Dolberg Poaching

[huntsfurfish]

As I said, "Good one-we should let you set the regulations."

What good are regulations when you pick and choose the ones you want to follow? You and others are down on the OP because he chose to report a poacher? It wouldnt be because they are fearfull of being reported, would it?

There is nothing wrong with kids fishing and messing around a bit though as long as they are close by. But there were other issues in this instance such as culling fish. And many are defending his taking a kid fishing(that is good on it self)! But, what is he teaching his kid(releasing dead fish to trade up)?

There are some on here that are personally attacking the OP and that is wrong.

[Doc]

Originally Posted by bruce44

The main reason for the regulations is to prevent over fishing of a species is it not. That is the bottom line and regulations change because the writers realize its dumb. Remember this is all my opinion am i not entitled to that. I would not waste my time reporting a guy using two rods because chances are hes going to have a harder time catching fish from the lack of skill. According to your way of thinking everyone should be reported and money wasted on a small crime that shouldnt even be considered a crime. Fishing with 2 rods will not result in extinction culling and over fishing will. One rod or ten if a person doesnt care about the limit they will catch over it. Not all regulations right and just because its made by the government it doesnt mean its morally right. So please stop acting so self righteous. A perfect example is the legallity of weed and alcohol. People whine about how bad weed is for them while they get wasted on alcohol and get into fights

Your opinion of what the regs should be and your perception of "morally right" really has nothing to do with anything. What it boils down to is the legality of fishing with two rods. If you don't like the fishing regs then mail your MLA and get it changed. In the mean time, it is not legal to fish with two rods in open water. Period. I have called the RAP line on guys fishing with two rods in the past and will again in a heart beat and feel good about calling it in. Tell you what, you just keep pickin' and choosin' what regs you want to follow today and we'll keep the RAP line on speed dial. Deal?

[bruce44]

Originally Posted by Doc

Your opinion of what the regs should be and your perception of "morally right" really has nothing to do with anything. What it boils down to is the legality of fishing with two rods. If you don't like the fishing regs then mail your MLA and get it changed. In the mean time, it is not legal to fish with two rods in open water. Period. I have called the RAP line on guys fishing with two rods in the past and will again in a heart beat and feel good about calling it in. Tell you what, you just keep pickin' and choosin' what regs you want to follow today and we'll keep the RAP line on speed dial. Deal?

deal i never said i pick and choose what to follow i follow them all you are just speculating. I just dont care if a person is not following a regulation that is made by a bunch of ignorant people who just pick rules out of a hat. Case in point gun registry. And like i said you tell me that you have never kept a friends fish in your cooler or transported it in your car without a proper note.

[huntsfurfish]

"I just dont care if a person is not following a regulation that is made by a bunch of ignorant people who just pick rules out of a hat"

Are you a fisheries biologist by any chance? Doubt it!

"bunch of ignorant people who just pick rules out of a hat"
You are kidding right? I take it back "Good one-we should let you set the regulations."
I wouldnt want you any where near making the regulations.

However you are entitled to your opinion as are the rest of us.

OH Man

[bruce44]

Originally Posted by huntsfurfish

"I just dont care if a person is not following a regulation that is made by a bunch of ignorant people who just pick rules out of a hat"

Are you a fisheries biologist by any chance? Doubt it!

"bunch of ignorant people who just pick rules out of a hat"
You are kidding right? I take it back "Good one-we should let you set the regulations."
I wouldnt want you any where near making the regulations.

However you are entitled to your opinion as are the rest of us.

its true half of those rules dont make any sense

[huntsfurfish]

Hi Bruce!

What rules dont make any sense? There are reasons for each of the regs. You might not agree with them but they are there for a purpose.

Regs will change with the fisheries as needed.

More people means less fish

It is all about fisherman and hunter management and in turn, fish and game management.

Other issues such as First Nations/Metis fishing/hunting rights are just something they have to take into account as best they can.

Good luck fishin & huntin!

Originally Posted by huntsfurfish

What rules dont make any sense?

