Quality Trout Fisheries in Alberta

[GaryF]

I actually really like the way Germany issues their fishing license. Its a required course on fishing and conservation and a test. We make everyone that wants to use a firearm do a course, drive a car, operate a boat, etc. Why not fishing?

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

Yeah, you're right. It's probably too hard to educate and change angler's attitudes so let's not do it. I know!!! Instead, let's make it easier to catch and keep big fish and really pound home the idea of keeping only bigger fish!

Being how your attitude is so easy to change...what ever made me think changing all of Alberta would be hard?

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

You feel that this poll could be inaccurate and that if all fishing Albertans were polled that 95% would be in favour of keeping the regulations exactly the same.

I think that it would be a much more realistic figure than the other way around. SRD knows this and that's why their policies reflect it.

Anything else is just a dream and not in touch with what the large majority of anglers in Alberta want.

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

I think that it would be a much more realistic figure than the other way around. SRD knows this and that's why their policies reflect it.

Anything else is just a dream and not in touch with what the large majority of anglers in Alberta want.

Now I know you are dreaming...

If you admit it and come into the light...it will be less stressful than hiding in the dark and being thrust kicking and screaming into the light.

Wake up Dave...wake up. Don't be scared...

[chubbdarter]

thanks Dave for calling the Mayor....my street is being cleaned right now

[Donkey Oatey]

Is it just me or does anyone else find the irony in this discussion? A few of you guys are getting your panties in a bunch about a non-sustaining population of introduced fish in to many "lakes" that are not natural and have no natural fish populations. If F&W did not stock these lakes there would be no fishing what so ever.

Sorry but I personally think more time, effort and study should be put in to saving our stocks of naturally occurring fish like pike, walleye, whites, perch, burbot, bull trout, browns, brookies etc...

[Gust]

Originally Posted by GaryF

I actually really like the way Germany issues their fishing license. Its a required course on fishing and conservation and a test. We make everyone that wants to use a firearm do a course, drive a car, operate a boat, etc. Why not fishing?

It was an optional class in my Calgary Junior High to take the AFGA course and it was near impossible to get into the class and it was hard. The other options were swimming, golf or shop.

But as far as quality trouting in or around Calgary, it takes a bit more than 90 minutes of driving, sometimes it takes 90 minutes of hiking in, part of the excitement. Some of the quality lakes are intermediate fishing and a "Quality" fish can be had but not at every outing (pending time of year, of course). I've been fishing here for the better part of 36 years (since I was 10) and have yet to have scratched the surface of some amazing fishing and am still amazed at those places that took as many hours of exploring as actual fishing.

Off-setting fishing techniques could be utilised to allow growth all the while allowing both groups to catch limit or C&R.

Lake's Group A are; lure and fly with a bait ban on even years, 2010, 2012, 2014 etc...

Lakes Group B are; lure and bait specific on even years, (i.e, maggot, worm, mealworm) not corn, velveeta, or powerbait. One hook per line.

on odd years the groups alternate the techniques.

Lakes Group C are; C&R only

Lakes Group D are; non-fishing until a designated date.

and so forth,,,

If staggered right, everybody from the drive-up and cast group through the hike-ins are happy.

Poaching would come down a chunk too as most poachers take the route of easiest fishing. (On a side note, what's with all the minnow fisherfolk at Carseland)

Last night, I had a hard time getting to sleep because of this very abstract debate,,, I thought, sheesh people in Edmonton don't reallly have the option for a "big" catch. So to deal with my insomnia, I brain-drafted the ultimate dugout with short run spawn gravel and holding areas for brookies and browns and bows and undercuts and pools and weed beds,,, but I don't play 6/49 so then I thought about a hostel for Alberta only fisherfolk from the Edmonton area and between who would like to fish the Bow/Sheep/Highwood without a dent to the wallet,,, so then I went back to the dugout.

I do know several people with considerable "pull" but I won't open the Rolodex (so to speak) until a really decent proposal be drafted, or the wording for an unbiased survey hammered out. If someone on here could create a series of roundtable discussion, that would be great. Right now, it seems we've got stuck on a linear thinking pattern of fishing person type.

great reading mind you,,,

[Heron]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

9 KIDS!!!!

Holy crap...when did you ever have time to learn fishing or even practice fishing...

na only two but I don't see the gov't. taking the time to know that. Even two has drastically cut my solo fishing which is why I like to bring them to close by quality fishing opportunities. I am more interested in this debate for them than me. I fished Carson in the 70s with my dad and grandfather. That was quality.

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by chubbdarter

thanks Dave for calling the Mayor....my street is being cleaned right now

I called my brother. He's in charge of all of the municipal affairs in Alberta. My other brother's in charge of everything federal and between the 3 of us we run this whole dammed province.

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by Heron

na only two but I don't see the gov't. taking the time to know that. Even two has drastically cut my solo fishing which is why I like to bring them to close by quality fishing opportunities. I am more interested in this debate for them than me. I fished Carson in the 70s with my dad and grandfather. That was quality.

I am back to fishing pretty good now that the kids are bigger. Today was very productive...stayed home...exercised and did my taxes... When the taxes frustrated me too much...I just read Dave's posts to give me a laugh and help me to relax.

