Go Back   Alberta Outdoorsmen Forum > Main Category > Fishing Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61  
Old 06-24-2019, 10:15 AM
Talking moose's Avatar
Talking moose Talking moose is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: McBride/Prince George
Posts: 14,520
Default

I think a lot has to do with owl river as it’s pretty much the exclusive spawn area of walleye Kurt.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 06-24-2019, 10:16 AM
Talking moose's Avatar
Talking moose Talking moose is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: McBride/Prince George
Posts: 14,520
Default

https://www.laclabichepost.com/artic...-lake-20120522
Here’s an interesting article by lackabiche post.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 06-24-2019, 04:46 PM
smitty9 smitty9 is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 695
Default Really??

Kurt:

Seriously, honestly, not trolling you, those images don't show much in the way of supporting your point (or mine for that matter).

Anyways, round and round we go, pretty certain we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Bottom line is that every province, every state, every jurisdiction has fisheries management challenges that are unique to that situation.

Nonetheless, you don't have to convince me AEP is behind the 8 ball here, and couldnt learn a thing or 2 from other fish and wildlife organizations.
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 06-24-2019, 05:24 PM
Kurt505 Kurt505 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Communist state
Posts: 13,245
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by smitty9 View Post
Kurt:

Seriously, honestly, not trolling you, those images don't show much in the way of supporting your point (or mine for that matter).

Anyways, round and round we go, pretty certain we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Bottom line is that every province, every state, every jurisdiction has fisheries management challenges that are unique to that situation.

Nonetheless, you don't have to convince me AEP is behind the 8 ball here, and couldnt learn a thing or 2 from other fish and wildlife organizations.

I know the images need to be zoomed in on but if I zoomed in you wouldn’t know where it was. If you know how to use google maps then have a look up close for yourself, if not have someone who knows how to use google maps to zoom in on Saskatchewan and Alberta, you’ll see where the water is and what’s accessible by roads.

I’m not trying to be rude, but it’s pretty easy to see when you use google maps. You can see most of Saskatchewan’s lakes are inaccessible while most of Alberta’s are. It’s something left out of the stats when comparing Alberta lakes with Saskatchewan’s lakes. There is no doubt there are less people and more accessible lakes in Saskatchewan, but not as bad as it sounds.

Like you said, AEP isn’t doing a very good job and should really look at other jurisdictions for a model that works.
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 06-24-2019, 05:47 PM
huntsfurfish huntsfurfish is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Southern Alberta
Posts: 7,350
Default

Not all water bodies are created equal either.

Lake Diefenbaker probably has as much fish biomass as Edmonton South.

And If not that, then it would for sure, if you included Last mountain and the Qu'Appelle lakes.

So the one on one comparison is skewed as well.

Not only does Sask have more water bodies but lots of large ones.
__________________
.
eat a snickers


made in Alberta__ born n raised.


FS-Tinfool hats by the roll.
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 06-24-2019, 05:51 PM
Talking moose's Avatar
Talking moose Talking moose is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: McBride/Prince George
Posts: 14,520
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by huntsfurfish View Post
Not all water bodies are created equal either.

Lake Diefenbaker probably has as much fish biomass as Edmonton South.

And If not that, then it would for sure, if you included Last mountain and the Qu'Appelle lakes.

So the one on one comparison is skewed as well.

Not only does Sask have more water bodies but lots of large ones.
Everyone gets that. Point is why use the 94,000 lake scenario when 93,700 of them need a float plane to access them.
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 06-24-2019, 05:58 PM
huntsfurfish huntsfurfish is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Southern Alberta
Posts: 7,350
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Talking moose View Post
Everyone gets that. Point is why use the 94,000 lake scenario when 93,700 of them need a float plane to access them.
Actually the numbers I have heard used was 600 AB and 6000 SK. Not sure where I got that from and dont remember where. They may not be correct either.

The point is we dont have nearly as much as other places.

