Go Back   Alberta Outdoorsmen Forum > Main Category > Fishing Discussion

View Poll Results: What type of stillwater trout fishery would you prefer at your favourite lake?
C&R with the chance of catching trout up to 25" 112 42.75%
Limit of 1 under 18" with a good chance of fish over 22" 47 17.94%
Limit of 1 over 18" with a good chance of fish over 20" 38 14.50%
Limit of 3 any size with a good chance of fish over 16" 49 18.70%
Limit of 5 any size with a good chance of fish over 12" 16 6.11%
Voters: 262. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 02-23-2011, 03:15 PM
dragon dragon is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Leduc
Posts: 485
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1/2 oz Bucktail View Post
In regards to your poll. Do you think that by posting on a forum for avid hunters and fishermen you are effectively capturing the views of all of the users of Alberta's stocked waters? Yeah sure you have over 50% on this forum saying that they would value better quality fisheries but the people answering the poll may only account for 10% of the people fishing these lakes. So once again to reiterate what was said by a previous poster.... are better quality fisheries, ie trophy class trout ponds (that always makes me laugh) what the fishing masses want? Or is it the want of the few who choose to voice their opinion on a website that probably covers a very small demographic?

Just some thoughts.
statistics can make any lie look truthful.

your right that this may or may not be a fair representation of the population. What about people that want to use the lake for other activities. Do they have a say? I mean I really hate when fisherman park their boats an the calmest part of the lake when I want to go for a ski!
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 02-23-2011, 03:27 PM
chubbdarter's Avatar
chubbdarter chubbdarter is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: cowtown
Posts: 6,653
Default

im just guessing at this....but i think even if you put this poll up on the bait fridge at the tackle store or gas station those people wont vote either.
It a different mind-set. They are just so excited to grab some worms and snacks and get their families out fishing. Spend family time together and maybe see their kids catch fish.
Do we build soccer domes for avid soccer players headed to the pros...or for little johnny who just wants to kick a ball?
Fishing may or not be a obsession with them...heck it may be a one or two time event for them.....but im betting they are the vast majority fisherman counted as fishing days in Alberta
They probably dont even join forums.
In a democratic society is that right?...maybe not...like the saying goes if you dont vote dont whine.
The government looks at moneys spent in licenses to determine many things. If we lose this catagory of fisherman...how will it also impact the overall fishery funding?
Im not against you Bigtoad i hope you push thru a solution to get a big fish fishery and yet not impact the happy fisherman who enjoy it the way it is.
Simply put....i rather see a happy smiling child holding a 6inch fish over a 40 year old man posing with a 30inch fish.
Im curious if you dont mind.....what did you vote for on your own poll?
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 02-23-2011, 06:05 PM
DuckBrat's Avatar
DuckBrat DuckBrat is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,349
Default

More quality fisheries please. A point was brought up by someone earlier that he was unsure if a lot of our lakes can produce quality fisheries and that was why officials had decided to allow current regs (5 fish limits) to continue.

Historically in Alberta, lakes like Carson (Whitecourt), Hasse (Edmonton), Dickson Dam, Ashland Dam, and numerous other water bodies proved annually of the ability to pump out massive trout 30+ inchers (12 pounds). A combination of increasing fishing pressure and brailnless harvest has wiped out the possibility of seeing these fish sizes ever again. Take a fish or two for the pan but a stringer of 6" rainbows stocked an hour ago, WTF is that? Time to fix these trailer park regulations on a number of lakes and bring quality fisheries back to the province. Save some of the waters with the daily 5 fish for the lake rapers, bait tubbers/litter bugs, and bring back the good stuff to those lakes that have proven production as mentioned above. Manitoba went this route in the Parkland and now see 3-5 million dollars pumped into the local economy every season from fly fishing tourism. Pays for the aerators and the jobs.

http://www.flippr.ca/about_flippr/aboutflippr.htm

On a related note:

Who's choice was it to put the trout project on Muir anyway? With the water level dropped as much as it had at the time the project initiated, it was senseless waste of cash. Low water has stagnated and limited that fishery. Good intention bad location. Should have aerated Star lake and dropped some C&R there we'd be seeing 30" fish on a daily basis.


Oh by the way I'm a fisheries biologist.
__________________
Respecting the land, water, fish, and wildlife is what makes true hunters and fishermen.

Road hunting is not hunting.