Now I am going to try a bit of ice fishing!

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by Donkey Oatey

Is it just me or does anyone else find the irony in this discussion? A few of you guys are getting your panties in a bunch about a non-sustaining population of introduced fish in to many "lakes" that are not natural and have no natural fish populations. If F&W did not stock these lakes there would be no fishing what so ever.

Sorry but I personally think more time, effort and study should be put in to saving our stocks of naturally occurring fish like pike, walleye, whites, perch, burbot, bull trout, browns, brookies etc...

I think that allot of people are concerned about the natural species as well but I've never heard of someone wanting a "quality" fishery created for pike. Maybe that's the next thing that'll come up? However, it appears to me that pike and the likes are not considered as sexy as trout. I think that walleye are pretty sexy though.

[Speckle55]

Hey Guys/Gals Remember a lake is just like a field if you have only so much feed then your trout will only get so big if you want bigger fish you have to incease the productivty of lake by adding food for your plankton and zoology they are doing this in BC ..sceintific anglers is the way to look at certain lake's.. 1. does it have the History 2. is there potencial . 3. is the type of fish there the best for the food.. in most case's in Alberta there is little or no potencial.. so they are PUT and CATCH lakes ..ei Goverment puts in we catch No Potencial .. if you want Bigger Fish ask you goverment Fish and Wildlife Officals to Put in your lake of choice some Hen's and Male's(5 to 9 lbs) that are done the spawning process from the fish hatchery process .. Also look around the Province to see what spieces of fish do well in certain lake and areas.. do your History check ..Big Lake /Big River hold Big Fish(potencial) Are you fishing the type of fish you want big in the right area.. Alberta has a awsome fishery in the given area's its just we have such a little lake/river area when compared to other Provinces.. but hey I am just a Red Neck Albertan

[Heron]

Originally Posted by Speckle55

Hey Guys/Gals Remember a lake is just like a field if you have only so much feed then your trout will only get so big if you want bigger fish you have to incease the productivty of lake by adding food for your plankton and zoology they are doing this in BC ..sceintific anglers is the way to look at certain lake's.. 1. does it have the History 2. is there potencial . 3. is the type of fish there the best for the food.. in most case's in Alberta there is little or no potencial.. so they are PUT and CATCH lakes ..ei Goverment puts in we catch No Potencial .. if you want Bigger Fish ask you goverment Fish and Wildlife Officals to Put in your lake of choice some Hen's and Male's(5 to 9 lbs) that are done the spawning process from the fish hatchery process .. Also look around the Province to see what spieces of fish do well in certain lake and areas.. do your History check ..Big Lake /Big River hold Big Fish(potencial) Are you fishing the type of fish you want big in the right area.. Alberta has a awsome fishery in the given area's its just we have such a little lake/river area when compared to other Provinces.. but hey I am just a Red Neck Albertan

I think you are being pessimistic about the potential of our lakes. I have caught and seen enough large fish from many bodies of water within a two hour drive of Edmonton to believe the big ones would grow just fine if not bonked as a 9" fish. They are just few and far between. Forget future studies. I think the biologists in the regions know enough to try this in 1/3 of the lakes in their region. Why not try it? What is lost? Does it cost money to just change rules to delayed harvest? The whole province went barbless in a fail swoop! I could care less about trophies and truely like to catch fish of all sizes. I remain flabbergasted as to why there is resistance to delayed harvest.

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by Heron

I think you are being pessimistic about the potential of our lakes. I have caught and seen enough large fish from many bodies of water within a two hour drive of Edmonton to believe the big ones would grow just fine if not bonked as a 9" fish. They are just few and far between. Forget future studies. I think the biologists in the regions know enough to try this in 1/3 of the lakes in their region. Why not try it? What is lost? Does it cost money to just change rules to delayed harvest? The whole province went barbless in a fail swoop! I could care less about trophies and truely like to catch fish of all sizes. I remain flabbergasted as to why there is resistance to delayed harvest.

Don't fret...only a small percentage voted for status quo. The balance all want something better.

While there is a vocal few proclaiming their consternation...the argument of...I have always loved a high limit and therefore I deserve it over all else is not long for this world.

[chubbdarter]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

Don't fret...only a small percentage voted for status quo. The balance all want something better.

While there is a vocal few proclaiming their consternation...the argument of...I have always loved a high limit and therefore I deserve it over all else is not long for this world.

LOL
you keep telling us that.....
your gonna wear out the wheels on this plane on the tar mac before it flys...vroom vroom.
You know how the NDP can promise a chicken in every pot..knowing they never have to deliver.....hahahaaahhahha
p.s. i voted for Catch and Release

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by chubbdarter

LOL
you keep telling us that.....
your gonna wear out the wheels on this plane on the tar mac before it flys...vroom vroom.
You know how the NDP can promise a chicken in every pot..knowing they never have to deliver.....hahahaaahhahha
p.s. i voted for Catch and Release

You had reasonable points in your posts. Time will tell as to whether anything moves along the lines proposed by various comments.