And the bottom line is we dont have the same biomass as others either.
__________________
.
eat a snickers


made in Alberta__ born n raised.


FS-Tinfool hats by the roll.
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 06-24-2019, 05:59 PM
Talking moose's Avatar
Talking moose Talking moose is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: McBride/Prince George
Posts: 14,520
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by huntsfurfish View Post
Actually the numbers I have heard used was 600 AB and 6000 SK. Not sure where I got that from and dont remember where. They may not be correct either.

The point is we dont have nearly as much as other places.

And the bottom line is we dont have the same biomass as others either.
Yes your information is off.
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 06-24-2019, 06:01 PM
Talking moose's Avatar
Talking moose Talking moose is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: McBride/Prince George
Posts: 14,520
Default




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 06-24-2019, 06:02 PM
huntsfurfish huntsfurfish is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Southern Alberta
Posts: 7,350
Default

What would the total hectares of fishable water be?

Might be a better way of measuring.
__________________
.
eat a snickers


made in Alberta__ born n raised.


FS-Tinfool hats by the roll.
Reply With Quote
  #71  
Old 06-24-2019, 06:04 PM
Talking moose's Avatar
Talking moose Talking moose is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: McBride/Prince George
Posts: 14,520
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by huntsfurfish View Post
What would the total hectares of fishable water be?

Might be a better way of measuring.
Not really relevant when access is so limited. Could have every float plane in Canada going in and out of the lakes and not put a dent in the fish populations up north.
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 06-24-2019, 06:05 PM
huntsfurfish huntsfurfish is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Southern Alberta
Posts: 7,350
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Talking moose View Post
Yes your information is off.
Thought the 600 vs 6000 was what was fishable (accessable).
__________________
.
eat a snickers


made in Alberta__ born n raised.


FS-Tinfool hats by the roll.
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 06-24-2019, 06:06 PM
Kurt505 Kurt505 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Communist state
Posts: 13,245
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by huntsfurfish View Post
Not all water bodies are created equal either.

Lake Diefenbaker probably has as much fish biomass as Edmonton South.

And If not that, then it would for sure, if you included Last mountain and the Qu'Appelle lakes.

So the one on one comparison is skewed as well.

Not only does Sask have more water bodies but lots of large ones.
If you take diefenbaker and last mountain lake, multiply by 2 you’ll have about as much surface area as Lesser Slave, which are all accessible by road.

The lakes in Alberta are literally polluted with walleye, to the point where it’s hard to find a pike in any water body that holds walleye. It’s our AEP who are destroying pike populations, not anglers. Soon every fish in Alberta will require tag$ for retention. They tested out how a tag system would work and found it lined their pockets well so they ran with it. They could have opened up lakes for retention for 2 months out of the year instead, say one in the summer and one in the winter to reach their intended numbers but there’s no bonus cash involved that way.
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 06-24-2019, 06:06 PM
Talking moose's Avatar
Talking moose Talking moose is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: McBride/Prince George
Posts: 14,520
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by huntsfurfish View Post
Thought the 600 vs 6000 was what was fishable (accessable).
Sask does not have 6000 drive to lakes. Not even close.
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 06-24-2019, 06:07 PM
huntsfurfish huntsfurfish is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Southern Alberta
Posts: 7,350
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Talking moose View Post
Not really relevant when access is so limited. Could have every float plane in Canada going in and out of the lakes and not put a dent in the fish populations up north.
I mean just accessible lakes- drive to.
__________________
.
eat a snickers


made in Alberta__ born n raised.


