Newel Pike limit

[davvoe]

just went over the fishing regs and saw that Lake Newel only has a limit of 1 pike over 63 cm. called fish and wildlife to check and see why, was told that due to pike numbers being low that this was the reason.... bunch of BS. let the netters take more ??? unbelievable. also changed the draws for walleye. whats your take on it?

[huntsfurfish]

1 over 63 not enough for you?

[Outcast]

i love it!

[npauls]

Newel gets hit really hard and tons of fish are taken out of there every year.

Good on them for trying to save a really good fun fishery.


Would you rather be able to keep 3 per person until the fishery has nothing left?

[davvoe]

No I have no problem with a 1 fish limit, but what gets me is us sport fisherman get cut back on limits but netting will still continue. Hopefully the powers that be will cut back on the netting of these same lakes.

[huntsfurfish]

You are sure thats the problem?

[huntsfurfish]

Dont think many commercial fishermen are very interested in getting much pike.

[hunted]

I fish Newell a lot and I can honestly say I have noticed a big decline over the past 5 years. I say good on them for trying something now before it is too late.

[npauls]

Originally Posted by huntsfurfish

Dont think many commercial fishermen are very interested in getting much pike.

Bingo!

The commercial guys are interested in whitefish. That is what makes them the money and from the reading I have done for the most part whitefish populations need to be kept in check or the other game fish will suffer.

[pikergolf]

Originally Posted by npauls

Bingo!

The commercial guys are interested in whitefish. That is what makes them the money and from the reading I have done for the most part whitefish populations need to be kept in check or the other game fish will suffer.

Have you got links to that? I've read that a few times on this board and find it hard to believe.

[Winch101]

Look at WC how many thousands of hours spent ....
And finally a pike worth talking about.

I know people who live in Brooks and only fish pike
Always get a few tween 25 and 30 ....last three years
Pretty dismal....Downright poor...

Could be creamed....or poached out.....or netted out
There has to be collateral damage from netting. Supposedly
F&W are there to monitor. But they still kill walleyes and pike.

Either way 1pike that big to eat is lots...

[davvoe]

So why not do like other provinces and keep fish under a certain slot size, why keep the bigger fish that are the spawners , I know Ontario you can catch 3 pike under slot size and allowed 1 over slot size, cant remember the slot sizes off hand, but have talked to many people out there and they cant understand why we keep the fish that are the spawners and release the small ones. They seem to have no problem with fish numbers, and I think it should be tried here as well.

[BeeGuy]

(facepalm)

[schmedlap]

Originally Posted by npauls

Bingo!

The commercial guys are interested in whitefish. That is what makes them the money and from the reading I have done for the most part whitefish populations need to be kept in check or the other game fish will suffer.

I find it rather hard to imagine how keeping whitefish populations down will help the predators for whom they are, from my experience, a rather significant food source. And I don't think whitefish compete, at all, for the same sources of sustenance (?). How does that theory work? Not being at all condescending - I really would be interested in the basis for that theory!
As to the limit, they should actually go a little further and make it a slot - 1 over 63 and under ___?___ (90?). There is no good reason for anyone to keep the really big old girls - leave the best genes and breeding stock in the lake. If not for those reasons, then only to allow the next fisher the opportunity to catch the beast again. There aren't many better thrills available in Alberta than doing battle with one of those (?).

[BeeGuy]

Originally Posted by schmedlap

I find it rather hard to imagine how keeping whitefish populations down will help the predators for whom they are, from my experience, a rather significant food source. And I don't think whitefish compete, at all, for the same sources of sustenance (?). How does that theory work? Not being at all condescending - I really would be interested in the basis for that theory!
As to the limit, they should actually go a little further and make it a slot - 1 over 63 and under ___?___ (90?). There is no good reason for anyone to keep the really big old girls - leave the best genes and breeding stock in the lake. If not for those reasons, then only to allow the next fisher the opportunity to catch the beast again. There aren't many better thrills available in Alberta than doing battle with one of those (?).

biomass and demographics for starters

ever catch a walleye with a 5lb whitefish in it's belly?

[Mutter87]

Originally Posted by davvoe

So why not do like other provinces and keep fish under a certain slot size, why keep the bigger fish that are the spawners , I know Ontario you can catch 3 pike under slot size and allowed 1 over slot size, cant remember the slot sizes off hand, but have talked to many people out there and they cant understand why we keep the fish that are the spawners and release the small ones. They seem to have no problem with fish numbers, and I think it should be tried here as well.

We don't have the lakes man. We have 900+ lakes/rivers/streams and Ontario has 250,000+. And no one makes you take home the pike, so spare me your crock o' caring shpiel. They put the size limit out and it is spawner fish only, so as the responsible fisherman you should throw it back. Pretty simple to understand. Want fish? Go to the market.

[npauls]

Originally Posted by davvoe

So why not do like other provinces and keep fish under a certain slot size, why keep the bigger fish that are the spawners , I know Ontario you can catch 3 pike under slot size and allowed 1 over slot size, cant remember the slot sizes off hand, but have talked to many people out there and they cant understand why we keep the fish that are the spawners and release the small ones. They seem to have no problem with fish numbers, and I think it should be tried here as well.

