Go Back   Alberta Outdoorsmen Forum > Main Category > Fly-Fishing Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 10-14-2020, 02:41 PM
shep dog shep dog is offline
Suspended User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 292
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sundancefisher View Post
Aerated quality fisheries are highly sought after. They are also critical for taking pressure off wild fisheries.

Wild fisheries are suffering. I used to be a fisheries biologist and am an avid angler. I can say with certainty, fish stocks are down, angling pressure is way up.

Aeration costs do and should come out of licensing fees. Licensing fees should go the resource and not general revenue.

Police should remain areated and if you have to make a regulation that it is forbidden and illegal to go on the ice...then sombe it.
If we take a short-sighted perspective, then I will agree that stocked Put and Take fisheries may take pressure off wild trout populations, albeit likely in areas where wild trout would not be in the first place, like man made reservoirs.

I see no reason to believe aerating Put and Take fisheries helps wild trout populations recover in the long-term.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 10-14-2020, 04:55 PM
SNAPFisher SNAPFisher is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 3,589
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shep dog View Post
I see no reason to believe aerating Put and Take fisheries helps wild trout populations recover in the long-term.
It certainly doesn't hurt wild trout stocks either by providing better choices and better fishing for stocked trout. From my own experience, I spend additional time at a particular stocked "quality" lake or two over the past two years where I normally would have spent chasing down wild trout. I'm sure I'm not the only one on here.

If increasing license fees help for better choices, I'm all for it. There was a posting on here showing the breakdown of ACA. That helped. Looking for link...
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 10-14-2020, 08:25 PM
Don Andersen Don Andersen is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Central Alberta
Posts: 1,481
Default

The aeration issue with Police goes directly back to parks who has 3 aeration spray units paid for with none Govt Money and an electrical outlet right at the lake shore.
The manager and I got into a shouting match in 2016 when he told me he wasnít aerating the lake due to cost.
This issue has 20 years of run time.
One might think 20 years would be adequate time to resolve an issue.
ACA was a bit player, Parks and F&W Are the main players.
Cooperation between the ACA/Parks/F&W resolved the issue in NW Alberta during the last aeration kerfuffle.
However, cooperation didnít exist in Central/Southern Alberta resulting in winterkill everywhere.

Don

Last edited by Don Andersen; 10-14-2020 at 08:53 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 10-16-2020, 02:58 PM
shep dog shep dog is offline
Suspended User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 292
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SNAPFisher View Post
It certainly doesn't hurt wild trout stocks either by providing better choices and better fishing for stocked trout. From my own experience, I spend additional time at a particular stocked "quality" lake or two over the past two years where I normally would have spent chasing down wild trout. I'm sure I'm not the only one on here.

If increasing license fees help for better choices, I'm all for it. There was a posting on here showing the breakdown of ACA. That helped. Looking for link...
Unfortunately, the $$$ support of stocked Put and Take fisheries may eventually hurt wild trout populations in the long run: Every dollar spent on stocked trout is one less dollar spent protecting wild trout.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 10-16-2020, 05:50 PM
Don Andersen Don Andersen is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Central Alberta
Posts: 1,481
Default

Sheepdog,

Please show me how Wild trout are protected with money.

During the past fifty years the abuse of Wild trout habitat has continued to escalate. Where does ones send the money to get the abusers to leave?

Don
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 10-16-2020, 06:07 PM
newdrenalin newdrenalin is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Calgary
Posts: 560
Default

What I don't understand is why is aeration ok at some lakes but not others ?
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 10-16-2020, 10:48 PM
Sundancefisher's Avatar
Sundancefisher Sundancefisher is online now
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Calgary Perchdance
Posts: 16,562
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Andersen View Post
The aeration issue with Police goes directly back to parks who has 3 aeration spray units paid for with none Govt Money and an electrical outlet right at the lake shore.
The manager and I got into a shouting match in 2016 when he told me he wasnít aerating the lake due to cost.
This issue has 20 years of run time.
One might think 20 years would be adequate time to resolve an issue.
ACA was a bit player, Parks and F&W Are the main players.
Cooperation between the ACA/Parks/F&W resolved the issue in NW Alberta during the last aeration kerfuffle.
However, cooperation didnít exist in Central/Southern Alberta resulting in winterkill everywhere.

