Alberta limits, size slot, and others...

Originally Posted by Mutter87

Tags are not a bad idea. 5 pike, 5 trout (any species) with the purchase of Your license. Kids are 1 Pike 1 trout and Walleye would still be on draw with none over 18".

#%#%hit why should i be limited to 10 fish per year. You just created a tag black market

Wake up guys and smell the coffee

Your ideas still target the largest fish one can catch or a specific size of fish. They dont balance the ecosystem and they do not address fishing pressure. Bettervset tags for the smallest size class where the pyramidical grouping of fish bla bla bla.

Set an open day or weekend a couple times a year. Then the size that is retIned will be random or represent the largest and easiest year class to catch.

My lake has a zero take walleye but we decimate the pike with the slot size. Id be fine with open pike take size a couple times a year and same for walleye. Then closed for periods at a time.


Especially if the open periods moved from lake to lake since lots of people move around. This would put everyone on the summer fish tour

[Pikebreath]

Pelada,

My memory doesn't remember the exact details on this but short 'harvest seasons" have been tried on a select few lakes in the past. Long Lake (walleye) near Boyle was one these lakes and I believe there a lake near St Paul as well. The harvest period was longer than the weekend you suggest,, (maybe a couple weeks?) ... Anyways the long and the short of it was angling pressure was concentrated (actually excessive) on these lakes during the open season and even with low limits, it didn't take long to harvest more fish than was desired. Perhaps someone with a better memory can enligthen us more on this.

Generally with hunting, it has been found that season length has much less effect on harvest rates than does restrictions on the number of participants and / or harvest. If you fail to restrict the number of participants / harvest, all you do is concentrate the effort over a shorter period which can create other issues such as crowding.

With the open weekend concept, it is likely that crowding that would occur on the open lakes. How many lakes have the infastructure to handle the numbers of anglers who would descend upon those lakes on the open weekends?

[Pikebreath]

Originally Posted by pelada trochu

#%#%hit why should i be limited to 10 fish per year. You just created a tag black market

Wake up guys and smell the coffee

Your ideas still target the largest fish one can catch or a specific size of fish. They dont balance the ecosystem and they do not address fishing pressure.

Pelada, the issue in Alberta with our limited lakes and high numbers of anglers is that 10 fish per angler per year may be closer to what is sustainable. I don't actually think it would be 10 total fish but maybe 10 pike, and 10 walleye and so on, The actual numbers are best determined by fisheries biologists who have much better data and expertise than we have.

For examples sake, let's just say that with the purchase of your angling license you get 10 pike tags (and 10 walleye and so on) for the season. Certainly these could be set up such that 6 tags might be for small young fish, 3 tags for mid size fish and 1 tag for that trophy fish of the year. It could also be easily set up you have to harvest your 10 pike over a minumum of 5 lakes with lake limits of say 1 - 3 fish (of varying sizes). Lake A with an over population of pike could be 3 small fish.... Lake B with a stable population might be 1 small, 1 mid and 1 large fish.... Lake C with a recovering population might be open for 1 mid size fish,, and so it goes.

Again the actual details are best left to fishery managers to determine,,,but the tag / slot concept might open many more walleye lakes to a limited harvest as well as improve the quality of many pike and walleye fisheries in this province. Additionally this should help in spreading angling pressure around rather than concentrate anglers on those few lakes that currently allow some harvest.

[edsonfisherman]

Originally Posted by Mutter87

Any Walleye/Pike over 18" should have to be released
Any trout/similar species 14" or over should have be released
Any perch over 10" should have to be released.

Pike limit should be dropped to 1 at all existing Pike lakes that allow harvest.

We need to get out of the "That's a big fish I'm gonna keep it mentality". Looking at the "skin vs graphite mount" thread shows just how many people are uneducated on the subject.

Skin mounts of Fish should me made from 2013 onward Illegal to produce.

Poaching should be mandatory prison sentances and hefty fines. We need minimum sentances as well. Caught with Walleye at Pine coulee? 1 year minimum jail time.

What I am proposing will not make Fisherman pop a chubby, however It will create trophy waters and more sustainable populations of fish.