Last edited by DuckBrat; 02-23-2011 at 06:28 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 02-23-2011, 06:22 PM
pipco pipco is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: edmonton
Posts: 504
Default

Hmm...some interesting comments and differing points of view. I'll throw my perspective in as well. I'm a C&R fisherman but have no problem with folks catching and keeping a few for the pan. If I was lucky enough to snag a few 10" plus perch on the fly I might consider a few for a meal.
In my younger days there were numerous family fishing trips when we caught and kept most everything and prevalent attitudes back then were that there would always be lots of fish left, which clearly wasn't the case when considering many collapsed walleye lakes. I've had my share of walleye and perch over the years and no longer feel the need to keep any. I've also eaten pothole trout in the past and did not enjoy it.
In the Edmonton area we're lucky enough to have one little lake that has some restrictions on it where you can get out, enjoy the fresh air and potentially catch a 26" rainbow. One the other hand there are a number of other trout lakes that are put and take. One that is no longer being stocked as it is been basically destroyed as a trout fishery by the illegal introduction of perch and pike. This is a different issue and has been discussed in many other threads. I'm perfectly fine with current regs on lakes that generally suffer from winter kill, though it would be awesome to have an aerator on Chickakoo. Again, topic for another thread. If we had maybe one more trout lake, Star for example that had some size and limit restrictions it may provide folks with an alternative to catching smaller fish.
Just my two cents.
stan
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 02-23-2011, 10:26 PM
Bigtoad's Avatar
Bigtoad Bigtoad is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 390
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1/2 oz Bucktail View Post
There is/are an amazing trout fishery(ies) in Alberta, well above what some would call mediocre where fish over 30 inches are common and no stocking or aeration is required.

What are these magical spaces that I speak of you say?

They are our western streams, creeks and rivers, where at the proper time and location any fisherperson (gear or fly) can tie into the badest mofo of the eastern slopes. Yup the bull trout.

Oh wait bulls are char and not trout. I gues my argument falls.
Ummmmm... I don't want to burst your bubble there 1/2 oz, but have a look at why these streams aren't mediocre:
- bull trout- total Catch and release
- cutties- many of our best waters, like the North Ram, are catch and release.
-browns- many of our best waters, like Prairie creek, are catch and release.

If it wasn't for catch and release, do you think you could still find a bull in Alberta bigger than 30"? Let's not kid ourselves.

Wouldn't the same reasoning work for stillwater fisheries in Alberta as well? Bonk less big fish= catch bigger fish on average.


And yes, you and Chubbdarter bring up good points that a poll on this website might not be totally indicative of the entire fishing population of Alberta. However, I think it's a pretty good sampling. You have elitist fly chuckers, bait huckers, weekend warriors, and probably a few guides that frequent this site. It seems like a pretty diverse sample group. I know if I go onto a flyfishing forum and posted this, the numbers would be even more skewed toward quality over quantity.

You can argue whatever you like about the stats, but I don't think you could argue that with 300 stocked lakes in Alberta with less than 10 of those having regulations that try to promote a quality fishery, that that is fulfilling the demand for quality fisheries in Alberta. 50 stocked lakes with special regs still wouldn't meet the need (or want?) of fishermen in Alberta who want the opportunity to catch big fish in a lake/pond.

I'm actually surprised how many Catch and release votes there are. I voted that way as well but really like the one under 18" option. However, with a one year old that, God willing, will love to fish, I understand those that would prefer to keep 3, which seems to be the next favourite answer.

Those that are voting for keeping 3 or 5, is it fishing with young children that are swaying you that way or do you really like keeping pan-fry sized trout? I really am interested to know the reasoning.

Cheers.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 02-23-2011, 10:52 PM
huntin'fool's Avatar
huntin'fool huntin'fool is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 821
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 1/2 oz Bucktail View Post
There is/are an amazing trout fishery(ies) in Alberta, well above what some would call mediocre where fish over 30 inches are common and no stocking or aeration is required.

What are these magical spaces that I speak of you say?

They are our western streams, creeks and rivers, where at the proper time and location any fisherperson (gear or fly) can tie into the badest mofo of the eastern slopes. Yup the bull trout.

Oh wait bulls are char and not trout. I gues my argument falls.

These fisheries can also be home to amazing grayling, bows (both native and introduced), whites (very underrated), cutts, introduced browns, brookies (the devil, the downfall of flowing water in the west).

Maybe we should focus money, management, and enforcement on our rivers and streams to ensure that we maintain healthy, viable populations of our beloved native fish species. The bulls, grayling, athabows and in some locations the cutties.

