Poll on Proposed Fishing Regulation Changes for Kananakis Lakes

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

LOL

I will clarify for you..

A great turn out for a AOF poll in the "fishing" section. I don't follow the hunting.

The last 10 polls in the fishing area was...

8
218
14
37
49
49
108
41
79
17

So your 103 in a short period of time is not bad. Still maybe a number of people just jumped straight to the petition and skipped the poll. Hopefully they keep signing.

How goes your review of Fishpro's dialog with ya?

Indeed, providing clear and factual information is always a good idea in order to gain and maintain your credibility.

I haven't reviewed Fishpro's dialogue with me. His points were presented in such a credible, respectful and intelligent manner that I don't feel the requirement to review it.

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

Indeed, providing clear and factual information is always a good idea in order to gain and maintain your credibility.

I haven't reviewed Fishpro's dialogue with me. His points were presented in such a credible, respectful and intelligent manner that I don't feel the requirement to review it.

We agree once again. He did an excellent job. I have deep respect for his prose.

So have you signed the petition yet. Please say no... If you said yes then it means you ignored everything I said and just had fun with me. If you say no...then all is right with the world still.

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

So have you signed the petition yet. Please say no... If you said yes then it means you ignored everything I said and just had fun with me. If you say no...then all is right with the world still.

No, I haven't signed the petition.

In fact, if I fished there all of the time I'd be starting my own petition to try to head this one off. Personally, I'd rather catch three harder to get 20" trout per day that you are currently allowed in Kan Lake rather than only one easy to catch one. I'm sure that everyone understood that when they signed the poll so they deserve what they get if this passes.

You guys down in Calgary can reduce your possession limits all that you want as long as you don't try to come up this way and do it. As soon as the weather warms up a bit a few of us are headed to Carson Lake to bring home our 5 trout limits and I'm pretty sure that some of them will be +20" if we want to keep them that big. It's nice to have that option.

[GaryF]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

You guys down in Calgary can reduce your possession limits all that you want as long as you don't try to come up this way and do it. As soon as the weather warms up a bit a few of us are headed to Carson Lake to bring home our 5 trout limits and I'm pretty sure that some of them will be +20" if we want to keep them that big. It's nice to have that option.

So this is all about keeping what you catch after all then. Not studies that haven't been done, economical impacts and everything else that you were stating as main reasons for your diagreement with the petition. Keeping the limit high isn't even on your top 10 list, but your statement makes it your top priority. With enough time, everyone slips up and the truth comes out. Thanks tho, you helped us put tons of information out there.

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by GaryF

So this is all about keeping what you catch after all then. Not studies that haven't been done, economical impacts and everything else that you were stating as main reasons for your diagreement with the petition. Keeping the limit high isn't even on your top 10 list, but your statement makes it your top priority. With enough time, everyone slips up and the truth comes out. Thanks tho, you helped us put tons of information out there.

I've already listed my reasons why I would not support this proposal and after reviewing it I believe that my main concern was that absolutely no studies have been done on anything. When people start messing with the environment without any studies as to the possible repercussions bad things can happen. I think that a good example is of do-gooders dumping a bunch of perch into a trout pond which I'm sure Sundance can relate to.

Actually, keeping the limit high IS in my top ten list as point #7. Just because I didn't spell it out for you doesn't mean that it wasn't there. No slip up there.

You're welcomed. It appeared to me that you guys needed all of the help that you could get.

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

No, I haven't signed the petition.

In fact, if I fished there all of the time I'd be starting my own petition to try to head this one off. Personally, I'd rather catch three harder to get 20" trout per day that you are currently allowed in Kan Lake rather than only one easy to catch one. I'm sure that everyone understood that when they signed the poll so they deserve what they get if this passes.

You guys down in Calgary can reduce your possession limits all that you want as long as you don't try to come up this way and do it. As soon as the weather warms up a bit a few of us are headed to Carson Lake to bring home our 5 trout limits and I'm pretty sure that some of them will be +20" if we want to keep them that big. It's nice to have that option.