Don
Don...is there a petition to sign to get the aeration going?
__________________
It is not the most intellectual of the species that survives; it is not the strongest that survives; but the species that survives is the one that is able best to adapt and adjust to the changing environment in which it finds itself. Charles Darwin
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 10-17-2020, 09:03 AM
SNAPFisher SNAPFisher is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 3,589
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shep dog View Post
Unfortunately, the $$$ support of stocked Put and Take fisheries may eventually hurt wild trout populations in the long run: Every dollar spent on stocked trout is one less dollar spent protecting wild trout.
"May" and your opinion only. Not my viewpoint but to each their own.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 10-17-2020, 09:09 AM
SNAPFisher SNAPFisher is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 3,589
Default

Found the post I was referring to regarding ACA and were the finances go:

http://www.outdoorsmenforum.ca/showthread.php?t=379631

Which leads to the general conclusion that adding more fees may not actually work. How about revamping the ACA - out with the bad and in with the new thinking and good?
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 10-17-2020, 12:19 PM
Bushrat's Avatar
Bushrat Bushrat is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 5,951
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shep dog View Post
Unfortunately, the $$$ support of stocked Put and Take fisheries may eventually hurt wild trout populations in the long run: Every dollar spent on stocked trout is one less dollar spent protecting wild trout.
On the other hand if we never spent money stocking trout there would be no trout where most people nowadays fish for them. All the pressure would be on wild trout only and there would be few or none left as there were few native wild trout or places to fish them in Alberta to begin with. Stocking trout puts trout in tons of places where people can fish for them taking pressure away from the few natural wild stocks we have left.
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 10-17-2020, 02:10 PM
kbobbeck kbobbeck is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 139
Default

has anyone brought the Cardston town council or County of Cardston Council into the fray? Might be of some help
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 10-17-2020, 05:31 PM
Sundancefisher's Avatar
Sundancefisher Sundancefisher is online now
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Calgary Perchdance
Posts: 16,562
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bushrat View Post
On the other hand if we never spent money stocking trout there would be no trout where most people nowadays fish for them. All the pressure would be on wild trout only and there would be few or none left as there were few native wild trout or places to fish them in Alberta to begin with. Stocking trout puts trout in tons of places where people can fish for them taking pressure away from the few natural wild stocks we have left.
Exactly.

Problem is two fold.

One...put and take fisheries still need to be load levels for harvest such that trout remain in the the lake for the year. It should no longer be about killing a gas tanks worth of fish but the experience and a chance for you and your kids to harvest one or more, enough for a meal and further enjoy the experience. That means rather than 5 trout a day... you make it one per person in high traffic spots like say Mount Lorette Ponds for instance. Supposed to be for handicapped people but the trout get stocked and within 2 weeks they are all gone.

Secondly...Significant poaching needs better policing especially in areas with poor to no cell phone coverage. Fines need to be increased with fees going into the resource.

In cases where there is regular winterkill. Open the harvest up to 5 a day starting Sept 1 then.

In areas with less traffic... drop the limit to 2 instead of 5. Use the stocking budget as needed to bolster high impact areas.
__________________
It is not the most intellectual of the species that survives; it is not the strongest that survives; but the species that survives is the one that is able best to adapt and adjust to the changing environment in which it finds itself. Charles Darwin
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 10-17-2020, 07:18 PM
Don Andersen Don Andersen is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Central Alberta
Posts: 1,481
Default

Iíve fished Police for 35 years. Typically when 100,000 trout were stocked and the kill was five the campground rarely more than 1/3 full and 5>8 vehicles in the boat launch parking area.
This year the campground was full in June and nearly full in Sept.
Boat launch parking was at a premium upwards to 30 vehicles there.
That is when less than 15,000 fish were available to fish for although some were 5 lbs.
The difference in the two management options is profound.
This year, by any measure, has to be seen as a success where as the other years - well. Not so much.
Only Govt would destroy a success.

Any other business would love to replicate Police success in 2020.

Don
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 10-17-2020, 10:29 PM
wind drift wind drift is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: YEG
Posts: 572
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Andersen View Post
Iíve fished Police for 35 years. Typically when 100,000 trout were stocked and the kill was five the campground rarely more than 1/3 full and 5>8 vehicles in the boat launch parking area.
This year the campground was full in June and nearly full in Sept.
Boat launch parking was at a premium upwards to 30 vehicles there.
That is when less than 15,000 fish were available to fish for although some were 5 lbs.
The difference in the two management options is profound.
This year, by any measure, has to be seen as a success where as the other years - well. Not so much.
Only Govt would destroy a success.

