from Central Alberta north. The Southern reservoirs (which are full of pike and walleye) are subject to a blanket zero retention. As such, I have to agree with the previous comment - head to Saskatchewan if you want to eat a fish. Can't F&W try some more innovative ideas between 3 over 63 and zero. How about rotating reservoirs with a limit of 1 in the specified reservoir and the others zero retention or issuing 10 tags with each license to be used on specified reservoirs at a rate of 1 per week. Try opening for retention of 1 fish 2 days per month. I find it amazing that on a body like Crawling Valley where the catch rate is about 1 per 10 minutes or less that there is absolutely no available harvest. And last year they dropped the number of class A tags for Newell in half. Sorry for the rant but its back to Tobin again.
No kidding. If I can catch 30 walleye from shore in an evening, I think the lake can spare a 16in walleye. Tags at a minimum.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 03-24-2018, 02:23 PM
Pikebreath Pikebreath is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,257
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RavYak View Post
Of course slots with no limit within slot wouldnt work... That seems like a no brainer...

Just like when you ask bios about slots and they say they tried reverse slots in the past and they didnt work... Duh...

Slots have worked well on the lakes that they have tried it on.
Please tell me which lakes had slots that worked?

Who said had no limit within them, there were still low daily limits applied, there just was no measures put in place to ensure that the overall harvest within the slot size was restricted to "X" number which is what tags can accomplish.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 03-24-2018, 02:50 PM
mulecrazy's Avatar
mulecrazy mulecrazy is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Drumheller
Posts: 2,666
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pikebreath View Post
Please tell me which lakes had slots that worked?

Who said had no limit within them, there were still low daily limits applied, there just was no measures put in place to ensure that the overall harvest within the slot size was restricted to "X" number which is what tags can accomplish.
you did.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 03-24-2018, 02:55 PM
RavYak's Avatar
RavYak RavYak is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: West Edmonton
Posts: 5,174
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pikebreath View Post
Please tell me which lakes had slots that worked?

Who said had no limit within them, there were still low daily limits applied, there just was no measures put in place to ensure that the overall harvest within the slot size was restricted to "X" number which is what tags can accomplish.
Calling and Spencer both have healthy populations covering numerous age classes due to slot limits in recent years. I cant wait to see the next netting data for Spencer now that they switched to minimum size instead of slot. It will probably be fairly obvious that slot was a better choice and that they should have left the regs alone.

I dont think as highly of the tag system as some others do. It has hurt a number of our lakes by wiping out competing species and simply put they dont have the data to micromanage these lakes properly especially on some of these more remote lakes they are starting/wanting to implement tags on.

I think it can be of value in our very high pressure lakes close to the cities like say Pigeon but that is all. Slot limits make more sense then minimum size limits on almost all other lakes yet our fisheries refuses to implement them and always comes up with crazy arguments as to why they dont work, most of which make zero sense.
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 04:22 AM.


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