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by Speckle55

Hey Guys/Gals Remember a lake is just like a field if you have only so much feed then your trout will only get so big if you want bigger fish you have to incease the productivty of lake by adding food for your plankton and zoology they are doing this in BC ..sceintific anglers is the way to look at certain lake's.. 1. does it have the History 2. is there potencial . 3. is the type of fish there the best for the food.. in most case's in Alberta there is little or no potencial.. so they are PUT and CATCH lakes ..ei Goverment puts in we catch No Potencial .. if you want Bigger Fish ask you goverment Fish and Wildlife Officals to Put in your lake of choice some Hen's and Male's(5 to 9 lbs) that are done the spawning process from the fish hatchery process .. Also look around the Province to see what spieces of fish do well in certain lake and areas.. do your History check ..Big Lake /Big River hold Big Fish(potencial) Are you fishing the type of fish you want big in the right area.. Alberta has a awsome fishery in the given area's its just we have such a little lake/river area when compared to other Provinces.. but hey I am just a Red Neck Albertan

Sure speckle.......bring common sense into it. Kinda like putting 1000 head of cattle on a quarter of land for the summer isn't it?

Just take a look at the Muir Lake "quality" fishery experiment. The rocket chemists got together and decided to create a "quality" lake there because SRD would let them have it and not because it was the right lake to do it in. It was a dead lake anyway and not worth stocking it so why not? It's an 80 acre slew that they are now trying to grow trophy sized fish in. Now I'm no fish doctor but I can pretty much figure out that it'll take more than a couple of aerators in a slew to keep any amount of reasonable sized fish alive in there let alone a large number of big ones.

Now that Muir Lake has failed to live up to expectations, the people that supported creating it in the first place are all pointing fingers to place the blame on why it didn't work. It's SRD fault for putting too many stocked fish in there, yada, yada, yada. We all know what the reality is though.....HEELLLOOO!

Muir Lake likely won't be shut down because it was a dead lake in the first place but there is currently a resolution to close down the "quality" fishery at Police Lake. Pro "quality" fishery fellas even openly admit that they don't consider 15 of the 17 "quality" trout fisheries in Alberta "quality" fisheries! So what's the solution they say......create more "quality" lakes.

Be happy that you're an Alberta Redneck because we're in the majority when it comes to giving up our lakes so a bunch of city fellas can try to make it easy for themselves to catch big fish.

BTW Great "outside the box" idea about putting in the big fish that are already grown to that size.

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

Sure speckle.......bring common sense into it. Kinda like putting 1000 head of cattle on a quarter of land for the summer isn't it?

Just take a look at the Muir Lake "quality" fishery experiment. The rocket chemists got together and decided to create a "quality" lake there because SRD would let them have it and not because it was the right lake to do it in. It was a dead lake anyway and not worth stocking it so why not? It's an 80 acre slew that they are now trying to grow trophy sized fish in. Now I'm no fish doctor but I can pretty much figure out that it'll take more than a couple of aerators in a slew to keep any amount of reasonable sized fish alive in there let alone a large number of big ones.

Now that Muir Lake has failed to live up to expectations, the people that supported creating it in the first place are all pointing fingers to place the blame on why it didn't work. It's SRD fault for putting too many stocked fish in there, yada, yada, yada. We all know what the reality is though.....HEELLLOOO!

Muir Lake likely won't be shut down because it was a dead lake in the first place but there is currently a resolution to close down the "quality" fishery at Police Lake. Pro "quality" fishery fellas even openly admit that they don't consider 15 of the 17 "quality" trout fisheries in Alberta "quality" fisheries! So what's the solution they say......create more "quality" lakes.

Be happy that you're an Alberta Redneck because we're in the majority when it comes to giving up our lakes so a bunch of city fellas can try to make it easy for themselves to catch big fish.

BTW Great "outside the box" idea about putting in the big fish that are already grown to that size.

Lots more hot air from Dave...but no facts.

Dave's idea of making a change is only if it works perfectly...immediately and not requiring any tweaking is hardly how anything is learned or improved. Dave...you should be an inventor. All your ideas must be perfect genius each time.

Obviously with the lack of experience starting these up here in Alberta there should be a period of adjustment to the process. Benefits will be obtained for future lakes via what is learned on past lakes. There will always be Daves of the world that demand we bow to their will and greedy self benefiting to ensure 10 lakes are at their beck and call for filling their freezers but NO WAY should we allow any lakes to the >90% that want something better, more challenging, more exciting. Dave has freely stated that his only desire is to catch many, many EASY to catch small fish. Anything that changes that is bad. Catching larger fish is a crazy, crappy idea that he does not endorse. Good on him. There will always be lakes like that to fill a niche.

Lots of hot air Dave to try and dismiss all the great effort people are doing to make fishing better for you whether you know it or not.

Your mentality of stock the crap out of everything needs to be shaken out of the tree. This is especially true for making a fishery with a higher average size trout in it. You agree with the stock the crap out of the lakes scenario as it is the only way to meet your logic. Stocking the crap out of the lakes keeps the kill rate high at 5...depletes the food resources...and keep the trout small. You comment positively about comparing cattle ranching and carrying capacity to trout in a lake. You are so true. To fix that problem you put fewer trout in the lake and in turn they grow bigger. Because there is fewer trout the limits have to be less. That is the balance you agree to on one hand yet fight against so valiantly on the other. Not sure what you call that when you agree to disagree with yourself?