Any other business would love to replicate Police success in 2020.

Don
100,000 trout stocked into Police Outpost? That doesnít make sense. They mustíve been very small.

I think youíre wrong in blaming govt. This is an ACA decision. Govt cant force them to aerate the lake if they believe there are safety issues. If ACA pulls the pin, should govt be expected to reallocate $s to cover? Iíd expect the govt budget is fully spent or committed by this point in the year.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 10-18-2020, 10:41 AM
Don Andersen Don Andersen is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Central Alberta
Posts: 1,481
Default

Reality:

I keep Stocking Records for Alberta. They are available here: https://open.alberta.ca/publications/fish-stocking-list

However- I keep the records longer than shown above.

Date - # stocked - length in CMS

2003 - 132000 10
2004 33000 8 31900 17 Dual Stocking
2005 132000 10
2006 132900 10
2007 133000 10
2008 50000 8
2009 43000 11
2010 30000 15
2011 32000 17 26800 18 Dual Stocking
2012 15300 17 14700 18 Dual Stocking
2013 0
2014 5000 14.1
2015 5000 22.6
2016 5000 17.3
2017 5000 17.3 Winterkilled 2017>2018 winter - ACA failure
2018 2750 20.3 2250 16.4 Dual Stocking
2019 5000 20.3
2020 5000 19

Obviously in 2013 there was a change in philosophy with a stocking of 0.
However, the trout live for <> 5 years so the 2011 & 2012 would have still impacted food resources. The winterkill of 2017 finally got the lake on track to raise larger fish as evidenced this year.

As far as Govt or ACA/ The ACA is only involved because Parks who has both electrical outlet at the lake and spray aerators will not use them. Blame the Govt - you bet!

Don
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 10-18-2020, 03:44 PM
tallieho tallieho is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: calgary
Posts: 889
Default

Don; When did they start buying the AF3N Trips from Troutlodge.After that the lake sizes of fish really took off.They now i believe have there own,brood stock from those first plantings.Also for a 3 years the lake was not aerated.The fish never grew for 3 years.Because imo.The fish were near death all 3 years & only recovered once the aeration restarted in 2015.With OLD dipoloids & New tripsloids,there were close to 75000 fish in there.Then the partial WK.Happened,leaving about 10% -40 % survival.I regelect a cast/a fish in 2015-16.Those silvers as Troutlodge called that strain,were extremely strong fighters/jumpers. My best day backswimmers was 50 fish,16-18" fish.
The worst things about wk ofcourse is fish death.It generally,takes out all the big fish.But does allow for scud population to boom,with less predation apone them.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 10-19-2020, 09:54 AM
Don Andersen Don Andersen is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Central Alberta
Posts: 1,481
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tallieho View Post
Don; When did they start buying the AF3N Trips from Troutlodge.After that the lake sizes of fish really took off.They now i believe have there own,brood stock from those first plantings.Also for a 3 years the lake was not aerated.The fish never grew for 3 years.Because imo.The fish were near death all 3 years & only recovered once the aeration restarted in 2015.With OLD dipoloids & New tripsloids,there were close to 75000 fish in there.Then the partial WK.Happened,leaving about 10% -40 % survival.I regelect a cast/a fish in 2015-16.Those silvers as Troutlodge called that strain,were extremely strong fighters/jumpers. My best day backswimmers was 50 fish,16-18" fish.
The worst things about wk ofcourse is fish death.It generally,takes out all the big fish.But does allow for scud population to boom,with less predation apone them.

Talli....
In the years since the winterkill of 2017, All three strains of Trout Lodge AF3N fish were stocked. Jumper, Kamloops and Silvers. All are AF3N.

Brood stock from the eggs bought from Trout Lodge are sterile so brood stocks canít happen from this group.

Alberta does some sterilization that results in 3N fish which are sterile but still retain spawning instincts and from what Iíve been told by the BC biologists, 1/2 of the males die in year two.

And The lake is still suffering from the stocking of 100,000 plus which mostly removed a lot of the bugs. This will take time to recover. It may take years.