FS-Tinfool hats by the roll.
Reply With Quote
  #76  
Old 06-24-2019, 06:07 PM
Smoky buck Smoky buck is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Posts: 7,325
Default

Start comparing population vs water throughout the US states. Alberta will look plentiful compared to parts of the US
Reply With Quote
  #77  
Old 06-24-2019, 06:08 PM
Talking moose's Avatar
Talking moose Talking moose is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: McBride/Prince George
Posts: 14,520
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by huntsfurfish View Post
I mean just accessible lakes- drive to.
I’d guess close to the same.
Reply With Quote
  #78  
Old 06-24-2019, 06:09 PM
huntsfurfish huntsfurfish is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Southern Alberta
Posts: 7,350
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Talking moose View Post
Sask does not have 6000 drive to lakes. Not even close.
ok i am not going to count them.
__________________
.
eat a snickers


made in Alberta__ born n raised.


FS-Tinfool hats by the roll.
Reply With Quote
  #79  
Old 06-24-2019, 06:10 PM
Talking moose's Avatar
Talking moose Talking moose is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: McBride/Prince George
Posts: 14,520
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by huntsfurfish View Post
ok i am not going to count them.
The good lord only gave us so many fingers and toes.....
Reply With Quote
  #80  
Old 06-24-2019, 06:12 PM
huntsfurfish huntsfurfish is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Southern Alberta
Posts: 7,350
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Talking moose View Post
I’d guess close to the same.
I dont think so.
__________________
.
eat a snickers


made in Alberta__ born n raised.


FS-Tinfool hats by the roll.
Reply With Quote
  #81  
Old 06-24-2019, 06:37 PM
smitty9 smitty9 is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 695
Default

Kurt:

Cheers. Quite familiar with Google maps, you chose your images poorly.

Anyways, ce'st la vie.

All I know is if Edmonton anglers were allowed their olden' days limit of 3 or 5 or 10 walleye per outing, wouldn't take long for Pigeon or Wabamun or Ste. Anne to get fished out. Ditto for the Lac la Biche crowd with Touchwood or Elinor or Pinehurst. Wait, didn't that already happen years ago due to liberal limits?

Anyways, it all comes down to funding, AEP policies/principles and culture of angling in this province. And that's 3 strikes against us right there.
Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 06-24-2019, 06:49 PM
Kurt505 Kurt505 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Communist state
Posts: 13,245
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by smitty9 View Post
Kurt:

Cheers. Quite familiar with Google maps, you chose your images poorly.

Anyways, ce'st la vie.

All I know is if Edmonton anglers were allowed their olden' days limit of 3 or 5 or 10 walleye per outing, wouldn't take long for Pigeon or Wabamun or Ste. Anne to get fished out. Ditto for the Lac la Biche crowd with Touchwood or Elinor or Pinehurst. Wait, didn't that already happen years ago due to liberal limits?

Anyways, it all comes down to funding, AEP policies/principles and culture of angling in this province. And that's 3 strikes against us right there.

Nobody is asking to go back to the old days. Old days was 5 walleye any size, and I think it might have been 10 before that. I think 1 slot size fish per outing would be manageable, with harsh penalties like forfeiture of boat, angling gear, and license for anyone caught over their limit.


Pigeon, Wabamun, and St Anne all need to be thinned out to help create a balanced fishery imo, and a 1 fish limit would do them good, even if only for a season or two. It took decades of 5 any size to collapse the lakes, I’m 100% positive opening up a one fish slot size would only help the lakes.

It certainly would help alleviate the pressure they’ve created on the lakes that allow retention.
Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 06-24-2019, 09:51 PM
smitty9 smitty9 is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 695
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurt505 View Post
Nobody is asking to go back to the old days. Old days was 5 walleye any size, and I think it might have been 10 before that. I think 1 slot size fish per outing would be manageable, with harsh penalties like forfeiture of boat, angling gear, and license for anyone caught over their limit.


Pigeon, Wabamun, and St Anne all need to be thinned out to help create a balanced fishery imo, and a 1 fish limit would do them good, even if only for a season or two. It took decades of 5 any size to collapse the lakes, I’m 100% positive opening up a one fish slot size would only help the lakes.

It certainly would help alleviate the pressure they’ve created on the lakes that allow retention.
I think you and I see eye to eye here; walleye definitely need thinning out. Bios think the lakes are on their way to being "rebalanced". Well, I guess we'll see.