I would like this one explained to me

"From the Tolman Bridge (Sec. Rd. 585) downstream to the Alberta/Saskatchewan border
May 15 to Mar. 31 – Walleye and Sauger limit 3; Walleye over 50 cm; Pike limit 3 over 63 cm; Burbot limit 10; Goldeye limit 10; Lake Sturgeon limit 0; Bait allowed."

As we do like to eat the odd fish, I wish they would change that to NOT keeping anything over 50cm...seems most of those are the females packed with eggs. I am not a biologist but this rule doesn't seem to make much sense to me, maybe someone can fill me in on the reasoning behind it?

[Shmag]

Originally Posted by troller

I would like this one explained to me

"From the Tolman Bridge (Sec. Rd. 585) downstream to the Alberta/Saskatchewan border
May 15 to Mar. 31 – Walleye and Sauger limit 3; Walleye over 50 cm; Pike limit 3 over 63 cm; Burbot limit 10; Goldeye limit 10; Lake Sturgeon limit 0; Bait allowed."

As we do like to eat the odd fish, I wish they would change that to NOT keeping anything over 50cm...seems most of those are the females packed with eggs. I am not a biologist but this rule doesn't seem to make much sense to me, maybe someone can fill me in on the reasoning behind it?

I agree, we protect walleye until it is able to spawn and make a difference. Then it is open season on them. Sometimes protecting it for say 7years and joe blow comes along and is legally able to take it. Protected for 7 years and taken before it can repay it's debt so to speak. Ya doesn't make much sense to me either!!!

[huntsfurfish]

Any walleye that makes it to 50cm has spawned at least once, sometimes twice. A 42 will not have spawned if you take it out. Sink about it.

If you remove sub spawning fish you risk crashing the fish stocks. All the fish under 50cm act as a buffer. And each fish should spawn at least once in its life time.

There is a lot of people that think slot limits are the answer too. Please see the above.

Hope that helps.

Originally Posted by huntsfurfish

Any walleye that makes it to 50cm has spawned at least once, sometimes twice. A 42 will not have spawned if you take it out. Sink about it.
.

I do "think" about it quite a bit. The studies I have read state that the mean size for a Canadian Female Walleye to start to spawn is between 42 and 60 cms. It is also documented that the older the female Walleye gets, at least until to age 11, the fecundity increases so you have a better percentage of successful offspring than those of the younger, smaller ones.

So yes, my question still stands.

But I am not here to argue with you, pretty meaningless. You have your opinions and I have mine, I will leave it at that.

[huntsfurfish]

Are we talking Alberta walleye?

I am.

But you are right about the argueing aspect(wink)

[huntsfurfish]

Should have added, that as long as that smaller fish replaces itself there has been no loss from removing that fish.
The same cannot be said about a fish that has not spawned.

And not all the large fish are removed either.

Either way a large buffer of smaller fish of various sizes (under 50cm) will help to ensure future stocks. If you remove the smaller fish-no buffer.

Anyway I believe that to be at least some of the reasoning behind that reg.

Hope that helps answer the question.

[happy perch fisher]

Originally Posted by huntsfurfish

Should have added, that as long as that smaller fish replaces itself there has been no loss from removing that fish.
The same cannot be said about a fish that has not spawned.

And not all the large fish are removed either.

Either way a large buffer of smaller fish of various sizes (under 50cm) will help to ensure future stocks. If you remove the smaller fish-no buffer.

Anyway I believe that to be at least some of the reasoning behind that reg.

Hope that helps answer the question.

x2 most of these fish would never even make it to 50cm range people would clean them out before that size. Aka the pembina

[huntsfurfish]

"x2 most of these fish would never even make it to 50cm range people would clean them out before that size. Aka the pembina"

Exactly.

If people are able to take them, they will.

When the size limit was 16" (about 40cm). You had trouble catching fish over that size. And what was worse most fisheries were in serious trouble because few were making it to spawn.

Times have changed.

[pdfish]

Originally Posted by huntsfurfish

When the size limit was 16" (about 40cm). You had trouble catching fish over that size. And what was worse most fisheries were in serious trouble because few were making it to spawn.

Times have changed.

Yes they have, now we are on the opposite end of the spectrum where we have over-population and dare I say, stunted fish in lakes such as Pigeon. When is SRD going to find a happy medium? That is the $64,000 question. The cash grab, I mean tag system, isn't the answer.