Geez Kyle,
If only we all had our own private fisheries where we could go down, sit below a set of beautiful waterfalls and catch the stupidist fish in the province with little to no skill....Hmmmm I guess access is kind of an issue for most normal people eh?

I'm actually really surprised that you don't see the validity of enhancing our stocking program to offer a wider range of opportunity to cater to a larger crowd. I also don't bother fishing at most socked trout lakes as the stocking rates are way too high and catching 30-40 9" trout in an evening just does not appeal to me. BUT that's just me - there are plenty of people out there who would be tickled pink to be able to catch 30-40 dinkers in an outing. I believe the gov't needs to accomodate the public in a broader fashion, not have to go and create our own freakin' lakes.

I love to fish and support conservation, but being able to take home an 18" trout and throw it on the bbQ with some butter/onions/seasoning is a beautiful thing, that's what we pay for. Albeit, a stocked fish, but I would rather kill a stocked fish than any fish in our streams in western alberta. But i'm sure a purist like yourself would not understand the barbaric need for the occasional protein boost of the pisces variety.

We were succesful last year with our lobbying and got three local lakes in the Hinton/Grande Cache changed to be "quality" fisheries. Bait ban, one trout limit over 40cm. This is what we want...now just need to adjust stocking rates to accomodate some better growth patterns. BUT GUESS WHAT????? There is still Grande Cache Lake, Victor Lake, 2 of 3 Pierre Grey Lakes, Kinky, Wildhorse, Jarvis pond, wildhorse 2, marygregg etc etc. in the immediate local vicinity. These lakes are very accesible to the general public and will cater the the vast majority of folks who enjoy catching lots of small trout. Perfect - both sides win.

Guys, seriously, lobby your local fish bio, even tell him to talk to the bio in Edson - he himself is an avid angler and understands this stuff. We will see some great trout fishing in the future yet, I'm hopeful.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 02-23-2011, 11:50 PM
HunterDave HunterDave is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Copperhead Road, Morinville
Posts: 19,290
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigtoad View Post
Those that are voting for keeping 3 or 5, is it fishing with young children that are swaying you that way or do you really like keeping pan-fry sized trout? I really am interested to know the reasoning.
Cheers.
I voted 3 up to 16" but only because that was the best choice for me of all the options presented. However, the way that the regs are now I have the option of keeping 5 fish bigger than that size if I wanted to. That would be my real choice.

I don't have any young kids but I do like to eat some of the fish that I catch. The size that I chose is the perfect eating size IMO. I'd eat one and put two in the freezer and when they were gone I'd go catch and keep 3 more.

If you want to catch a big fish, take a picture, measure and release it and then get a replica made to put on your wall, there are currently bodies of water where you can do that. Why would anyone want to change the current opportunities for other anglers just to make it easier for themselves to catch bigger fish? I don't get it?
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 02-24-2011, 12:42 AM
GaryF GaryF is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Calgary
Posts: 178
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HunterDave View Post
If you want to catch a big fish, take a picture, measure and release it and then get a replica made to put on your wall, there are currently bodies of water where you can do that.
Could you tell me where these places are pls?
__________________
Enjoying the peace and serenity of this wonderful sport!!
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 02-24-2011, 09:08 AM
Bigtoad's Avatar
Bigtoad Bigtoad is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 390
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HunterDave View Post
I voted 3 up to 16" but only because that was the best choice for me of all the options presented. However, the way that the regs are now I have the option of keeping 5 fish bigger than that size if I wanted to. That would be my real choice.
I think you misread the poll options. I was suggesting that if the limit was 3 fish of any size, that most fish in the lake would be less than 16". If you caught one bigger than that, you could still keep it. Heck, if you were lucky enough to catch 3 bigger than that, you could whack all 3!

Quote:
If you want to catch a big fish, take a picture, measure and release it and then get a replica made to put on your wall, there are currently bodies of water where you can do that. Why would anyone want to change the current opportunities for other anglers just to make it easier for themselves to catch bigger fish? I don't get it?
I totally agree with you about releasing big fish but I see changing the current "opportunities" a lot different from you HunterDave. I don't know a lot of waterbodies that have a 5 fish limit and have fish over 20". Swan Lake by Valleyview is one but overall size there seems to be going down as well and most likely will continue as fishing pressure increases. I know of one other lake that I won't mention that has a 5 fish limit and some lunkers but don't know of any others.

HunterDave, can you think of even 3 lakes (don't need to name them) out of the 300 stocked lakes that have:
1. a 5 fish limit
2. allow bait
3. are accessible (so within 100m of a road)
4. have some fishing pressure
that you can regularly (nearly every time you fish it) catch a trout larger than 20"?