If you keep all the under size non spawners how are you suppose to have a spawn every year?

The way the regs are set up each fish has a chance to get at least one spawning season in before they are legal size to keep. If it wasn't like this you would have whole year classes missing which is terrible for a fishery.

As for how whitefish could ruin a fishery if not managed. If the whitefish populations get to big they will eat all the insects and a big percentage of the eggs from the spawn. Eventually the fishery will start to lose the forage fish which in turn would cause the predator population to drop off and eventually collapse.

[schmedlap]

Originally Posted by BeeGuy

biomass and demographics for starters

ever catch a walleye with a 5lb whitefish in it's belly?

Can't claim quite that, but I have caught, or seen cleaned, Pike with walleye or whitefish of pretty fair size (maybe 3 lb.) in their belly, particularly whites. I have seen a 17-18 lb. pike with a 5-6 lb. walleye in it's distended belly. As to biomass, whites do not, so far as I discern, compete for the same food at all.
They eat "tiny things", which is why you are not going to catch them, winter or summer, generally on large bait or lures (?). The biggest ones we have caught (6-7 pounds) were casting 1/16 or 1/32 oz. green jigs, with very light line and gear, in front of large schools of them cruising big algae/plankton blooms on the surface in August. Quietly laughing, at the time, at the near-by fishers who were casting their much larger cranks and metal at them. No chance unless you happen to "snag" one (?). You have to imitate a really big "plankton", or very small "bug" to get their attention. And then you have to execute a very "gentle" and patient retrieval to land them - they have relatively very soft mouths, and any "horsing" will result in losing the fish. And their bellies are full of a green morass of algae/plankton, with the odd small bug.
The way of all such nature is the food chain - beasts that eat the little stuff are the prime food for the top end predators. In most cases (?), Pike are the top end predators in these lakes. Whitefish are a prime food source for Pike. So how would reducing whitefish biomass (with the exception, of course, of a lake that was seriously overpopulated, such that they are eating themselves out of existence) possibly benefit Pike (or walleye, who also eat them)? I'm not a biologist, but .... common sense?

[Kyle]

Originally Posted by Winch101

Look at WC how many thousands of hours spent ....
And finally a pike worth talking about.

I don't think he is a very good gauge to how a fishery is doing. I am glad to see this new rule in effect. I wish they would make a slot size so the big girls live to see another day...but this is a step in the right direction.

Originally Posted by Mutter87

They put the size limit out and it is spawner fish only, so as the responsible fisherman you should throw it back. Pretty simple to understand. Want fish? Go to the market.

[huntsfurfish]

Large whites can and do eat spottail shiners. I have cought them on jigs with spottail shiners! They also feed on fish eggs. and other small fish.

[huntsfurfish]

Originally Posted by schmedlap

Can't claim quite that, but I have caught, or seen cleaned, Pike with walleye or whitefish of pretty fair size (maybe 3 lb.) in their belly, particularly whites. I have seen a 17-18 lb. pike with a 5-6 lb. walleye in it's distended belly. As to biomass, whites do not, so far as I discern, compete for the same food at all.
They eat "tiny things", which is why you are not going to catch them, winter or summer, generally on large bait or lures (?). The biggest ones we have caught (6-7 pounds) were casting 1/16 or 1/32 oz. green jigs, with very light line and gear, in front of large schools of them cruising big algae/plankton blooms on the surface in August. Quietly laughing, at the time, at the near-by fishers who were casting their much larger cranks and metal at them. No chance unless you happen to "snag" one (?). You have to imitate a really big "plankton", or very small "bug" to get their attention. And then you have to execute a very "gentle" and patient retrieval to land them - they have relatively very soft mouths, and any "horsing" will result in losing the fish. And their bellies are full of a green morass of algae/plankton, with the odd small bug.
The way of all such nature is the food chain - beasts that eat the little stuff are the prime food for the top end predators. In most cases (?), Pike are the top end predators in these lakes. Whitefish are a prime food source for Pike. So how would reducing whitefish biomass (with the exception, of course, of a lake that was seriously overpopulated, such that they are eating themselves out of existence) possibly benefit Pike (or walleye, who also eat them)? I'm not a biologist, but .... common sense?

In a nutshell, you dont need a large population of large whitefish. So you remove it.

[RavYak]

I often wonder why so many Alberta lakes you can only keep the larger fish. Most other places including Saskatchewan seem to be the opposite and want you to keep smaller ones.

To me and I am sure others it means that whenever I catch a big fish here I am keeping it because they are harder to come by and I like to eat fish and go home skunked more often then not. If I could keep 1-2 lbers then I would and would throw back any large fish so they can reproduce and become monsters.

Some lakes around Edmonton already have this type of situation in which very few fish are over the limit and soon as they are they are gone. I guess they have the limits set high enough as there still tends to be a fair amount of smaller fish in there as well though so maybe it is fine, imo it just knocks out the chances of catching trophy fish though.