I like this, the only thing I would add to it would be more F&W officers to enforce the rules. There are still to many (and not every one) people in this province that think its no big deal to keep a Illegal fish, that them keeping just one or two is no big deal. Had more than one time that me and my buddies had to tell some people out at like isle poaching that if they didn't put the walleye back in the water their pic and licence place would be going to F&W.

[hit_theice]

no one is going to agree on a limit for any lake in alberta the problem is not whether or not they let you keep walleye it is the size of the walleye that they are letting you keep when they allow harvest. the walleye limits should be this: 2-3 walleye under 15" and 1 over say 25". this protects the walleye that do the majority of the spawning. this is essentially what they use on walleye everywhere else in north america.

there is no possible way to catch every walleye under 15" from a lake. it is not possible so once a walleye hits 15" it can spawn freely every year until it is over 25" and can be obtained legally.

the smaller the fish the higher the number of fish of that size. bio mass problems. by removing a good number of fish under 15" you are leaving behind the food they would consume for your fish over 15". the spawners which leaves happier, healthier and better spawning fish.

do not fall for the 10 anglers per lake bs they have been feeding albertan's for years. no matter what the population there are still ways to manage it properly. if all the fish in pigeon lake are between 15"-25" and the whole population of edmonton fishes there every day for a whole year. then i am sorry but no walleye can legally be taken out. granted some will die from being hooked etc. but it still gives people the hope that maybe they will be able to keep a fish this trip. where as now you know you can't legally keep any unless u have applied for a draw and then gotten a tag.

if u look at all the lakes in minnesota, michigan vs the number of anglers the majority of their big fisheries get way more pressure then any of the lakes here in alberta. if you don't believe me youtube opening day fishing in minnesota. they call it the opener and people are lined up on shore for the stroke of midnight so they can fish. some places it is even a long weekend and there is no school and i am not making this up. since they have open water longer then we do it gives there fish a longer growing season yes but it also gives people out there more days to harvest fish then in alberta.

have you ever seen grumpy old men? it is actually like that out there with cities of permanent shacks out on the ice asap. they keep what they call 'eaters' out there for walleye. which generally speaking refers to any walleye 15" or under. a perfect 'eater' is around 14.5". they have managed their walleye out there like this for years and it works perfectly fine. u catch a lot of 18-20" walleye out there but they all have to be thrown back. and they are nice and healthy because there is food in the lake for them. once the fish hit a certain length you can keep normally 1 "over" that length.

the main thing i would like to say is however you think they should manage our fishery. then set your limits by your own personal beliefs. if they are letting you keep 43cm or bigger walleye and maybe you catch one around 50cm. throw it back and try to get one closer to 43cm. that is what i do. i keep fish within my limits based on how i think they should be doing it. personally i don't think you should be allowed to keep a 50cm walleye so i would throw it back and hope for a smaller one.

limit your limit!!!

[huntsfurfish]

Originally Posted by hit_theice

no one is going to agree on a limit for any lake in alberta the problem is not whether or not they let you keep walleye it is the size of the walleye that they are letting you keep when they allow harvest. the walleye limits should be this: 2-3 walleye under 15" and 1 over say 25". this protects the walleye that do the majority of the spawning. this is essentially what they use on walleye everywhere else in north america.

there is no possible way to catch every walleye under 15" from a lake. it is not possible so once a walleye hits 15" it can spawn freely every year until it is over 25" and can be obtained legally.

the smaller the fish the higher the number of fish of that size. bio mass problems. by removing a good number of fish under 15" you are leaving behind the food they would consume for your fish over 15". the spawners which leaves happier, healthier and better spawning fish.

do not fall for the 10 anglers per lake bs they have been feeding albertan's for years. no matter what the population there are still ways to manage it properly. if all the fish in pigeon lake are between 15"-25" and the whole population of edmonton fishes there every day for a whole year. then i am sorry but no walleye can legally be taken out. granted some will die from being hooked etc. but it still gives people the hope that maybe they will be able to keep a fish this trip. where as now you know you can't legally keep any unless u have applied for a draw and then gotten a tag.

if u look at all the lakes in minnesota, michigan vs the number of anglers the majority of their big fisheries get way more pressure then any of the lakes here in alberta. if you don't believe me youtube opening day fishing in minnesota. they call it the opener and people are lined up on shore for the stroke of midnight so they can fish. some places it is even a long weekend and there is no school and i am not making this up. since they have open water longer then we do it gives there fish a longer growing season yes but it also gives people out there more days to harvest fish then in alberta.