F&W will get it right...but unfortunately they are still trying to bow to the likes of Dave's era...and over stocked the quality lakes. They have realized the error and corrected it. That has been discussed and Dave's concern was earlier dismissed. But still Dave...you have to bring up old arguments till you grow red in the face.

One of your poorer attempts at diversion.

IMHO

Sun

[Bigtoad]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

Just take a look at the Muir Lake "quality" fishery experiment. The rocket chemists got together and decided to create a "quality" lake there because SRD would let them have it and not because it was the right lake to do it in.

And who is saying that Muir is a failure? Doc said there weren't many monsters in it yet but the average size of fish was still MUCH higher than on your average limit of 5 lake. People were still catching fish to 26" which I would say is pretty stellar considering it is just an aerated slew next to a major center with nearly 1 million people.

It just hasn't met the expectations (which were high) of some. That doesn't make it a failure. It might have been the wrong lake to try it in, and maybe more research was needed, I don't know. But it sure sounds better than Strubel, or a hundred other stocked lakes in Alberta.

So Dave, if SRD were to do the proper research and find that a lake with a current limit of 5 is the "right" lake to have a quality fishery based on size of lake, carrying capacity, angler pressure, blah, blah, blah, but currently does not produce quality fish; would you support regulation changes to that lake? Let's say the 1 under 18" so that you can still keep tiddlers?

Be happy that you're an Alberta Redneck because we're in the majority when it comes to giving up our lakes so a bunch of city fellas can try to make it easy for themselves to catch big fish.

HunterDave, until you can find me a legit survey showing what the average fishermen wants in Alberta, YOU CAN NOT KEEP REFERRING TO QUANTITY FISHERMEN AS THE MAJORITY! You just don't know. Maybe most of the people you know are but most of the people I know aren't. And we aren't from the city either, so a little less stereotyping would help too.

I'm not saying quality is the majority out there either (because I really don't know, that's part of the reason I put the poll up in the first place; I wanted to see what people thought.) but I also don't pull some "fact" out of my ass and tell you it's God's truth. So stop doing it please. The only thing I know for certain is that there are not as many quality fisheries vs. the number of people wanting them in many areas of Alberta.

Oh, and your "easier to catch big fish" mantra is getting old as well. If you're a fishermen, you're in the business of catching fish. You're trying to catch the most big fish that you can, right? No one goes out and tries to catch the fewest small fish?

If you're going to go whitetail hunting, are you going to pick Saskatchewan or Florida? If you want to go fishing for pike are you going to pick Wab or Pigeon? If you owned a lumber mill, are you going to set up in Edson or Medicine Hat? You can't ridicule people for making the most common sense decision by saying that they just want it easier. It's not about it being easier, it's about it being better! If someone wants to go fishing on the Bow instead of the Ghost River, no one says, "What, why would you want to fish the Bow! You Cityfolk, always wanting an easier time catching big fish!" That would be stupid. Of course, the Bow is a better fishery than the Ghost, and if you have one ounce of common sense, you would know that!

The last time I checked, better fishing means that you catch bigger fish, and more of them. Better hunting means that you see bigger deer, and more of them. People want the best experience possible, what's wrong with that? What's wrong with wanting better fishing at more locations? And why are you trying to make us feel guilty for that? If we had the opportunity to make more rivers in Alberta as good as the Bow (without causing an environmental meltdown) who wouldn't be for that? Better fishing and more of it. HOW IN THE WORLD CAN YOU BE AGAINST THAT!

Cheers.

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

Lots more hot air from Dave...but no facts.

Dave's idea of making a change is only if it works perfectly...immediately and not requiring any tweaking is hardly how anything is learned or improved. Dave...you should be an inventor. All your ideas must be perfect genius each time.

Obviously with the lack of experience starting these up here in Alberta there should be a period of adjustment to the process. Benefits will be obtained for future lakes via what is learned on past lakes. There will always be Daves of the world that demand we bow to their will and greedy self benefiting to ensure 10 lakes are at their beck and call for filling their freezers but NO WAY should we allow any lakes to the >90% that want something better, more challenging, more exciting. Dave has freely stated that his only desire is to catch many, many EASY to catch small fish. Anything that changes that is bad. Catching larger fish is a crazy, crappy idea that he does not endorse. Good on him. There will always be lakes like that to fill a niche.

Lots of hot air Dave to try and dismiss all the great effort people are doing to make fishing better for you whether you know it or not.

Your mentality of stock the crap out of everything needs to be shaken out of the tree. This is especially true for making a fishery with a higher average size trout in it. You agree with the stock the crap out of the lakes scenario as it is the only way to meet your logic. Stocking the crap out of the lakes keeps the kill rate high at 5...depletes the food resources...and keep the trout small. You comment positively about comparing cattle ranching and carrying capacity to trout in a lake. You are so true. To fix that problem you put fewer trout in the lake and in turn they grow bigger. Because there is fewer trout the limits have to be less. That is the balance you agree to on one hand yet fight against so valiantly on the other. Not sure what you call that when you agree to disagree with yourself?

F&W will get it right...but unfortunately they are still trying to bow to the likes of Dave's era...and over stocked the quality lakes. They have realized the error and corrected it. That has been discussed and Dave's concern was earlier dismissed. But still Dave...you have to bring up old arguments till you grow red in the face.