Regards,

Don
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 10-19-2020, 07:57 PM
shep dog shep dog is offline
Suspended User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 292
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Andersen View Post
Talli....
In the years since the winterkill of 2017, All three strains of Trout Lodge AF3N fish were stocked. Jumper, Kamloops and Silvers. All are AF3N.

Brood stock from the eggs bought from Trout Lodge are sterile so brood stocks canít happen from this group.

Alberta does some sterilization that results in 3N fish which are sterile but still retain spawning instincts and from what Iíve been told by the BC biologists, 1/2 of the males die in year two.

And The lake is still suffering from the stocking of 100,000 plus which mostly removed a lot of the bugs. This will take time to recover. It may take years.

Regards,

Don
I sincerely hope the uneducated opinion of an amateur fishery biologist is dismissed by the ACA on the matter.

Aerating a stocked Put-and-Take man-made reservoir is nothing more than a want to catch larger (non-reproductive) trout before the stocking truck arrives.
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 10-20-2020, 11:51 AM
fishinhogdaddy fishinhogdaddy is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 138
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shep dog View Post
I sincerely hope the uneducated opinion of an amateur fishery biologist is dismissed by the ACA on the matter.

Aerating a stocked Put-and-Take man-made reservoir is nothing more than a want to catch larger (non-reproductive) trout before the stocking truck arrives.
NO! It's not. It's to allow the fish to survive over the winter/summer and to enable spending dollars on fish elsewhere instead of double stocking when they die from lack of oxygen.

MR. Dog?
Comments about someone who is VERY well know for their advocation, years of knowledge, working with and on behalf of many and is VERY WELL RESPECTED within the fishing community does not deserve your dismissive comments IMO. As much is it is your right to express and opinion, I would submit that Mr. Anderson, (DON) has the respect of many and has probably forgotten more information about fisheries in Alberta than most would learn in a lifetime!

Don, thank you for your efforts, advocation and your valuable contributions to our fisheries and your passion!
Times have changed and keyboard warriors seem to rule now. Don't let the few, take away the respect you have EARNED from a lifetime of experience and efforts to save and make our provincial fisheries better in the long run!
Much Respect.
Rick AKA FHD
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 10-20-2020, 12:24 PM
italk2u's Avatar
italk2u italk2u is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Edmonton, AB
Posts: 459
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fishinhogdaddy View Post
NO! It's not. It's to allow the fish to survive over the winter/summer and to enable spending dollars on fish elsewhere instead of double stocking when they die from lack of oxygen.

MR. Dog?
Comments about someone who is VERY well know for their advocation, years of knowledge, working with and on behalf of many and is VERY WELL RESPECTED within the fishing community does not deserve your dismissive comments IMO. As much is it is your right to express and opinion, I would submit that Mr. Anderson, (DON) has the respect of many and has probably forgotten more information about fisheries in Alberta than most would learn in a lifetime!

Don, thank you for your efforts, advocation and your valuable contributions to our fisheries and your passion!
Times have changed and keyboard warriors seem to rule now. Don't let the few, take away the respect you have EARNED from a lifetime of experience and efforts to save and make our provincial fisheries better in the long run!
Much Respect.
Rick AKA FHD
ditto.
__________________
God grant me the Focus to Visualize myself catching fish, the Faith to believe that I will, and the Wisdom to keep the freezer stocked with hamburgers and hot dogs
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 10-20-2020, 01:13 PM
cranky cranky is offline
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 1,327
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fishinhogdaddy View Post
NO! It's not. It's to allow the fish to survive over the winter/summer and to enable spending dollars on fish elsewhere instead of double stocking when they die from lack of oxygen.

MR. Dog?
Comments about someone who is VERY well know for their advocation, years of knowledge, working with and on behalf of many and is VERY WELL RESPECTED within the fishing community does not deserve your dismissive comments IMO. As much is it is your right to express and opinion, I would submit that Mr. Anderson, (DON) has the respect of many and has probably forgotten more information about fisheries in Alberta than most would learn in a lifetime!

Don, thank you for your efforts, advocation and your valuable contributions to our fisheries and your passion!
Times have changed and keyboard warriors seem to rule now. Don't let the few, take away the respect you have EARNED from a lifetime of experience and efforts to save and make our provincial fisheries better in the long run!
Much Respect.
Rick AKA FHD
X2 Well said.
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 10-20-2020, 02:50 PM
SNAPFisher SNAPFisher is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 3,589
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shep dog View Post
I sincerely hope the uneducated opinion of an amateur fishery biologist is dismissed by the ACA on the matter.