have you ever seen grumpy old men? it is actually like that out there with cities of permanent shacks out on the ice asap. they keep what they call 'eaters' out there for walleye. which generally speaking refers to any walleye 15" or under. a perfect 'eater' is around 14.5". they have managed their walleye out there like this for years and it works perfectly fine. u catch a lot of 18-20" walleye out there but they all have to be thrown back. and they are nice and healthy because there is food in the lake for them. once the fish hit a certain length you can keep normally 1 "over" that length.

the main thing i would like to say is however you think they should manage our fishery. then set your limits by your own personal beliefs. if they are letting you keep 43cm or bigger walleye and maybe you catch one around 50cm. throw it back and try to get one closer to 43cm. that is what i do. i keep fish within my limits based on how i think they should be doing it. personally i don't think you should be allowed to keep a 50cm walleye so i would throw it back and hope for a smaller one.

limit your limit!!!

You obviously were not around when the size limit for walleye in AB was 16" and the fisheries collapsed(took about 10 years to recover). It would be just a matter of time till it happened again with 2-3 fish under 15

And we do not live in everywhere else!

We live in limited water AB which is in to many fisherman county.

Originally Posted by Pikebreath

Pelada, the issue in Alberta with our limited lakes and high numbers of anglers is that 10 fish per angler per year may be closer to what is sustainable. I don't actually think it would be 10 total fish but maybe 10 pike, and 10 walleye and so on, The actual numbers are best determined by fisheries biologists who have much better data and expertise than we have.

For examples sake, let's just say that with the purchase of your angling license you get 10 pike tags (and 10 walleye and so on) for the season. Certainly these could be set up such that 6 tags might be for small young fish, 3 tags for mid size fish and 1 tag for that trophy fish of the year. It could also be easily set up you have to harvest your 10 pike over a minumum of 5 lakes with lake limits of say 1 - 3 fish (of varying sizes). Lake A with an over population of pike could be 3 small fish.... Lake B with a stable population might be 1 small, 1 mid and 1 large fish.... Lake C with a recovering population might be open for 1 mid size fish,, and so it goes.

Again the actual details are best left to fishery managers to determine,,,but the tag / slot concept might open many more walleye lakes to a limited harvest as well as improve the quality of many pike and walleye fisheries in this province. Additionally this should help in spreading angling pressure around rather than concentrate anglers on those few lakes that currently allow some harvest.

i love to fish. im a conservationist. i know my idea of open lake (still daily limit) will work. A guy has to get a feed in once in a while. otherwise they just poach it anyway. so what if we have a busy may long at lake xyz. She will be vacant the rest of the year. whites are 5 on most lakes and they dont destroy the lake in a weekend. wabamun could be open for 2 days! Next weekend its another lake etc.

But im so firmly against the idea that in all of alberta fishing i will only be allowed x fish per year that Im willing to punch anyone in the mouth for bringing up that stupidity. close that pie hole now before they legislate something dumb like that.

its like you said i can only drive 10 miles per year! How about only 3 deer lifetime!

You create a black market for licenses this way. Hey your grandma using her's this year. my way is open limited time. you snooze you loose. they have free fishing day twice a year. why not open all the lakes that day??? i wouldnt it would still require a license on a take day.

supply and demand. charge more for a license. just dont ever remove my ability to fish. 10 fish a year will quickly become 10 fishing days a year due to fish mortality due to fishing...

Rant rant rant....

[ramriver]

Originally Posted by lippy

Lots of good points here the main problem is not enough F&W officers in the province to ensure a slot size regulation is adhered to. Alberta has 300 plus fishermen per body of water while Saskatchewan has something like 2 per body of water.I think overall the walleye are recovering from the collapse and the harvest restrictions have worked but now is the time for some forward thinking and a change needs to be made. Slot size limits would work if there were enough field officers to enforce the regulation.. otherwise forget it. I also agree that management of the fisheries needs to change but enforcement and management go hand in hand and there needs to be the staff available to do their jobs properly..the government needs to spend more money on resource management.

bang on! you guys can make any suggestions you want regarding the management, but it comes down to the enforcement and officer presence. its only alberta take what you can get and legally kill all the mature fish.