I want the regs to change not so it is EASIER to catch big fish (although that would be a nice byproduct), I want them changed so that it is POSSIBLE to catch big fish. Big difference. I don't think you can have all 4 of the items I listed and still have a reasonable chance of catching big fish, regardless of how good a fishermen you are.

Some of the posters on here seem to feel that catching big trout in stocked lakes has more to do with superior fishing skill and that the regs aren't the issue, but the lack of fishing knowledge. I think that when you are allowed to take 5 fish out of a lake, that if there is ANY fishing pressure on that lake, you could be the Chuck Norris of fishing and won't be able to catch fish over 20" because someone beat you to it and bonked that fish when it was 12".

Cheers.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 02-24-2011, 09:16 AM
Bigtoad's Avatar
Bigtoad Bigtoad is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 390
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by huntin'fool View Post

We were succesful last year with our lobbying and got three local lakes in the Hinton/Grande Cache changed to be "quality" fisheries. Bait ban, one trout limit over 40cm. This is what we want...now just need to adjust stocking rates to accomodate some better growth patterns. BUT GUESS WHAT????? There is still Grande Cache Lake, Victor Lake, 2 of 3 Pierre Grey Lakes, Kinky, Wildhorse, Jarvis pond, wildhorse 2, marygregg etc etc. in the immediate local vicinity. These lakes are very accesible to the general public and will cater the the vast majority of folks who enjoy catching lots of small trout. Perfect - both sides win.

Guys, seriously, lobby your local fish bio, even tell him to talk to the bio in Edson - he himself is an avid angler and understands this stuff. We will see some great trout fishing in the future yet, I'm hopeful.
Huntin'Fool, would you mind sharing how you went about lobbying for more quality fisheries? You can even just PM if you want (or maybe start a new thread???) but I would love to know what it takes to actually see change and not just talk about it.

Cheers.
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 02-24-2011, 10:11 AM
Freedom55 Freedom55 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Perdue SK
Posts: 1,570
Default Fuget about it

Did you sleep through the long winded debate between someone from S.E. Calgary (the fellow with the private perch pond sans the oil company sponsored trip to the north coast) and several other forum members concerning a certain family lake in the eastern Rockies and the desire to petition SRD for changes to the regulations there? I did not see your ideas floated during that debate.

At first, and until I looked you up, I thought you were him singing the same song with a different title.

Over 300 posts in three threads of wasted bandspace related to a handful of fellas who were lobbying us to bend to his will to create a "quality" fishery. All of which I followed and kept copious notes on. More than half of those posts were made by the same urbanite who asked us to "...keep the debate in one place so he would have an easier time correcting us all...". Talk about elitism.

Alberta is known far and wide for the world-class trout fishery on the Bow downstream of Calgary, and for the big pike that are available almost anywhere. Not good enough for you?

Go north young man. You are close enough to world class char family angling to make your argument moot to those of us that must drive more than three hours to get to a spot that is not overwhelmed with latter day anglers who fish because Rapala says they should purchase all 2765 varieties/colors of their crankbaits. And even that might not be far enough.

Free (to say no)
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 02-24-2011, 11:21 AM
Bigtoad's Avatar
Bigtoad Bigtoad is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 390
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Freedom55 View Post
Did you sleep through the long winded debate between someone from S.E. Calgary (the fellow with the private perch pond sans the oil company sponsored trip to the north coast) and several other forum members concerning a certain family lake in the eastern Rockies and the desire to petition SRD for changes to the regulations there? I did not see your ideas floated during that debate.

At first, and until I looked you up, I thought you were him singing the same song with a different title.

Over 300 posts in three threads of wasted bandspace related to a handful of fellas who were lobbying us to bend to his will to create a "quality" fishery. All of which I followed and kept copious notes on. More than half of those posts were made by the same urbanite who asked us to "...keep the debate in one place so he would have an easier time correcting us all...". Talk about elitism.
I don't know what you're talking about nor do I see your point....I'm just a guy who wants an opportunity to catch a freaking trout over 20" in more than just 10 bodies of water scattered across the whole province and I wanted to see what the general consensus was out there. Seems I'm not alone.

Quote:
Alberta is known far and wide for the world-class trout fishery on the Bow downstream of Calgary, and for the big pike that are available almost anywhere.
Ummm... the only world class fisheries in this province are still world class because of 1 of 2 things:
1. They are remote and difficult to access = low fishing pressure
or
2. They have special regulations that limit harvest:
Trout - Bow river, Crow, Livingstone, North and South Ram, Prairie Creek, Oldman, etc, etc, etc.