The difference between back then and now is the province's population has tripled. Though licenses have been stable or declined. Also, much more roads, as you say. My point being, I do see the timeline slightly differently; I wouldn't open up a lake longer than 1 season, if that. I'd be more in favour of an 8 week window. And yes, the lakes would need stepped up enforcement presence.
Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old 06-27-2019, 11:58 AM
Red Bullets's Avatar
Red Bullets Red Bullets is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: central Alberta
Posts: 12,627
Default

There is talk of how walleye have changed and 'unbalanced ' the lakes. Interestingly lakes that do not have walleye have also changed.

An example is Wizard lake, a small pothole lake southwest of Edmonton. (It could be any similar lake in Alberta though.) Wizard is a spring fed lake that has always had northern pike, burbot, perch and suckers. Back around the turn of 1900 the settlers mentioned they caught many pike in a few hours and most averaged 6 to 8 lbs. a few over 10 lbs. When I fished there in the early 1960's the average pike I would catch was 4 to 6 lbs. Easy to catch many in a day. Biggest I know caught in the 60's was 21 lbs. Now the average size of a pike is maybe a pound or two. You might catch a 10+ lb. pike once in a lifetime there now. The perch have remained consistent. The immense minnow populations are still there. Years ago people that caught lingcod left them on the ice by the dozens. Now there aren't as many lingcod to compete with the pike.

What would explain this size reduction in many lakes? It can't be just over fishing or the walleye.
__________________
___________________________________________
This country was started by voyagers whose young lives were swept away by the currents of the rivers for ten cents a day... just for the vanity of the European's beaver hats. ~ Red Bullets
___________________________________________
It is when you walk alone in nature that you discover your strengths and weaknesses. ~ Red Bullets
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old 06-27-2019, 12:27 PM
SNAPFisher SNAPFisher is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,439
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Bullets View Post
There is talk of how walleye have changed and 'unbalanced ' the lakes. Interestingly lakes that do not have walleye have also changed.

An example is Wizard lake, a small pothole lake southwest of Edmonton. (It could be any similar lake in Alberta though.) Wizard is a spring fed lake that has always had northern pike, burbot, perch and suckers. Back around the turn of 1900 the settlers mentioned they caught many pike in a few hours and most averaged 6 to 8 lbs. a few over 10 lbs. When I fished there in the early 1960's the average pike I would catch was 4 to 6 lbs. Easy to catch many in a day. Biggest I know caught in the 60's was 21 lbs. Now the average size of a pike is maybe a pound or two. You might catch a 10+ lb. pike once in a lifetime there now. The perch have remained consistent. The immense minnow populations are still there. Years ago people that caught lingcod left them on the ice by the dozens. Now there aren't as many lingcod to compete with the pike.

What would explain this size reduction in many lakes? It can't be just over fishing or the walleye.
Agreed. Same people complaining will just say that a slot size would have fixed it all and saved Wizard
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old 06-27-2019, 12:55 PM
Kurt505 Kurt505 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Communist state
Posts: 13,245
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SNAPFisher View Post
Agreed. Same people complaining will just say that a slot size would have fixed it all and saved Wizard
Lol! You’re a card.

Comparing how a lake open to unlimited size retention over the past century to how lakes have changed over the past decade?

Bahahahaha!


Where’s your proof slot sizes wouldn’t have prevented this??? You have none! The only thing lakes with slot sizes have proved so far is that it works.

Can you show me where slot sizes have failed?


FWIW, I fished wizard once in my life for about a half hour casting of the dock, caught a 9lb pike on either my first or second cast.
Reply With Quote
  #87  
Old 06-27-2019, 08:29 PM
Red Bullets's Avatar
Red Bullets Red Bullets is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: central Alberta
Posts: 12,627
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurt505 View Post
Lol! You’re a card.