[Mutter87]

Originally Posted by pelada trochu

#%#%hit why should i be limited to 10 fish per year. You just created a tag black market

That would not be a big deal, the same ammount of fish would be leaving the water. If I use my 10 tags, then my 3 buddies illegally give me there 10 tags, the fish do not know the difference.

People in this province can not be relied on to conserve the fisheries themselves, so we need to bring in regulatiions like this.

[AdverseCity]

I won't pretend to have an educated opinion on managing fisheries but I do have an idea that would definitely help.

What about creating a volunteer F&W officer program? Interested people would need to take a course (maybe even once a year) educating them about the regulations and reasons for them, proper fish handling techniques and other good stuff. Then give them LIMITED F&W officer powers like inspecting hooks and livewells, counting and measuring kept fish and the ability to quickly get a real F&W officer on site. As a side benefit think of all the knowledge and good fishing attitudes/habits that will spread during these inspections. Some people would react badly but I think the majority of people would realize it's for the best.

Thoughts?

[Mutter87]

Sounds like a good idea to me.

[Wild&Free]

Originally Posted by AdverseCity

I won't pretend to have an educated opinion on managing fisheries but I do have an idea that would definitely help.

What about creating a volunteer F&W officer program? Interested people would need to take a course (maybe even once a year) educating them about the regulations and reasons for them, proper fish handling techniques and other good stuff. Then give them LIMITED F&W officer powers like inspecting hooks and livewells, counting and measuring kept fish and the ability to quickly get a real F&W officer on site. As a side benefit think of all the knowledge and good fishing attitudes/habits that will spread during these inspections. Some people would react badly but I think the majority of people would realize it's for the best.

Thoughts?

They're either F&W or they're nothing. Good idea, but in reality it would more be like a citizen on patrol thing imo, if they 'observed' anything illegal happening they would call an officer in. No such thing as granting limited RCMP powers to security guards and the like. Plus if some joker without a badge wanted to 'inspect' my gear because he thinks it's illegal he'll have another issue on his hands.

I think there should be something similar to CORE for fishing. Focus it on fish habitat, life cycle, mortality rates, handling, ect. ect. It should also be taught in high school, and offered for very low cost afterwards. Hell, I'm not even sure if they do CORE training for hunters anymore, or in Alberta at all since I didn't have to give my hunter # to get a license. I did it at 15 in BC before I was no longer able to hunt as a minor with my dad.
It shouldn't be a requirement to get a license but should be required to apply for tags, so if you're going to fish a lake that is being restored you have the information as to why it is being done and how to do your part to help it and other lakes.

just my 2 cents, hope no one gets bent out of shape over it.

[AdverseCity]

Originally Posted by Wild&Free

They're either F&W or they're nothing. Good idea, but in reality it would more be like a citizen on patrol thing imo, if they 'observed' anything illegal happening they would call an officer in. No such thing as granting limited RCMP powers to security guards and the like. Plus if some joker without a badge wanted to 'inspect' my gear because he thinks it's illegal he'll have another issue on his hands.

Can I ask why wouldn't allow a volunteer officer to check your fish? I'm assuming you're all legal and have nothing to hide so is this just a "you can't force me so I won't do it out of spite" type of thing? You'd be within your rights to refuse but that's not actively helping anything.

And as for the security guard analogy, they might not have any RCMP powers but when they make a call about minor illegal things I'm sure the cops take them a little more serious, that's all I'm suggesting here. I think the majority of people wouldn't mind, personally I'd feel good that someone else is doing what they can to curb illegal fishing and promote good fishing attitudes and habits.

[MoFugger21]

Originally Posted by AdverseCity

I won't pretend to have an educated opinion on managing fisheries but I do have an idea that would definitely help.

What about creating a volunteer F&W officer program? Interested people would need to take a course (maybe even once a year) educating them about the regulations and reasons for them, proper fish handling techniques and other good stuff. Then give them LIMITED F&W officer powers like inspecting hooks and livewells, counting and measuring kept fish and the ability to quickly get a real F&W officer on site. As a side benefit think of all the knowledge and good fishing attitudes/habits that will spread during these inspections. Some people would react badly but I think the majority of people would realize it's for the best.

Thoughts?

Isn't this the kind of thing the Report-A-Poacher line is for.....??