That is a shame. So you are totally opposed to all quality fisheries. But you have not even fished one by the sounds of it.

[steelhead]

I would say its about stopping the SRD from just making more rules to have a reason not to spend a cent to do anything. Its a bad precedent to set. Rules dont keep people honest, enforcement does.

Then they move them trout rules over to manage walleyes and Pike cause it worked soooo well for a trout pond, well, its gotta work for the Pike and walleyes too. Keep all the spawners, great Idea. Works for stocked trout, but not for self sustaining walleye and pike populations. I guess ALL the other provinces and many many states got it wrong in thier management, and Alberta has been right all the time. Can ya imagine that!


Its also about very few individuals ideas of how fishing should be. Catch and release and bigger fish to fit thier ego's and picture frames. So much so that they dont consider anyone else when thinking this stuff up.

Theres not one person here thats made up a good definition of quality yet. Quality to who, evryone, or just the 300 that signed the petition. Not every angler goes to FLY shops and internet boards. How about a petition at the grocery store or fish and game accociations not affiliated with trout?

Sun and GaryF, people want to keep fish too. I know its hard to get it into your heads, but yes, people do like keeping fish, and not big mud trout, little panfries. Many of them want to go fishing to keep a few for the pan. Its legal and a part of life, living, growing up and a tool to get youngsters to respect the resource. If you make rules to prevent take, then the poachers are the only ones who win, and with no enforcement, they win all the time. Theres still bait containers found and cut up small fish and entrails found in bullshead, muir, and beaver once in a while. I guess all those eyes you talked about being out there didnt help at all.


But its all about your ideals, your thoughts on how it should be done, your reasoning is right, your quest for quality. And from many of your responses, you have no desire or want to look at the broader picture. There is a broader picture, but its wrong in your eyes.


And GarryF, we asked for your top 10 list, not the SRD's top 4 list of links. I'd rather see your humble opinions on why, just like the rest of us did. So yah, do like we did, and make a list that we can cut up with lame opinionated, and words in our mouth responses like the ones that you and Sun have graced our pages with. Or are ya yeller? Not prepared to look stupid like you made the rest of us out to be?


HunterDave and I put forward very real concerns and ones backed by conservation strategies put in place for 15 years and in some cases, decades. But i guess thier not correct now. Not in the light of a quality fishery boom. How interesting how staunch opinions of the past have changed to open the doors of one small sectors ideals to change the future. I have seen every post on the fly anglers boards, I see what you guys want, i see what you guys complain about, I see what you guys see fishing should be like. I see what people on this board want and what fishing should be like. 2 very different perspectives, but who is right, really? I see you guys call this board the redneck board!!LOL Have you lowered yourselves to be here? I bet you think you have.


Calling out and shrugging off real concerns of other sectors of angling like your the only ones that are right, and everyone else is wrong, well, I guess we get what we have for fisheries today. More complaints than quality reports.


I do not agree with this quality fishery on these 2 lakes. A single specie pond, like beaver and bullshead closer to Calgary, yes, but not a self-sustaining system that is already quality. I guess a 25" plus bull isnt quality but a 20 inch cutt is. I guess all the foothills and high mountain streams that surround these lakes arent quality either as you see a need for these quality lakes deep within them. According to you fellas.


STEELHEAD

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by steelhead

I would say its about stopping the SRD from just making more rules to have a reason not to spend a cent to do anything. Its a bad precedent to set. Rules dont keep people honest, enforcement does.

Then they move them trout rules over to manage walleyes and Pike cause it worked soooo well for a trout pond, well, its gotta work for the Pike and walleyes too. Keep all the spawners, great Idea. Works for stocked trout, but not for self sustaining walleye and pike populations. I guess ALL the other provinces and many many states got it wrong in thier management, and Alberta has been right all the time. Can ya imagine that!


Its also about very few individuals ideas of how fishing should be. Catch and release and bigger fish to fit thier ego's and picture frames. So much so that they dont consider anyone else when thinking this stuff up.