One of your poorer attempts at diversion.

IMHO

Sun

Actually, the post that you were referring to is filled with facts.

When did this become an exercise in learning? If you want to conduct experiments then revitalize dead lakes like Muir and new bodies of water like the mine pits. That's what SRD has offered up for people that want "quality" fisheries. Conduct all of the experiments that you want in them, just not in the bodies of water that Alberta anglers currently enjoy fishing in.

I find it ironic that you think that it's wrong for me to want people to "bow" to what I want but not wrong for people to "bow" to what you want. Why is it somehow different, simply because you are on the opposite side of what I want?

If you think that I want many, many easy to catch small fish then you simply haven't been paying attention. I've stated from the beginning of this thread that I'm already catching big fish and I'm keeping some of the smaller ones to eat. I also said that I live within 3 kms of the Morinville Rez where I can catch a boatload of small fish but I rarely go there. From that you perceive that I only want to fish for easy to catch small trout? Interesting.......

As far as the "Dave's era" comment..............so you think that this is a demographics issue do you? All the 'ol boys want the lakes to stay the same but all the young fellas want quality lakes is that it? Again, you have an interesting way of thinking.

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

Actually, the post that you were referring to is filled with facts.

When did this become an exercise in learning? If you want to conduct experiments then revitalize dead lakes like Muir and new bodies of water like the mine pits. That's what SRD has offered up for people that want "quality" fisheries. Conduct all of the experiments that you want in them, just not in the bodies of water that Alberta anglers currently enjoy fishing in.

I find it ironic that you think that it's wrong for me to want people to "bow" to what I want but not wrong for people to "bow" to what you want. Why is it somehow different, simply because you are on the opposite side of what I want?

If you think that I want many, many easy to catch small fish then you simply haven't been paying attention. I've stated from the beginning of this thread that I'm already catching big fish and I'm keeping some of the smaller ones to eat. I also said that I live within 3 kms of the Morinville Rez where I can catch a boatload of small fish but I rarely go there. From that you perceive that I only want to fish for easy to catch small trout? Interesting.......

As far as the "Dave's era" comment..............so you think that this is a demographics issue do you? All the 'ol boys want the lakes to stay the same but all the young fellas want quality lakes is that it? Again, you have an interesting way of thinking.

Your misdirection continues.

On one hand you say you can catch the odd bigger fish...yet you want no regulation changes to increase that number. Odd is a polite way of describing your odd way of thinking. Who wants to encourage bigger and bigger fish being caught. You have stated you love the status quo...yet poll after poll no matter how often you turn your back to the results shows more people want better fishing. Your response to the majority is tough luck...Dave likes the old way. Odd is describing someone who won't accept the thought that most people don't think the same way anymore.

You are very hesitant to say the simple thing and leave it alone such as let's improve some fisheries and leave some the way it is. You keep back tracking saying nothing should change. Would you agree if there was a more comprehensive poll that met standard polling logistics that said the majority wanted better fishing and by that they meant something along the lines of a quality fishery that you would accept that? If 95% wanted quality fishing...would you then accept that 95% of the lakes can be used for quality fishing? You state that 95% want the status quo and therefore it should stay the same...are you willing to put your acceptance on the line if at some point this poll was done?

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by Bigtoad

So Dave, if SRD were to do the proper research and find that a lake with a current limit of 5 is the "right" lake to have a quality fishery based on size of lake, carrying capacity, angler pressure, blah, blah, blah, but currently does not produce quality fish; would you support regulation changes to that lake? Let's say the 1 under 18" so that you can still keep tiddlers?

HunterDave, until you can find me a legit survey showing what the average fishermen wants in Alberta, YOU CAN NOT KEEP REFERRING TO QUANTITY FISHERMEN AS THE MAJORITY! You just don't know. Maybe most of the people you know are but most of the people I know aren't. And we aren't from the city either, so a little less stereotyping would help too.

I'm not saying quality is the majority out there either (because I really don't know, that's part of the reason I put the poll up in the first place; I wanted to see what people thought.) but I also don't pull some "fact" out of my ass and tell you it's God's truth. So stop doing it please. The only thing I know for certain is that there are not as many quality fisheries vs. the number of people wanting them in many areas of Alberta.

Oh, and your "easier to catch big fish" mantra is getting old as well. If you're a fishermen, you're in the business of catching fish. You're trying to catch the most big fish that you can, right? No one goes out and tries to catch the fewest small fish?

If you're going to go whitetail hunting, are you going to pick Saskatchewan or Florida? If you want to go fishing for pike are you going to pick Wab or Pigeon? If you owned a lumber mill, are you going to set up in Edson or Medicine Hat? You can't ridicule people for making the most common sense decision by saying that they just want it easier. It's not about it being easier, it's about it being better! If someone wants to go fishing on the Bow instead of the Ghost River, no one says, "What, why would you want to fish the Bow! You Cityfolk, always wanting an easier time catching big fish!" That would be stupid. Of course, the Bow is a better fishery than the Ghost, and if you have one ounce of common sense, you would know that!