And I'm with Wild&Free. If a someone in plain clothes came up to me while I was fishing and asked to "investigate" my gear/license/catch/etc, I'm pretty sure I'd tell 'em to get bent in a real hurry. If they think I'm doing something illegal, call RAP and I'll gladly show the CO whatever it is they want to see. I've got nothing to hide, but pretty soon there'd be ordinary citizens thinking they have more power than they actually do, and I could see it causing more headaches for the CO's than actually helping.

Originally Posted by Mutter87

Sounds like a good idea to me.

in simple terms... just extend the direction your heading indefinitely to see where you will end up.

catch all you want -> slot sizes -> closed lakes -> 10 fish per year per person harvest -> no fish per year harvest -> no fishing period.

id rather see a lake fished out completely than loose my rights and freedom to act as a responsible adult and fish when and where i want. its not like they mourn lost relatives or something...

look at hockey rinks, the other day i was on the second floor of a rink watching the arena below while the peewee game was on. i couldnt see through this white fish net thing they had on just in case a puck with enough velocity came soaring up from that pee wee player on a trajectory which would have surely killed me. seems to me you should bring a helmet to the game instead and enjoy the view. they even arrested a guy for possession of a peanut butter sandwhich in public.

airplanes have all these rules and restrictions and cavity searches.... maybe we will have that at all boat launches in the future and every boat on the lake will have to pass through a check point before proceeding directly on or off the lake or back to the cabin.

maybe we need a fishing rod registry??? or a hook and lure confiscation and issuance only by the govenment after a background check???

thats the direction your advocating. If you want to make an immediate and tangible impact, I suggest that you give up fishing. That would be a step in the right direction.


education is always the solution. lets see some signs up at launches indicating the status of the fishery and recommended practices. Lets see some creel surveys. lets get some television programs which focus on conservation and show how important and wonderous fish habitat is. our government recently repealed laws protecting fish habitats. I called my area fish and wildlife guy and left a message requesting information and he never even called back. so they can do a way better job by me.

changing to yearly limits per person is ludicris.

Originally Posted by MoFugger21

Isn't this the kind of thing the Report-A-Poacher line is for.....??


And I'm with Wild&Free. If a someone in plain clothes came up to me while I was fishing and asked to "investigate" my gear/license/catch/etc, I'm pretty sure I'd tell 'em to get bent in a real hurry. If they think I'm doing something illegal, call RAP and I'll gladly show the CO whatever it is they want to see. I've got nothing to hide, but pretty soon there'd be ordinary citizens thinking they have more power than they actually do, and I could see it causing more headaches for the CO's than actually helping.

if you show up with a badge indicating your a certified conservation assistant. I would definitely respect it. But those guys carry a gun for a reason.

then there will always be the weirdo's who are looking for some kinda power trip and take it upon themselves to board every vessel they find. so id rather just triple my license cost and hire more officers. how many lakes do we have... just put one out there permanently at the major places and have him hit the surrounding areas randomly.

i got a 25000 dollar boat, never mind equipment launch fees, gas, travel, food, lodging, etc... 25 bucks for a license seems ridiculous...

[MoFugger21]

Originally Posted by pelada trochu

if you show up with a badge indicating your a certified conservation assistant. I would definitely respect it. But those guys carry a gun for a reason.

then there will always be the weirdo's who are looking for some kinda power trip and take it upon themselves to board every vessel they find. so id rather just triple my license cost and hire more officers. how many lakes do we have... just put one out there permanently at the major places and have him hit the surrounding areas randomly.

Not to sound like I'm back tracking, but ya, if the plain clothes citizen showed me some sort of certification of authority, then obviously I'd respect it (I still think you'd get people abusing that power though...). I just meant if 'Joe-blow', whom had taken this 'course', came up to me and demanded to see my license and measure my fish, without indicating any sort of authority to do so, I wouldn't hesitate telling him/her where to go....

My preference is to use RAP and leave it up to the CO's. I don't need to be confronting people and getting myself into a situation that could have been avoided.

And I agree, I'd rather pay more to have more CO's than having volunteers taking on the role of 'rent-a-cop'.

[Mutter87]

I am in favor of shutting down the harvest of most fish and lakes, pelada trochu. I am not the ally of Catch and keep fisherman, trust me on this. Alberta simply can not sustain trophy and Catch and keep fisheries.