Theres not one person here thats made up a good definition of quality yet. Quality to who, evryone, or just the 300 that signed the petition. Not every angler goes to FLY shops and internet boards. How about a petition at the grocery store or fish and game accociations not affiliated with trout?

Sun and GaryF, people want to keep fish too. I know its hard to get it into your heads, but yes, people do like keeping fish, and not big mud trout, little panfries. Many of them want to go fishing to keep a few for the pan. Its legal and a part of life, living, growing up and a tool to get youngsters to respect the resource. If you make rules to prevent take, then the poachers are the only ones who win, and with no enforcement, they win all the time. Theres still bait containers found and cut up small fish and entrails found in bullshead, muir, and beaver once in a while. I guess all those eyes you talked about being out there didnt help at all.


But its all about your ideals, your thoughts on how it should be done, your reasoning is right, your quest for quality. And from many of your responses, you have no desire or want to look at the broader picture. There is a broader picture, but its wrong in your eyes.


And GarryF, we asked for your top 10 list, not the SRD's top 4 list of links. I'd rather see your humble opinions on why, just like the rest of us did. So yah, do like we did, and make a list that we can cut up with lame opinionated, and words in our mouth responses like the ones that you and Sun have graced our pages with. Or are ya yeller? Not prepared to look stupid like you made the rest of us out to be?


HunterDave and I put forward very real concerns and ones backed by conservation strategies put in place for 15 years and in some cases, decades. But i guess thier not correct now. Not in the light of a quality fishery boom. How interesting how staunch opinions of the past have changed to open the doors of one small sectors ideals to change the future. I have seen every post on the fly anglers boards, I see what you guys want, i see what you guys complain about, I see what you guys see fishing should be like. I see what people on this board want and what fishing should be like. 2 very different perspectives, but who is right, really? I see you guys call this board the redneck board!!LOL Have you lowered yourselves to be here? I bet you think you have.


Calling out and shrugging off real concerns of other sectors of angling like your the only ones that are right, and everyone else is wrong, well, I guess we get what we have for fisheries today. More complaints than quality reports.


I do not agree with this quality fishery on these 2 lakes. A single specie pond, like beaver and bullshead closer to Calgary, yes, but not a self-sustaining system that is already quality. I guess a 25" plus bull isnt quality but a 20 inch cutt is. I guess all the foothills and high mountain streams that surround these lakes arent quality either as you see a need for these quality lakes deep within them. According to you fellas.


STEELHEAD

You are very bitter and I feel for you. I am researching the Fisheries budget information for the past 10 years. When I can piece it all together I will report. I want to know how many anglers we have a year for the past 10 years. I want to know what the fisheries budget is for the past 10 years. I also want to know what the fishing license revenue has been for the past 10 years. I also want to know how many officers we have per 100,000 hectares and compare to BC. I also want to know what the budget breakdown is in Alberta.

We know that BC stocks tons more lakes 900 to our 242 stocked and has about 4-5 times the licensing revenue. We also know we stock 20,000,000 fish a year in Alberta compared to only 8,000,000 in BC.

You keep throwing out this major assumption of I hate government...but...your points have not been backed up with any facts. Hopefully my contacts can provide what I am looking for. Should be numbers that are tracked yearly I would hope.

Your attempts to scare people into thinking put and take trout pond rules will somehow influence pike and walleye regulations is...how shall I put it nicely...bizarre. Funny how the plan is to only make a few of these lakes regionally to fill the demand. Stretching this future as you try is misplaced paranoia.

You say that nobody wants the new regulations we are selling but save a few and yet...wow...there are significant numbers buying it up when they put these regulations on a lake. You complain yet to me...complaining without context of knowing what you are complaining about (as in having experienced it) is very weak debating.

Your concerns center around maintaining high stocking rates, small fishing and plenty of space in your freezer while excluding all other users from having any say or any fishery that being fair works for everyone and not just your own ideals.