[huntsfurfish]

This isnt Sask, or Ontario.

If you could keep 1 or 2 pounders there would eventually be none left.

[pikergolf]

Originally Posted by huntsfurfish

In a nutshell, you dont need a large population of large whitefish. So you remove it.

A very underutilized fishery, wish it got more attention from anglers.

[moose 2]

I think its a great idea that they put a 1 limit on. we need our fishing hole back , newell is great for perch fishing to if you know where to go

[BeeGuy]

Originally Posted by schmedlap

Can't claim quite that, but I have caught, or seen cleaned, Pike with walleye or whitefish of pretty fair size (maybe 3 lb.) in their belly, particularly whites. I have seen a 17-18 lb. pike with a 5-6 lb. walleye in it's distended belly. As to biomass, whites do not, so far as I discern, compete for the same food at all.
They eat "tiny things", which is why you are not going to catch them, winter or summer, generally on large bait or lures (?). The biggest ones we have caught (6-7 pounds) were casting 1/16 or 1/32 oz. green jigs, with very light line and gear, in front of large schools of them cruising big algae/plankton blooms on the surface in August. Quietly laughing, at the time, at the near-by fishers who were casting their much larger cranks and metal at them. No chance unless you happen to "snag" one (?). You have to imitate a really big "plankton", or very small "bug" to get their attention. And then you have to execute a very "gentle" and patient retrieval to land them - they have relatively very soft mouths, and any "horsing" will result in losing the fish. And their bellies are full of a green morass of algae/plankton, with the odd small bug.
The way of all such nature is the food chain - beasts that eat the little stuff are the prime food for the top end predators. In most cases (?), Pike are the top end predators in these lakes. Whitefish are a prime food source for Pike. So how would reducing whitefish biomass (with the exception, of course, of a lake that was seriously overpopulated, such that they are eating themselves out of existence) possibly benefit Pike (or walleye, who also eat them)? I'm not a biologist, but .... common sense?

white fish love to eat small fish. often it is their preferred forage. this puts them in direct competition with walleye and smaller pike.

most pike are not >15lb and are not eating large whitefish. they eat smaller whitefish which is a good reason to harvest the mature whitefish.

even the larger rockies we catch (15-18") will almost always have small fish in them. the last few had 3" lake trout, small burbot, and lots of sticklebacks.

huge populations of whitefish do indeed eat the little stuff which puts them in direct competition with juveniles of the 'top predators'.

only a small proportion of the top predators feed on mature whitefish.

mature whitefish do more harm through competition than the good they provide for a small number of large predatory fish.


You can find large pike and walleye in lakes with no whitefish at all.

[pikergolf]

Originally Posted by BeeGuy

white fish love to eat small fish. often it is their preferred forage. this puts them in direct competition with walleye and smaller pike.

most pike are not >15lb and are not eating large whitefish. they eat smaller whitefish which is a good reason to harvest the mature whitefish.

even the larger rockies we catch (15-18") will almost always have small fish in them. the last few had 3" lake trout, small burbot, and lots of sticklebacks.

huge populations of whitefish do indeed eat the little stuff which puts them in direct competition with juveniles of the 'top predators'.

only a small proportion of the top predators feed on mature whitefish.

mature whitefish do more harm through competition than the good they provide for a small number of large predatory fish.


You can find large pike and walleye in lakes with no whitefish at all.

Can you find large pike in lakes with no soft rayed fish? Ie ciscoe?

[BeeGuy]

A ciscoe is just a small white fish.

you can get large pike anywhere there is sufficient forage, preferably baitfish.

mature lake whites are not the preferred forage of anything that I can think of

I dont see how your question relates to the op or the off topic discussion about lake whitefish

[RavYak]

Originally Posted by huntsfurfish

This isnt Sask, or Ontario.

If you could keep 1 or 2 pounders there would eventually be none left.

Not so sure I agree. They would have to leave it for a while to allow more large fish to grow first though or yes both sizes would be fished out by changing quickly.

The ideology behind keeping smaller fish is that the large ones are left to breed so there are always eggs and new fish populating the lake. Said fish grow up until someone catches them or if they are smart/lucky they survive and start reproducing.

I don't know that some of these lakes have that much more fishing pressure then some similar lakes in Sask do and they seem to do fine. In fact with the huge difference in limits I wouldn't be surprised if there was actually greater fishing pressure on some Sask lakes.

[pikergolf]

Originally Posted by BeeGuy

A ciscoe is just a small white fish.

you can get large pike anywhere there is sufficient forage, preferably baitfish.

mature lake whites are not the preferred forage of anything that I can think of

I dont see how your question relates to the op or the off topic discussion about lake whitefish

It relates because I know ciscoe are whitefish. I know of a lake that has no whitefish but is full of perch. That lake hasn't given up a decent pike ever. I am not sold on the whitefish hurt pike line. Nobody has put anything but speculation on the table, if you have something it's already been asked for. The lakes that give up the biggest pike in Alberta all have whites.