[Mutter87]

Originally Posted by MoFugger21

I don't need to be confronting people and getting myself into a situation that could have been avoided.

.

Sounds like something that is right up my alley that I would excel at. I'd be the first name on the volunteer paper.

[AppleJax]

Originally Posted by Mutter87

Sounds like something that is right up my alley that I would excel at. I'd be the first name on the volunteer paper.

Are you a security guard or a mall cop in real life? I have nothing to hide, and if somebody in plain clothes got confrontational with me.........I hope they dont mind getting wet.

[AdverseCity]

Originally Posted by Mutter87

Sounds like something that is right up my alley that I would excel at. I'd be the first name on the volunteer paper.

Sorry to say but if it was set-up and ran how I'm picturing it, you wouldn't make the cut based on your heated reactions to this thread. You've been flexing your digital muscles the whole time, I think you'd honestly do more damage than good out there. I appreciate your dedication but we don't need tough guys, we need diplomats and teachers out there.

Hope I didn't offend you, I'm just calling it as I see (and read) it.

[AppleJax]

^^^^X2

great to hear some common sense starting to show up. sorry for my rant guys but this just got to me.

im also clarifying a point i made earlier.

i see lakes where we have take on slot sizes. i dont condone taking mature spawning fish. I also see closed walleye fisheries alot. these fisheries are stocked and they are a bio shock. this creates a huge strain on the natural spawning species as their minnow young are ate out of the lake. i know we cant open walleye for total open at this young stage but we need to assist the natural species by having staged take limits as the majority of the young walleye (whatever species) is being stabilized.

my concern is that when it is opened it is too late and needs corrective action by then. creating a gap in the control feature we are trying to implement by introducing other species.


additionally if walleye opens up the fishing pressure skyrockets and then puts additional pressures on the native species as a by product of the walleye fishermen (think pike and lake white here). Now instead i would like to see fisheries open walleye staged on lakes and then cut off the existing take limits on these days so that the impact can be controlled.

if they open walleye permanently, then i would like to see additional full closures for a couple years on the native/established species. to allow them to stabilize and recover from this expected extra pressure.

in all cases use common sense!


this wouldnt be necessary if fisheries stocked all species when stocking a lake and did so in what they consider relative ratios which would exist given successful programming. eg. stock pike and whites with the walleye to effect a ratio of change.

dont get me started on habitat change.....

[Wild&Free]

Originally Posted by AdverseCity

Can I ask why wouldn't allow a volunteer officer to check your fish? I'm assuming you're all legal and have nothing to hide so is this just a "you can't force me so I won't do it out of spite" type of thing? You'd be within your rights to refuse but that's not actively helping anything.

And as for the security guard analogy, they might not have any RCMP powers but when they make a call about minor illegal things I'm sure the cops take them a little more serious, that's all I'm suggesting here. I think the majority of people wouldn't mind, personally I'd feel good that someone else is doing what they can to curb illegal fishing and promote good fishing attitudes and habits.

A volunteer officer is not an officer and has absolutely 0 authority so why would I submit to someone who legally, lawfully and technically is my equal. It would be like knocking on your neighbors door to ask to come inside and search for contraband. I am a mature, responsible member of society and follow all the laws I'm aware of. Unfortunately with many thousands of pages of legislation governing anything we do in this country(income tax is a 2500 page document for example) it's kind of hard to know them all. I'm not a fan of any form of big brother type attitudes, or neighbor watching neighbor to tell on; however there is right and wrong and if I see something wrong I'll inform the proper authorities. If someone who is not a CO ever asks to measure my catch or to inspect my gear however will get a flat refusal from me. They can call RAPP on me, but the CO will find me to be legal.

I have the right under the constitution to not be subject to unwarranted search and seizure. I do not consent to searches. I will however voluntarily show my catch, gear, license, new shoes, paring knife, and whatever new toy I have laying around to a CO without even being asked, so long as he comes to me first, I'll even hang about and wait to show off if he's busy and making rounds. Always get some good info with a good BS session with the COs.

Basically, it comes around to the golden rule again (do unto others...) and quiet frankly I would never ask to do anything that wasn't within my duty to do and expect to be treated the same. I do not police my neighbors and do not wish to be policed by them. Although, one of my neighbors works for F&W so ya, there is THAT.