Pike - the pike fishery in this province nearly collapsed because of over fishing. Walleye the same thing. Special regs had to be put in.

While Saskatchewan, Manitoba, and B.C. are trying to improve their fisheries, we let them get totally decimated before we do anything about them. If Alberta should be world-renowned for anything, it's for being reactive and not proactive when it comes to its fisheries.

You seem anti-regulations when it comes to stocked trout waters yet the world class fishing in Alberta only exists in places with special regs (or in isolation). You're contradicting yourself. Why can't we be known for a world class stillwater trout fishery (like Manitoba) as well?

Quote:
Not good enough for you?
Nope, not even close. Less than 10 stocked waters with special regs out of 300 stocked lakes is not good enough for me and it doesn't look like it's good enough for the vast majority of the people that are voting on this poll.

You can not have an accessible trout stream or lake in this province consistently produce fish over 20" without special regs. Prove me wrong.

Quote:
Go north young man. You are close enough to world class char family angling to make your argument moot to those of us that must drive more than three hours to get to a spot that is not overwhelmed with latter day anglers who fish because Rapala says they should purchase all 2765 varieties/colors of their crankbaits. And even that might not be far enough.

Free (to say no)
Sorry, you've lost me again... I don't know what you're talking about or what point you're trying to make. I'm slow... you might need to draw me a picture or something? Why am I driving North???

Cheers.

Last edited by Bigtoad; 02-24-2011 at 11:26 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 02-24-2011, 11:32 AM
HunterDave HunterDave is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Copperhead Road, Morinville
Posts: 19,290
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Freedom55 View Post
Did you sleep through the long winded debate between someone from S.E. Calgary (the fellow with the private perch pond sans the oil company sponsored trip to the north coast) and several other forum members concerning a certain family lake in the eastern Rockies and the desire to petition SRD for changes to the regulations there? I did not see your ideas floated during that debate.
You mean this one Freedom?

http://www.outdoorsmenforum.ca/showt...ght=kananaskis

Huntin'Fool, would you mind sharing how you went about lobbying for more quality fisheries? You can even just PM if you want (or maybe start a new thread???) but I would love to know what it takes to actually see change and not just talk about it.

Propose a resolution at your local Fish & Game club and if there is support for it they will take it to AFGA. If there is support for it at AFGA they will take it to SRD. I think that I mentioned it in the thread that I just posted the link for.

See, I'm not that heartless.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 02-24-2011, 12:12 PM
HunterDave HunterDave is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Copperhead Road, Morinville
Posts: 19,290
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigtoad View Post
HunterDave, can you think of even 3 lakes (don't need to name them) out of the 300 stocked lakes that have:
1. a 5 fish limit
2. allow bait
3. are accessible (so within 100m of a road)
4. have some fishing pressure
that you can regularly (nearly every time you fish it) catch a trout larger than 20"?
You don't need 3 lakes, you only need one that will fit that criteria. Allot of the bigger bodies of water that don't have a winter kill hold big fish. They aren't easy to catch like the smaller ones, but they are there. Maybe you'll catch one once out of a hundred times fishing there but that's what makes it exciting for me. Now if you replace that with knowing that you are going to catch a whopper every cast then, to me anyway, something is lost.

As far as mentioning accessibility, I would class that under "making it easier". If you want big fish then it'll take a little effort. Plan a Spring fishing trip and come up north for a week (assuming that you are down south where I think you are). That's what we do and we have a great time.

I've fished all over Canada and it's no big secret that the best fishing is in bodies of water that don't have easy access and don't have allot of fishing pressure. IMO That's because other anglers don't want to make the extra effort or spend the extra on gas to get to them. If you want to catch bigger fish easier and more often then you have to go out and get them (off of the beaten path) not try to bring the fish to you.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 02-24-2011, 12:36 PM
fishpro fishpro is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: NW Calgary
Posts: 1,047
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HunterDave View Post
You don't need 3 lakes, you only need one that will fit that criteria. Allot of the bigger bodies of water that don't have a winter kill hold big fish. They aren't easy to catch like the smaller ones, but they are there. Maybe you'll catch one once out of a hundred times fishing there but that's what makes it exciting for me. Now if you replace that with knowing that you are going to catch a whopper every cast then, to me anyway, something is lost.