The last time I checked, better fishing means that you catch bigger fish, and more of them. Better hunting means that you see bigger deer, and more of them. People want the best experience possible, what's wrong with that? What's wrong with wanting better fishing at more locations? And why are you trying to make us feel guilty for that? If we had the opportunity to make more rivers in Alberta as good as the Bow (without causing an environmental meltdown) who wouldn't be for that? Better fishing and more of it. HOW IN THE WORLD CAN YOU BE AGAINST THAT!

Cheers.

No, I would absolutely not support creating any "quality" fisheries in any currently stocked trout lake. I think that's clear enough. Why would I want to give up something that I have just to make it easier for someone else to catch big fish? It's all relative I guess.....you consider an 18" trout a tiddler where I do not. An 18" trout is one that I would put back and I'd keep smaller eatin sized ones.

The reason that there aren't more "quality" fisheries is because the majority of Alberta anglers don't want them. Plain and simple. It's also the reason why SRD will not change any stocked lakes from their current status to "quality" fisheries. They will give up dead lakes and newly formed bodies of water in order to appease the "quality" fishery fellas though because it won't tick off Joe angler. You can dismiss the facts by pointing to the results in the attached poll but you aren't being realistic if you do. No one can give you an exact percentage of who wants what but common sense should lead you to some sort of conclusion shouldn't it?

By the same logic, how do you know for certain that "there are not as many quality fisheries vs. the number of people wanting them in many areas of Alberta." Because the enclosed poll with 200 people that participated in it indicates it?

As far as stereotyping that it's city fellas that want these "quality" fisheries, it's not stereotyping if that's who wants more "quality" fisheries. Just have a look at who's been posting on this thread. You don't hear all of the good ol boys up in Whitecourt pushing to get MacLeod lake changed into a "quality" fishery do you?

Making it easier to catch big fish is what it is and no matter how you sugar coat it you can't change the bottom line. You can replace the word " bigger", "easier", "more" with "quality" but it won't change the fact that "quality" fisheries are all about making it easier to catch bigger fish.

"I caught a quality fish" translation "I caught a big fish"
"There are allot of quality fish in Muir Lake" translation "There are allot of big fish in Muir Lake."
"You can catch quality fish in Muir all day" translation " The big fish in Muir lake are easy to catch."
"Muir Lake is a "quality" fishery." translation "It's easy to catch big fish in Muir Lake."

What's not to understand?

If you are only fishing and hunting because you only want big fish or big deer then you are doing it for all of the wrong reasons IMO. Good fishing and good hunting does not mean more bigger fish and more bigger deer to me at all. If every field had a big 6x6 buck in it or every lake had 30" trout in them then they are no longer trophies.

If what I'm posting makes you feel a little guilty about "quality" fisheries then maybe there's a part of you that doesn't think that it's right?

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

The reason that there aren't more "quality" fisheries is because the majority of Alberta anglers don't want them. Plain and simple. It's also the reason why SRD will not change any stocked lakes from their current status to "quality" fisheries. They will give up dead lakes and newly formed bodies of water in order to appease the "quality" fishery fellas though because it won't tick off Joe angler. You can dismiss the facts by pointing to the results in the attached poll but you aren't being realistic if you do. No one can give you an exact percentage of who wants what but common sense should lead you to some sort of conclusion shouldn't it?

LOL

Dave you crack us all up. Being as this is a new initiative in the overall management of lakes in Alberta...you wonder why more are not out there? Cause it is just starting buddy.

I could believe your stellar argument if these new quality lakes regulations have been around for 50 years.

New blood brings new ideas...like the novel idea of providing what the masses want. Better fishing...not Dave's favorite fishing.

You may get when the new regs prove their worth and then while you will feign you will end up secretly

Right now you are struggling to understand and feel like but even though you talk a good yarn you are just going round in

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

Your misdirection continues.

On one hand you say you can catch the odd bigger fish...yet you want no regulation changes to increase that number. Odd is a polite way of describing your odd way of thinking. Who wants to encourage bigger and bigger fish being caught. You have stated you love the status quo...yet poll after poll no matter how often you turn your back to the results shows more people want better fishing. Your response to the majority is tough luck...Dave likes the old way. Odd is describing someone who won't accept the thought that most people don't think the same way anymore.

You are very hesitant to say the simple thing and leave it alone such as let's improve some fisheries and leave some the way it is. You keep back tracking saying nothing should change. Would you agree if there was a more comprehensive poll that met standard polling logistics that said the majority wanted better fishing and by that they meant something along the lines of a quality fishery that you would accept that? If 95% wanted quality fishing...would you then accept that 95% of the lakes can be used for quality fishing? You state that 95% want the status quo and therefore it should stay the same...are you willing to put your acceptance on the line if at some point this poll was done?

Correct. I enjoy the challenge that it takes to catch a big fish and I don't want to make it easier for myself. Weird eh?

You are not paying attention again.................

Post #247

"I think that the best solution to confirm either way what anglers want is to ask SRD to conduct a survey of all licensed anglers. It should include a section with the number of children in the home and the counts of the children should count towards how the angler votes. This would cover licensed anglers as well as their children that will inherit the fishing waters from us adults. The only group not covered would be seniors and an online or similar poll could be available for them. Is there any logic to my thinking?