Aerating a stocked Put-and-Take man-made reservoir is nothing more than a want to catch larger (non-reproductive) trout before the stocking truck arrives.
I'm not sure what you think you are adding at this point. You have been on pretty 100% of everyone's case on this post that doesn't see it your way. Your welcome to your opinion ...to a point. Keep pushing it ad nauseam and you might not end up with the result you expect.
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 10-20-2020, 03:35 PM
Jokey75 Jokey75 is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 93
Default

This thread has taken a bit of turn in regards to the ACA agenda and it's something I think about a lot so I am going chime in again with my thoughts. I think I have posted this before so scroll past if you've heard this one.

The whole mandate of conservation on the part of the ACA needs to be re-examined and probably tweaked.

While I completely agree that stocked fish serve a "conservation" purpose by allowing fishing and harvesting opportunities close to communities, thereby reducing pressure on wild stock, what it DOESN'T do is provide the education to actually CONSERVE anything for the future.

Aside from the SQF lakes most of these stocked ponds have the usual bag limit of 5 trout per angler. A huge amount of folks start their fishing careers at these ponds purely because of their accessibility. Myself and almost all of my current fishing buddies cut our teeth chucking spinning gear into stocked ponds we rode out bikes to. It was awesome! I learned a ton. But what I didn't learn about was conservation. The bag limit was 5 so that's what I took home. I figured that's what you did.

So tell me what kind of angler that creates? One that feels they are "entitled" to a great deal of fish every time they go fishing. 5 fish per person is a lot of fish. If you are even somewhat competent you and your family of 4 could quite easily hit your 20 in a day at a pond...or close to it. That's more fish than you will eat for a meal even if these are standard govt trout chow rainbows. But should you have taken that many fish? Probably not and it's taught this family nothing. The chance of a family needing this many fish are pretty small nowadays.

IF the ACA truly wanted to help with conservation you adjust the limits on these stocked ponds to something comparable to what wild trout bag limits are (where they exist). Make it 2-3 fish. This will in turn breed many generations of anglers that won't feel they need to take home a crazy number of fish each time they go out.

Let's face it...humans as a rule are greedy and will usually take all they can get given a chance. Take the decision out their hands. Reduce the limit and force them to be a more conservation minded type of outdoorsmen. To me this is crucial in a place like Alberta where we have so many anglers and fewer fishing opportunities than most.

Anyway, my $0.02

Cheers
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 10-20-2020, 07:37 PM
Don Andersen Don Andersen is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Central Alberta
Posts: 1,481
Default

Normally I donít respond to personal attacks but shep dog seems curious about money to solve native trout issues.
Well, tried that when I organized a habitat educational day presented by the Cows and Fish organization on Elk Creek attended by a bunch of staff from Forestry, Fish and Wildlife and the ACA.
The day resulted in different grazing plans and salting locations.
During the day I asked the Forestry staff member responsible for cattle operations how much the Govt recovered from Cow grazing on the Elk Creek flats. She told me $6500/year. I asked if I raised $7000 and was willing to pay for the grazing lease, could I get the cows removed.
Nope, no a chance,
Entrenched entitlement trumps Bull Trout.

Don
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 10-20-2020, 08:26 PM
lannie lannie is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 3,260
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Andersen View Post
Normally I donít respond to personal attacks but shep dog seems curious about money to solve native trout issues.
Well, tried that when I organized a habitat educational day presented by the Cows and Fish organization on Elk Creek attended by a bunch of staff from Forestry, Fish and Wildlife and the ACA.
The day resulted in different grazing plans and salting locations.
During the day I asked the Forestry staff member responsible for cattle operations how much the Govt recovered from Cow grazing on the Elk Creek flats. She told me $6500/year. I asked if I raised $7000 and was willing to pay for the grazing lease, could I get the cows removed.
Nope, no a chance,
Entrenched entitlement trumps Bull Trout.