As far as mentioning accessibility, I would class that under "making it easier". If you want big fish then it'll take a little effort. Plan a Spring fishing trip and come up north for a week (assuming that you are down south where I think you are). That's what we do and we have a great time.

I've fished all over Canada and it's no big secret that the best fishing is in bodies of water that don't have easy access and don't have allot of fishing pressure. IMO That's because other anglers don't want to make the extra effort or spend the extra on gas to get to them. If you want to catch bigger fish easier and more often then you have to go out and get them (off of the beaten path) not try to bring the fish to you.
Yes the best fishing is where the access is tough, but that same type of fishing could easily be achieved where access is easy with the proper regulations.

Also, you say that it's better if you only catch a whopper every 100 times out. So right now in the average lake that winter kills the average fish is 10 inches and rarely you get a fish in the 20-24 inch range and that random catch is what makes it exciting. Do you not think it would be exciting to have fishing that average 20 inches on every other cast and then once in a while you pull in a 32 inch monster? Many of our stocked lakes could produce fish like that, why not try and reach the full potential of our fisheries?
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 02-24-2011, 12:51 PM
NorthernAbGuy NorthernAbGuy is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 80
Default

What about a different spin on this idea? I travelled to Ontario last fall, and they have 2 different styles of fishing licences. One is the regular sportfishing licence, and the other is a conservation licence. There are different numbers of fish you are allowed to keep depending on the waterbody and the permit that you posess. The conservation licence is for the catch & release guy, and is a bit cheaper that the regular one. Just a thought.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 02-24-2011, 01:05 PM
HunterDave HunterDave is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Copperhead Road, Morinville
Posts: 19,290
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fishpro View Post
Do you not think it would be exciting to have fishing that average 20 inches on every other cast and then once in a while you pull in a 32 inch monster?
No, I wouldn't find that exciting/challenging at all. Nor would I find filling a dugout full of big trout and throwing a line in to catch them. What I find exciting is going out fishing knowing that there are big fish in the lake but it will take time, patience and persistence to catch them. Making it easier actually makes it less exciting for me.

It might be the hunter in me but I think that a big part of fishing is the "thrill of the chase" so to speak with everything that leads up to actually hooking a fish. If it's a biggin' it makes it that much more exciting, but not when you already know that it's going to be a big one.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 02-24-2011, 01:08 PM
Bigtoad's Avatar
Bigtoad Bigtoad is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 390
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HunterDave View Post
You don't need 3 lakes, you only need one that will fit that criteria. Allot of the bigger bodies of water that don't have a winter kill hold big fish. They aren't easy to catch like the smaller ones, but they are there. Maybe you'll catch one once out of a hundred times fishing there but that's what makes it exciting for me. Now if you replace that with knowing that you are going to catch a whopper every cast then, to me anyway, something is lost.

As far as mentioning accessibility, I would class that under "making it easier". If you want big fish then it'll take a little effort. Plan a Spring fishing trip and come up north for a week (assuming that you are down south where I think you are). That's what we do and we have a great time.

I've fished all over Canada and it's no big secret that the best fishing is in bodies of water that don't have easy access and don't have allot of fishing pressure. IMO That's because other anglers don't want to make the extra effort or spend the extra on gas to get to them. If you want to catch bigger fish easier and more often then you have to go out and get them (off of the beaten path) not try to bring the fish to you.
I'm totally with you here. I love strapping on the backpack and wearing some rubber of the soles to find good spots. However, I couldn't say it better than FishPro:

"Yes the best fishing is where the access is tough, but that same type of fishing could easily be achieved where access is easy with the proper regulations."

They're doing it in the Manitoba Parkland, we've got to be able to do it here.

Cheers.
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 02-24-2011, 01:09 PM
whitetail Junkie's Avatar
whitetail Junkie whitetail Junkie is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: AB
Posts: 6,637
Default

When I go out fishing it's to catch big Fish and bring something home for the dinner Table,catch and release ONLY is out of the question !!!!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 02-24-2011, 01:21 PM
fishpro fishpro is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: NW Calgary
Posts: 1,047
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HunterDave View Post
No, I wouldn't find that exciting/challenging at all. Nor would I find filling a dugout full of big trout and throwing a line in to catch them. What I find exciting is going out fishing knowing that there are big fish in the lake but it will take time, patience and persistence to catch them. Making it easier actually makes it less exciting for me.