If done fairly, whatever the results, I would be happy to live with it. As I have previously stated, I do see an upside with easing the fishing pressure in harder to get to lakes as a result of creating easy to get to "quality" fisheries close to large urban areas like Calgary and Edmonton."

Now get with the program will ya.

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

You may get when the new regs prove their worth and then while you will feign you will end up secretly

Yeah, secretly happy like the fellas that are trying to shut down the "quality" fishery ay Police Lake that the elitists created for themselves.

There are no new regs. Where are you getting that from?

[Bigtoad]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

If you think that I want many, many easy to catch small fish then you simply haven't been paying attention. I've stated from the beginning of this thread that I'm already catching big fish and I'm keeping some of the smaller ones to eat. I also said that I live within 3 kms of the Morinville Rez where I can catch a boatload of small fish but I rarely go there. From that you perceive that I only want to fish for easy to catch small trout? Interesting.......

What Dave?!?!? You mean you drive PAST a place that is close but has lots of small fish to fish a lake farther away that has the potential to have larger fish??? That sure sounds like you're a quality not quantity guy to me

Why not stay at the Morinville res and try in vain to catch something of some size? Or just fish there for the fun of catching tons and tons of tiddlers where you don't really need any skill? Instead you drive PAST this lake and go to greener pastures???? But Dave, you do know you're going to lakes where... it is... actually easier to catch big fish than at Morinville res!!! HOW COULD YOU!!! You're turning soft on us Dave; driving farther to find "easier" fishing. How unredneck of you!

The reason you drive further is because there is better fishing somewhere else. "Better" meaning you have the chance of catching something decent (whatever that means to you). It's worth more to you than going to the Morinville res or you wouldn't drive farther.

Well Dave, imagine if the Morinville res was all you had. Every lake around you that you love and cherish because the fishing is "better" is reduced to the Morinville res. Welcome to our world buddy! That's what we get to experience! I have to drive 5 hours to find good fishing and even there, the average size has dropped dramatically over the past 3 years. Welcome also to the future Dave! The Morinville experience is what you have to look forward to on all of the other lakes that you fish unless you get off your duff and do something constructive. Don't give me this crap line of, "well, if it is about the size, then you've lost the point," when you CLEARLY value the sport of catching bigger fish more than the unsport of catching lots and lots of tiddlers.

Just because it hasn't happened there yet doesn't mean it won't and just because you aren't experiencing it, doesn't mean it's any less real for the thousands of other anglers in Alberta that do. Now come out of that quantity closet Dave and come into the light of a quality fisherman! You've already admitted that you want to. Why resist what you know to be right?

Cheers.

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by Bigtoad

What Dave?!?!? You mean you drive PAST a place that is close but has lots of small fish to fish a lake farther away that has the potential to have larger fish??? That sure sounds like you're a quality not quantity guy to me

Why not stay at the Morinville res and try in vain to catch something of some size? Or just fish there for the fun of catching tons and tons of tiddlers where you don't really need any skill? Instead you drive PAST this lake and go to greener pastures???? But Dave, you do know you're going to lakes where... it is... actually easier to catch big fish than at Morinville res!!! HOW COULD YOU!!! You're turning soft on us Dave; driving farther to find "easier" fishing. How unredneck of you!

The reason you drive further is because there is better fishing somewhere else. "Better" meaning you have the chance of catching something decent (whatever that means to you). It's worth more to you than going to the Morinville res or you wouldn't drive farther.

Well Dave, imagine if the Morinville res was all you had. Every lake around you that you love and cherish because the fishing is "better" is reduced to the Morinville res. Welcome to our world buddy! That's what we get to experience! I have to drive 5 hours to find good fishing and even there, the average size has dropped dramatically over the past 3 years. Welcome also to the future Dave! The Morinville experience is what you have to look forward to on all of the other lakes that you fish unless you get off your duff and do something constructive. Don't give me this crap line of, "well, if it is about the size, then you've lost the point," when you CLEARLY value the sport of catching bigger fish more than the unsport of catching lots and lots of tiddlers.

Just because it hasn't happened there yet doesn't mean it won't and just because you aren't experiencing it, doesn't mean it's any less real for the thousands of other anglers in Alberta that do. Now come out of that quantity closet Dave and come into the light of a quality fisherman! You've already admitted that you want to. Why resist what you know to be right?

Cheers.

X2

Dave...you have been

Bigtoad...you have won the I caught Dave in a doozie award. Good catch. Seems like the more he writes the more he crosses himself hoping he doesn't come across as trolling for fun.



I would say you just shot the elusive HunterDave in a conundrum.

I gotta shake your hand And share a toast...

Actually...just trying to keep Dave happy by using the smiles he loves so much.

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by Bigtoad

What Dave?!?!? You mean you drive PAST a place that is close but has lots of small fish to fish a lake farther away that has the potential to have larger fish??? That sure sounds like you're a quality not quantity guy to me

Why not stay at the Morinville res and try in vain to catch something of some size? Or just fish there for the fun of catching tons and tons of tiddlers where you don't really need any skill? Instead you drive PAST this lake and go to greener pastures???? But Dave, you do know you're going to lakes where... it is... actually easier to catch big fish than at Morinville res!!! HOW COULD YOU!!! You're turning soft on us Dave; driving farther to find "easier" fishing. How unredneck of you!