Your "fisheries strategies" are always out of context to this issue and yet you fail to acknowledge or recognize it. For instance...demanding the release of larger spawning sized trout makes no sense in a fishery that is put and take and any poor spawning success is just a novelty rather than a management strategy point.

And last but not least...funny how you tell us that people want to keep fish...excluding the fact that 95% of all put and take fisheries will remain 12 inch or smaller fisheries...ignoring everyone that wants something better...and forgetting that this new regulation allows for increase harvest by weight of fish while increasing and improving catch rates for everyone in the process. What you fail to do Sirs...is actually read what is being said. Keeping an open mind is what real debating is all about.

Cheers

Sun

[steelhead]

Sun,



Quit putting words into peoples mouths. No more"so what your saying" and " your attempts" stuff. You have been doing it quite a bit, and thats poor debating. It not reading what people have said and your making your own decisions of what you think we said. One reason why fishpro has credibility. He doesnt assume. He recognizes the point, and adresses it accordingly. And he doesnt use lines that put a false emotion and words into the poster hes relpying to.

I'm not bitter. Not at all. If i was bitter, I would have been banned 6 pages ago. I just dont like this proposal for these peticular lakes.



Read this carefully SUN,

I'm definetly not here to scare people, I dont hate the government, I am a catch and release angler, my concerns do not center around high stocking rates, I am pro quality lakes (just not these 2) and what I do not do is not read whats being said! I have been saying this since the beginning, BUT, you have flipped it to make me out to be a bad person by , well...... as you put it....

"What you fail to do Sirs...is actually read what is being said. Keeping an open mind is what real debating is all about."


I think you are the one that best fits that description. And a few here have already agreed in past posts.


And then you say I dont know what these quality fisheries are like!! Ha ha,

I have fished Bullshead 12 times last year, Upper and lower k 5 times, many trout streams from north to south about 25 times, I even fished beaver and Muir twice each. I am a REGULAR USER OF QUALITY FISHERIES already.

Sun said what he thinks I know.....


"complaining without context of knowing what you are complaining about (as in having experienced it) is very weak debating"


Lets hear your experience with quality lakes. Where else and how many times have you fished the quality lakes and streams of this province.


For a person that is gunning for more quality lakes, how much have you used the ones we have already? How much have you experienced it? By reading your posts and reports for the last year (allthough quite nauseating) I already know the answer to my queries.


STEELHEAD



Don Theres not a person in the AFGA that does anything helpfull for our fisheries as a whole. They should Take the F out of thier title. Theres also not many people in the SRD I have any confidence in protecting our waters, such as the one that moved on that you mention.

I guess thats what we get for our dollar. Poor employees and pee poor enforcement.



I'm glad Sun quit as a Bio. He has a tough time reading and comprehending simple stuff, the tough stuff must be overwhealming at times.

[Sundancefisher]

Link to Petition.
http://www.petitiononline.com/dekkbeed/petition.html

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

That is a shame. So you are totally opposed to all quality fisheries. But you have not even fished one by the sounds of it.

That depends on what you consider a quality fishery. If making it easier to catch and keep one 20" trout instead of being able to catch and keep three harder to catch 20" is considered a quality fishery then yeah, I guess that I am opposed to it.

No, I have never fished in any body of water in Alberta that is officially classed as a quality fishery. Nor have I jabbed a sharp pencil in my eye but even thou I haven't experienced it, I bet that it would hurt. I have though fished lakes that I personally consider quality fisheries although not officially called such.

If there were two bodies of water each 150kms from my home and both held +20" trout, which lake do you think that I'm going to drive to?

A. A quality fishery lake with easier to catch large trout with a minimum size limited to +20" and a possession limit of one; or

B. A lake with harder to catch larger trout with a minimum size limited to 12" and a possession limit of three.

I'll give you a hint........it's not "A"

In lake "B" I have the option of keeping three +20" if I want to. I also have the option of keeping three trout between 12" and 20" if I want something to cook up for myself for supper when I get home. I'm also the type that doesn't mind a challenge when it comes to catching fish and I realize that not everyone is like that.