It might be the hunter in me but I think that a big part of fishing is the "thrill of the chase" so to speak with everything that leads up to actually hooking a fish. If it's a biggin' it makes it that much more exciting, but not when you already know that it's going to be a big one.
Are you saying that a 20 inch trout is a big fish? In my opinion, a 20 inch trout is nothing spectacular, a 30 inch trout is. These could be the big fish that give the thrill of the hunt.
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 02-24-2011, 01:26 PM
fishpro fishpro is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: NW Calgary
Posts: 1,047
Default

I will also say that I love hiking into lakes for the chance at quality fish and solitude. I just think it would be nice to have some easily accessible lakes to just drive to and be able to catch numerous larger fish. However, I find it equally fun to be challenged and experience the thrill of hunting down a large trout - we are lucky to have some great fisheries for this, namely our spring creeks that are inhabited by large wary brown trout.

What I'm trying to say is there are many different things that can provide fishermen with enjoyment, or even provide one person with enjoyment. It would be nice to have a balance in our fisheries management that allowed sufficient access to all styles of fisheries.
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 02-24-2011, 02:16 PM
huntin'fool's Avatar
huntin'fool huntin'fool is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 821
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fishpro View Post

.......What I'm trying to say is there are many different things that can provide fishermen with enjoyment, or even provide one person with enjoyment. It would be nice to have a balance in our fisheries management that allowed sufficient access to all styles of fisheries.
Reiterated exactly my point in perhaps a more comprehensive manner. Thanks Fishpro.

And to those wondering how to get things changed??? GET INVOLVED. Become a member of your local fish and game club. Bring your matter to the table, if there is local support, they will forward it to AFGA. It is AFGA's job to bring these matters forward to SRD. They are our voice. That is why there are liaison positions for AFGA/SRD.

I have spoken to our bio on a couple of occasions and he has told me of fisheries "of the past" that have now been replaced by the overstocked put and take lakes that we're now unfortunately accustomed to. These lakes haven't just disappeared, only they have been made to accomodate only the majority---why not have fisheries that accomodate everyone? Even just 10% of our stocked trout lakes...that would be suffice...no????
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 02-24-2011, 04:28 PM
Heron Heron is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Sherwood Park
Posts: 221
Default

For the life of me I can not understand the resistance to delayed harvest and a slightly reduced retention.

These were my thoughts last time this came up...There needs to be WAY more delayed harvest waters. 293 stocked waters and 4 or 5 with delayed harvest is a joke. I would support 1/3 of all stocked waters going immediately to a delayed harvest. Since I am dreaming here and get to make up the rules lets start by making most of these delay harvest lakes at 3-16” fish for retention and perhaps 10 more lakes at 1- 20” retention. Not very far down the road that will put a lot more fish of decent eating size in frying pans if that is where you want them to go. That still leaves 198 lakes for the people who like to eat 9” fish. As acceptance and realization sets in, that could be changed later. How would this get enforced? More enforcement from dollars saved on stocking, and civic duty. I believe most people will follow the laws because it is their civic duty. Ya lots will break the rules but so what. Dollars saved can also perhaps go to larger fish being stocked and more diverse stocking. Why do I have to go to Saskatchewan to catch a tiger trout? More triploids anyone? Am I nuts?
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 02-24-2011, 08:02 PM
HunterDave HunterDave is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Copperhead Road, Morinville
Posts: 19,290
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigtoad View Post
I think you misread the poll options. I was suggesting that if the limit was 3 fish of any size, that most fish in the lake would be less than 16". If you caught one bigger than that, you could still keep it. Heck, if you were lucky enough to catch 3 bigger than that, you could whack all 3!
So, if most of the fish in the lake are 16" or smaller then some of the fish must be bigger than 16".........

In that case I'll change my vote from 3 - 16" fish to: "Limit of 5 any size with a good chance of fish over 12"." Assuming of course that the same applies to being able to catch fish bigger than 12" in that lake. If I'm hungry I'll catch a couple of 12" fish for the frying pan to eat right away. If not, I'll bring 5 bigger ones home to eat when I am hungry.
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 02-24-2011, 08:44 PM
DuckBrat's Avatar
DuckBrat DuckBrat is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,349
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HunterDave View Post

Huntin'Fool, would you mind sharing how you went about lobbying for more quality fisheries? You can even just PM if you want (or maybe start a new thread???) but I would love to know what it takes to actually see change and not just talk about it.