Comparing how a lake open to unlimited size retention over the past century to how lakes have changed over the past decade?

Bahahahaha!


Where’s your proof slot sizes wouldn’t have prevented this??? You have none! The only thing lakes with slot sizes have proved so far is that it works.

Can you show me where slot sizes have failed?


FWIW, I fished wizard once in my life for about a half hour casting of the dock, caught a 9lb pike on either my first or second cast.
That was your once in a lifetime Wizard lake big pike then. haha
__________________
___________________________________________
This country was started by voyagers whose young lives were swept away by the currents of the rivers for ten cents a day... just for the vanity of the European's beaver hats. ~ Red Bullets
___________________________________________
It is when you walk alone in nature that you discover your strengths and weaknesses. ~ Red Bullets
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old 06-27-2019, 10:21 PM
pikeman06 pikeman06 is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,615
Default

It was the ten plus years of the 3 over 63 that toasted our pike gene pool. All the big females from gull sylvan buck lac st anne coal etc etc got whacked when it shoulda been one under 60 or so for pike at that point. There were enough big pike alive at that point to sustain the population. End of point. When you harvest all the spawning size fish without stocking to replace what they produce .......what the eff do you think happens slowly but surely? Throw another predator into the mix "walleye " and protect them the whole time the pike are getting whacked and you get a runty stunty little population of genetically inferior and modified fish that shoulda been in the frying pan instead of breeding. Look at the quality of the deer herd in many areas. Wonder why just a bunch of skinny 3 pointers running around anymore? Cuz that's what the last couple generations of breeding of little runty bucks produced. Now it starts from scratch again....if you never raised animals or understand what bloodlines mean to a population of animals and how to preserve that then it'll never make sense. Why our biologists, whoever they are, if they even exist, can't figure that out will always remain a mystery. The only biologists I ever seen were the kids at the boat launch asking how many fish ya got. Where all this info about the state of our fishery and how to drastically change it came from will be one of our greatest wonders some day when they look back to see what the hell happened to alberta fisheries.
Reply With Quote
  #89  
Old 06-28-2019, 09:21 AM
cube cube is offline
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,939
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Bullets View Post
There is talk of how walleye have changed and 'unbalanced ' the lakes. Interestingly lakes that do not have walleye have also changed.

An example is Wizard lake, a small pothole lake southwest of Edmonton. (It could be any similar lake in Alberta though.) Wizard is a spring fed lake that has always had northern pike, burbot, perch and suckers. Back around the turn of 1900 the settlers mentioned they caught many pike in a few hours and most averaged 6 to 8 lbs. a few over 10 lbs. When I fished there in the early 1960's the average pike I would catch was 4 to 6 lbs. Easy to catch many in a day. Biggest I know caught in the 60's was 21 lbs. Now the average size of a pike is maybe a pound or two. You might catch a 10+ lb. pike once in a lifetime there now. The perch have remained consistent. The immense minnow populations are still there. Years ago people that caught lingcod left them on the ice by the dozens. Now there aren't as many lingcod to compete with the pike.

What would explain this size reduction in many lakes? It can't be just over fishing or the walleye.
Not saying it is so but just one possible explanation of what you are seeing is actually an over population of the pike and stunting. They had larger limits back then which would have thinned the pike population down leaving more forage for each pike remaining. This would lead to much faster growth and larger size for those that did not get caught and retained.
Certainly I am not advocating returning to the huge limits of the past but a lack of harvesting also has effects.
Reply With Quote
  #90  
Old 06-28-2019, 09:52 AM
cube cube is offline
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,939
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurt505 View Post

Where’s your proof slot sizes wouldn’t have prevented this??? You have none! The only thing lakes with slot sizes have proved so far is that it works.

Can you show me where slot sizes have failed?

.
Not saying I necessarily agree with it but there have been a few trials of slot sizes that have failed in Alberta.

https://mywildalberta.ca/fishing/reg...ta-May2017.pdf
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:01 AM.


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