The reason you drive further is because there is better fishing somewhere else. "Better" meaning you have the chance of catching something decent (whatever that means to you). It's worth more to you than going to the Morinville res or you wouldn't drive farther.

Well Dave, imagine if the Morinville res was all you had. Every lake around you that you love and cherish because the fishing is "better" is reduced to the Morinville res. Welcome to our world buddy! That's what we get to experience! I have to drive 5 hours to find good fishing and even there, the average size has dropped dramatically over the past 3 years. Welcome also to the future Dave! The Morinville experience is what you have to look forward to on all of the other lakes that you fish unless you get off your duff and do something constructive. Don't give me this crap line of, "well, if it is about the size, then you've lost the point," when you CLEARLY value the sport of catching bigger fish more than the unsport of catching lots and lots of tiddlers.

Just because it hasn't happened there yet doesn't mean it won't and just because you aren't experiencing it, doesn't mean it's any less real for the thousands of other anglers in Alberta that do. Now come out of that quantity closet Dave and come into the light of a quality fisherman! You've already admitted that you want to. Why resist what you know to be right?

Cheers.

Good point. Let me explain it to you. I drive past Morinville rez for similar reasons that I drive by Muir Lake. As a first choice, I don't want to fish a lake that is filled with little trout and I don't want to fish a lake that's filled with big trout either. I prefer a lake that has both sizes of fish and a choice of size that I want to keep. It's like a swinging pendulum with small trout on one side and big trout on the other. I prefer the middle of the swing, with both sizes of trout to catch and keep if I want to.

Throughout this thread there have been allot of good suggestions, I think anyway, that would result in a happy medium but each suggestion was dismissed because it wouldn't work. Either ALL the stocked trout are gone right away, or there are no big fish anywhere now or whatever. I know this to be untrue. It seems to me that the only solution to catching big fish for some posters is to create "quality" fisheries. I disagree. I catch big fish on occasion right now. It doesn't happen all of the time and it's not easy to catch them but it does happen from time to time.

Someone suggested that I should take off my blinders but everything posted on this thread indicates to me that there are allot of posters wearing them. If I am given only two choices, either "quality" fisheries or smaller higher harvest trout lakes, and I am forced to chose between the two then I pick the latter. However, I don't suffer from the same misconceptions as some other people that there are currently no big fish around to catch.

If the fishing is as bad where you are living as you say that it is, a five hour drive to catch a big fish has me stumped, then by all means identify a lake where a "quality" fishery could be created. That is a regional specific issue. But for someone to say that they want 30% of the currently stocked lakes province wide turned into "quality" fisheries..........yeah, you'll meet with allot of resistance.

The bottom line is that if I'm forced to make a choice and only have the two options to chose from then I'll stick with the status quo.

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

X2

Dave...you have been

Bigtoad...you have won the I caught Dave in a doozie award. Good catch. Seems like the more he writes the more he crosses himself hoping he doesn't come across as trolling for fun.



I would say you just shot the elusive HunterDave in a conundrum.

I gotta shake your hand And share a toast...

Actually...just trying to keep Dave happy by using the smiles he loves so much.

Good one! You are dancing in the streets a little early though I think.

I don't expect you "quality" fishery guys to understand everything all at once. The issue of "quality" fisheries is allot more complex than just wanting to make it easier to catch big fish.

And I'm not trolling as you have suggested a few times. My comments are 100% truthfully my opinion on the issue. I am trying to have fun with it though.

[SNAPFisher]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

Just take a look at the Muir Lake "quality" fishery experiment. The rocket chemists got together and decided to create a "quality" lake there because SRD would let them have it and not because it was the right lake to do it in. It was a dead lake anyway and not worth stocking it so why not? It's an 80 acre slew that they are now trying to grow trophy sized fish in. Now I'm no fish doctor but I can pretty much figure out that it'll take more than a couple of aerators in a slew to keep any amount of reasonable sized fish alive in there let alone a large number of big ones.

Now that Muir Lake has failed to live up to expectations, the people that supported creating it in the first place are all pointing fingers to place the blame on why it didn't work. It's SRD fault for putting too many stocked fish in there, yada, yada, yada. We all know what the reality is though.....HEELLLOOO!

Woah this post has gone on long since I was last in here.

Dave, I'm not sure if I missed something but I thought you have never fished Muir? Yet you seem to know a lot about what a failure it is. I'm guessing the good people that put a ton of what into it and continue to do so might take a bit exception to your post. However, they are good people and would likely forgive your ignorance.

It would be great to see water levels come up but that is an issue in a lot of area of this province. The aerators do their trick though year in and out. Early spring there is something else...can't wait. It is a success to me and I'm pretty thankful to the people that decided to do something different in a fishery.

Just to finish off your argument about easier to catch big fish, that is one of the reasons why I go to Muir. There you go, what a revelation....
As I posted earlier I'm not sure why you keep harping on that but whatever...
I like having the choice of C&Ring bigger fish at Muir but then trying something different for the pan somewhere else on another day. You also seem to just ignore the fact that most that go to Muir are looking for that elusive HUGE trout. Same challenge or enjoyment as you get catching that HUGE trout for the lakes you go to. Seems like the same experience...