It's all about options. This proposal will take the options away from anglers and limit them to one thing. If anyone that signs the petition doesn't understand that before signing it then too bad for them.

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

In lake "B" I have the option of keeping three +20" if I want to. I also have the option of keeping three trout between 12" and 20" if I want something to cook up for myself for supper when I get home. I'm also the type that doesn't mind a challenge when it comes to catching fish and I realize that not everyone is like that.

It's all about options. This proposal will take the options away from anglers and limit them to one thing. If anyone that signs the petition doesn't understand that before signing it then too bad for them.

Funny...these mystery lakes that really really great and skilled fishermen like yoursefl know about and can readily catch these 20 inch rainbows whenever they feel like really makes the rest of us anglers jealous. It is good to know they are so readily accessible and catchable. So now where are these mystery lakes?

Oh wait...

1) you won't tell us cause the over fishing will destroy this mystery fishery.

2) you will tell us another lake and hope no one calls you on it.

Fact is...you start a poll that asks are there lots of opportunity to catch lots of bigger cutthroat and rainbow trout in Alberta...you know the resounding answer would be no. It is a dream except where there is a quality fishery. Still...I bet after a quality fishery gets established...all other put and take lakes experience a sharp drop in usage. Why fish for minnows when you can catch something way more fun. Still you bad mouth what you know nothing about.

As for perch...somethings are clearly common sense.

Is it wrong to put perch in a put and take trout lake...yes...obviously...horribly bad.

Is it wrong to stock the lake with larger trout or let the trout grow bigger and have higher catch rates...terrible...just terrible...NOT...

[ADIDAFish]

Sun, HunterDave just wants it to be harder to catch fish there. To each his own but I think there are lots of other bodies of water where it is hard to catch fish. Why not try Ghost Lake for some lake trout?

I'm still surprised that 21 people voted no to this proposed change. I didn't think so many people enjoyed having a smaller chance of catching smaller fish.

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

Funny...these mystery lakes that really really great and skilled fishermen like yoursefl know about and can readily catch these 20 inch rainbows whenever they feel like really makes the rest of us anglers jealous. It is good to know they are so readily accessible and catchable. So now where are these mystery lakes?

Oh wait...

1) you won't tell us cause the over fishing will destroy this mystery fishery.

2) you will tell us another lake and hope no one calls you on it.

Fact is...you start a poll that asks are there lots of opportunity to catch lots of bigger cutthroat and rainbow trout in Alberta...you know the resounding answer would be no. It is a dream except where there is a quality fishery. Still...I bet after a quality fishery gets established...all other put and take lakes experience a sharp drop in usage. Why fish for minnows when you can catch something way more fun. Still you bad mouth what you know nothing about.

As for perch...somethings are clearly common sense.

Is it wrong to put perch in a put and take trout lake...yes...obviously...horribly bad.

Is it wrong to stock the lake with larger trout or let the trout grow bigger and have higher catch rates...terrible...just terrible...NOT...

Nothing of substance. Perhaps you should take Fishpro's example and apply it to your posts.

[Don Andersen]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

No, I haven't signed the petition.


You guys down in Calgary can reduce your possession limits all that you want as long as you don't try to come up this way and do it. As soon as the weather warms up a bit a few of us are headed to Carson Lake to bring home our 5 trout limits and I'm pretty sure that some of them will be +20" if we want to keep them that big. It's nice to have that option.

Hey Hunter...

You must have been pleased as all get out with the Regional Bio. responsible for taking Carson from 14 lbs. > 14". Thank God he retired to be - - - are your ready for this - - - - President of the Alberta Fish and Game Assoc. And at one Roundtable Meeting Proposed making all trout lakes into Perch Lakes.

I've watch SRD destroy lake after lake by poor management practices. It has taken no studies of any kind to reduce the ability of nearly all the trout lakes in this Province to produce any fish over 14".

Don