It takes work. First know your regs and study up on the area so that when you hit the next step you are knowledgeable and can make good points. When you have the info make the call to a local fisheries biologist ask relevant questions and make your point. Make a connection and make notes if your idea has legs this is the guy to get it going. Now take all the information you have gained and formulate a letter (and email) with the proposal. Address the letter to the minister of SRD, MLA for the area around the lake whose regs you are trying to change, your local MLA, the premiers office, and any applicable fisheries offices. Sell the idea with all the benefits from economics to environmental if your MLA can use your idea to look good feed off off that. It may take awhile for a response at this point but use this time to create a followup letter. Use the second letter to reiterate key points and bring up new info that will help your case. Start the phone calls from you and anyone who likes your idea. The more the wheel squeaks the more they will try and facilitate you. If possible this is where you try to make a connection and meet the people you are trying to convince visits to trade shows they are attending or drop by their office, you have to be persistent , patient, and charismatic. The bigger the following for your idea the better so if possible include media and communication specialists. It's not easy and you can expect the process to take about 7 months to up to 2 years. If your willing to take the time and effort these things can happen. You cannot let your initiatives slip under the carpet and if you feel they have it's time to send another letter and make another phone call. If you have made it to the end of this post then you may have what it takes to lobby for changes to our fisheries regulation. It can be done.
__________________
Respecting the land, water, fish, and wildlife is what makes true hunters and fishermen.

Road hunting is not hunting.
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 02-25-2011, 12:30 AM
Lazerloop Lazerloop is offline
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Ed's
Posts: 33
Default

Full out C&R !! or a 1 fish over 50cm like muir.
I would much rather go out fishing and catch some decent fish! Taking one or two while your out camping is good. But always limiting out on stocked trout gimme a break... If you want to eat fish go to the grocery store.
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 02-25-2011, 12:38 AM
HunterDave HunterDave is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Copperhead Road, Morinville
Posts: 19,290
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lazerloop View Post
If you want to eat fish go to the grocery store.
And if you want pictures of yourself with big fish then install photoshop in your computer and learn how to use it!
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 02-25-2011, 03:40 AM
Don Andersen Don Andersen is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Central Alberta
Posts: 1,793
Default

It's kind simple guys.

Sask does it, Manitoba does it, BC does it, private pond operators do it, even the Natives @ Morley do it.
What is it - raise fish to 8 lbs. and yet our SRd folks seem unable to to the same.

Curiously, all the lakes where I live did have 8 lbs. fish in them. They don't now.

Forget the Quality Lake thing - every lake in the Rocky Area was once a Quality Lake as defined by the Policy. Not any more - even the touted Quality Lakes are now decimated.

WHY!!!


Don
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 02-25-2011, 08:38 AM
DuckBrat's Avatar
DuckBrat DuckBrat is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,349
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Andersen View Post
It's kind simple guys.
WHY!!!


Don
Transient workers from the east who don't realize what effect there angling population has on our limited fisheries?
__________________
Respecting the land, water, fish, and wildlife is what makes true hunters and fishermen.

Road hunting is not hunting.
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 02-25-2011, 08:59 AM
Bigtoad's Avatar
Bigtoad Bigtoad is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 390
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Andersen View Post
It's kind simple guys.

Sask does it, Manitoba does it, BC does it, private pond operators do it, even the Natives @ Morley do it.
What is it - raise fish to 8 lbs. and yet our SRd folks seem unable to to the same.

Curiously, all the lakes where I live did have 8 lbs. fish in them. They don't now.

Forget the Quality Lake thing - every lake in the Rocky Area was once a Quality Lake as defined by the Policy. Not any more - even the touted Quality Lakes are now decimated.

WHY!!!


Don
This is why I really like the idea of one fish UNDER 18" (or 16" or 20" or whatever) for lakes that are dubbed "quality". (Don't worry HunterDave you can still instantly gratify yourself with five 10" fish at hundreds of other stocked ponds around the province).

One under 18" allows some harvest of pan-sized fish for those that would like to keep one but it keeps the big boys in there. Catch it, take a picture and quick measurement, give it a big smooch, and send it on it's way. You don't have to kill it to have a replica made and if you hold it WAY out during the picture you can make it look even bigger!

SRD also have to limit how many fish they are putting in. It's ironic really; they are underfunded yet waste time and money dumping way too many fish into lakes. I don't get it. They need to do us, and themselves a favour and lighten up the stocking on every lake that has an aerator. They could also do us another favour and make C&R or one under 18" at any lake with an aerator as well. My guess is that would still be under 10% of the stocked lakes in Alberta and allow all 5 of the guys on this poll who voted for 5 fish to still be able to have all of the tiddlers they want.

Cheers.
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 08:49 AM.


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