[huntsfurfish]

Hi pdfish!

Lakes and reservoirs close to Calgary and Edmonton are the most susceptable to overfishing. Just from fishing pressure alone. Although, that pressure is also increasing province wide as well.

Im afraid there are no easy answers to these issues. Tags for walleye are already here(unfortunately). But that may also be the way of the future. Actually quite likely.

Im from the south and the reservoirs down here are still pretty good. But I/we are starting to see evidence fo the fishing pressure down here as well.

Anyway, good luck fishin and huntin to ya all.

[Paul C]

First of all I hope nobody gives me a hard time with this old thread.
Two weeks ago they caught another poacher at Dolberg. He had 27 rainbow trout and was caught with 3 fishing rods with barbs.
I not sure what how much the total would be but this is what I know.
Extra 2 rods @ $50.0 per rod.
3 rods with barbs $200.0 per rod.
I hope somebody on this forum could tell me what the fine is for 22 extra dolberger trouties ?
Now thats a expensive fishing trip.
I am glad they caught the @#%$
On another note, about 8 bears have been moving in WMU 507.

Originally Posted by Paul C

First of all I hope nobody gives me a hard time with this old thread.
Two weeks ago they caught another poacher at Dolberg. He had 27 rainbow trout and was caught with 3 fishing rods with barbs.
I not sure what how much the total would be but this is what I know.
Extra 2 rods @ $50.0 per rod.
3 rods with barbs $200.0 per rod.
I hope somebody on this forum could tell me what the fine is for 22 extra dolberger trouties ?
Now thats a expensive fishing trip.
I am glad they caught the @#%$
On another note, about 8 bears have been moving in WMU 507.

Are there stewardship programs out there, like a neighborhood watch/friendly reminder club? You'd be perfect (and I mean that as a compliment) I don't know, poachers tend to scuttle away when chit chat is made. I was at MacGregor and my cellphone wouldn't get a signal and I couldn't call F&W, but my presense got them on the highway real quick.

[wildman]

Yaaayyyy!!!
Hope they banned that *****hole for life!!!
Ps. Wasn't the dolberg campground closed all summer a few years back due to grizzly sightings?!?! Crazy bear #s for being that close to town!!!

[AK47]

If we talking about weird rules somebody explain to me why in the winter on ice we can use two lines and in the summer only one? That makes no sense to me whatsoever.

[Jon_Boy]

Anyways... Back to Dolberg! When I was there 10-11 years ago there were a huge group (15+) of Vietnamese (i hope someone can correct me if I am wrong) people who used to fish and then sell to some sketchy restaurants. When I witnessed this, I was out with my friend and his old man - who knew some of the CO's out of Barrhead well. He reported them and the CO's said they have had a real time with these guys and even supposedly set up a little sting to catch them selling the fish but it didn't deter them, they just kept sending out more people.

Does anyone know if this is still a problem out there or has it been cleaned up? It was a real shame because it is a really nice little trout lake.

[AlbertaAngler]

I hope somebody on this forum could tell me what the fine is for 22 extra dolberger trouties ?

$100 plus $20 dollars for each fish over upto a maximum of $1000. So $540 total.

[Paul C]

Originally Posted by Jon_Boy

Anyways... Back to Dolberg! When I was there 10-11 years ago there were a huge group (15+) of Vietnamese (i hope someone can correct me if I am wrong) people who used to fish and then sell to some sketchy restaurants. When I witnessed this, I was out with my friend and his old man - who knew some of the CO's out of Barrhead well. He reported them and the CO's said they have had a real time with these guys and even supposedly set up a little sting to catch them selling the fish but it didn't deter them, they just kept sending out more people.

Does anyone know if this is still a problem out there or has it been cleaned up? It was a real shame because it is a really nice little trout lake.

You are right, this "people" poaching is still a problem. For those who like to fish up there incidents are very high on friday.

[Paul C]

Originally Posted by AlbertaAngler

$100 plus $20 dollars for each fish over upto a maximum of $1000. So $540 total.

Thx for the costing information.