[MoFugger21]

Originally Posted by Mutter87

Sounds like something that is right up my alley that I would excel at. I'd be the first name on the volunteer paper.

Originally Posted by MoFugger21

...but pretty soon there'd be ordinary citizens thinking they have more power than they actually do, and I could see it causing more headaches for the CO's than actually helping.

Hmmmmm..... Lol

[AdverseCity]

What I'm suggesting is basically an unpaid (and obviously unarmed) F&W officer, with the same training and having proven themselves to be respectful ambassadors of the sport. You're right that some people would refuse a search just because they can, I'm not sure how to deal with that as this is still a fresh idea in my mind. I just think that the idea has potential, it just needs to be designed by people more informed than myself. Without the "asking to see your catch" part I practice this same principle all the time. I've never been close to calling anyone in as I've never actually found (or was convinced) that anyone was poaching, it's usually just informing people of things they obviously didn't realize. I've also never even once thought the people were upset at me for what I did, probably because I tend to approach friendly people and leave the grumpy guys alone. I'll admit the idea needs a lot of work but I think it has potential, at the very least you'd end up with a better informed public.

[hit_theice]

Originally Posted by huntsfurfish

You obviously were not around when the size limit for walleye in AB was 16" and the fisheries collapsed(took about 10 years to recover). It would be just a matter of time till it happened again with 2-3 fish under 15

And we do not live in everywhere else!

We live in limited water AB which is in to many fisherman county.

i was around when the limit was 15" and it wasn't 1 or 2 fish in most cases it was 5 fish and that was a minimum size limit so the spawners were also taken not just the 15" fish. anything over 15" was taken. and the lakes obviously still had fish in them after that otherwise there would be none right now. the limit i am talking about is 1-3 fish under 15" and 1 over 25" anything in between 15"-25" would have to be released. i still have a copy of the regs from 1993 i should take some pics and post them or try to get a scan of it. how about the old limit of 10 pike no size limit. it is sad what a huge step back our fisheries took from the limits we had back then. like i said in my first post do not by into the too may fisherman bs. it is simply not true, u can use statistics to prove anything you want to. 15% of all people know that. lol

[Mutter87]

Originally Posted by AdverseCity

Sorry to say but if it was set-up and ran how I'm picturing it, you wouldn't make the cut based on your heated reactions to this thread. You've been flexing your digital muscles the whole time, I think you'd honestly do more damage than good out there. I appreciate your dedication but we don't need tough guys, we need diplomats and teachers out there.

Hope I didn't offend you, I'm just calling it as I see (and read) it.

Naw man, were good. I understand what you mean 110%.

[Wild&Free]

Originally Posted by AdverseCity

I just think that the idea has potential, it just needs to be designed by people more informed than myself. Without the "asking to see your catch" part I practice this same principle all the time. I've never been close to calling anyone in as I've never actually found (or was convinced) that anyone was poaching, it's usually just informing people of things they obviously didn't realize. I've also never even once thought the people were upset at me for what I did, probably because I tend to approach friendly people and leave the grumpy guys alone. I'll admit the idea needs a lot of work but I think it has potential, at the very least you'd end up with a better informed public.

I cut out a bit in the quote but i highlighted the important part. What you're doing here is being a good ambassador of the sport, I try to do the same without interfering in others personal enjoyment, and that is one of the aspects of this forum I enjoy the most. We encourage people to fish responsibly and help those out who just don't know. It's the ones who do know and choose to disregard the rules that are an issue and an unarmed volunteer is not going to have much success dealing with these people. There is a very good reason F&W officers are armed since most of the time they are dealing with armed individuals and groups. I'm not opposed to your idea, but imo, someone would need at least the equivalent of a technical diploma (2 years) for me to consider them remotely near educated enough to begin to do what you suggest and who is going to do that to be an unpaid volunteer?
I'm in agreement with increasing licensing costs slightly to get more 'real' Conservation Officers in the field. Or better yet, elect a government that actually supports the people, and their pursuit of happiness, not just the big business looking to take our resources for a profit and leave nothing behind. Of course that starts with each person educating themselves on the actions of the current gov't and the policies of those who run against them.