Don
You are confusing a legal lease agreement with entitlement. Quite a stretch.
__________________
You are what you do, not what you say.
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 10-21-2020, 09:30 AM
pipco pipco is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: edmonton
Posts: 489
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fishinhogdaddy View Post
NO! It's not. It's to allow the fish to survive over the winter/summer and to enable spending dollars on fish elsewhere instead of double stocking when they die from lack of oxygen.

MR. Dog?
Comments about someone who is VERY well know for their advocation, years of knowledge, working with and on behalf of many and is VERY WELL RESPECTED within the fishing community does not deserve your dismissive comments IMO. As much is it is your right to express and opinion, I would submit that Mr. Anderson, (DON) has the respect of many and has probably forgotten more information about fisheries in Alberta than most would learn in a lifetime!

Don, thank you for your efforts, advocation and your valuable contributions to our fisheries and your passion!
Times have changed and keyboard warriors seem to rule now. Don't let the few, take away the respect you have EARNED from a lifetime of experience and efforts to save and make our provincial fisheries better in the long run!
Much Respect.
Rick AKA FHD
Yep. X10
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 10-21-2020, 09:34 AM
pipco pipco is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: edmonton
Posts: 489
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jokey75 View Post
This thread has taken a bit of turn in regards to the ACA agenda and it's something I think about a lot so I am going chime in again with my thoughts. I think I have posted this before so scroll past if you've heard this one.

The whole mandate of conservation on the part of the ACA needs to be re-examined and probably tweaked.

While I completely agree that stocked fish serve a "conservation" purpose by allowing fishing and harvesting opportunities close to communities, thereby reducing pressure on wild stock, what it DOESN'T do is provide the education to actually CONSERVE anything for the future.

Aside from the SQF lakes most of these stocked ponds have the usual bag limit of 5 trout per angler. A huge amount of folks start their fishing careers at these ponds purely because of their accessibility. Myself and almost all of my current fishing buddies cut our teeth chucking spinning gear into stocked ponds we rode out bikes to. It was awesome! I learned a ton. But what I didn't learn about was conservation. The bag limit was 5 so that's what I took home. I figured that's what you did.

So tell me what kind of angler that creates? One that feels they are "entitled" to a great deal of fish every time they go fishing. 5 fish per person is a lot of fish. If you are even somewhat competent you and your family of 4 could quite easily hit your 20 in a day at a pond...or close to it. That's more fish than you will eat for a meal even if these are standard govt trout chow rainbows. But should you have taken that many fish? Probably not and it's taught this family nothing. The chance of a family needing this many fish are pretty small nowadays.

IF the ACA truly wanted to help with conservation you adjust the limits on these stocked ponds to something comparable to what wild trout bag limits are (where they exist). Make it 2-3 fish. This will in turn breed many generations of anglers that won't feel they need to take home a crazy number of fish each time they go out.

Let's face it...humans as a rule are greedy and will usually take all they can get given a chance. Take the decision out their hands. Reduce the limit and force them to be a more conservation minded type of outdoorsmen. To me this is crucial in a place like Alberta where we have so many anglers and fewer fishing opportunities than most.

Anyway, my $0.02

Cheers

Yep. Agree with you on this one and have seen it first hand on a number of stocked lakes.
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 10-21-2020, 10:16 AM
Don Andersen Don Andersen is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Central Alberta
Posts: 1,481
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lannie View Post
You are confusing a legal lease agreement with entitlement. Quite a stretch.
Somehow the lease agreement gets entrenched, traditional and finally entitled.

Tis the Alberta way.

Don

Last edited by Don Andersen; 10-21-2020 at 10:23 AM. Reason: Sorry !annie -ainít gonna bite - Police dying too important
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 10-21-2020, 01:57 PM
crazy_davey's Avatar
crazy_davey crazy_davey is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Foothills
Posts: 1,853
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lannie View Post
You are confusing a legal lease agreement with entitlement. Quite a stretch.
Agreed! Quite a stretch for sure!
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 10-21-2020, 02:13 PM
Sundancefisher's Avatar
Sundancefisher Sundancefisher is online now
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Calgary Perchdance
Posts: 16,562
Default

So why not in the regulations and signage make Police Outpost Lake off limits on ice and only open to the public when open water.

Anyone on the ice will be trespassing. Sign accordingly. If really pushed see what insurance would cost however there should be a way to legislate public responsibility for personal stupidity.
__________________
It is not the most intellectual of the species that survives; it is not the strongest that survives; but the species that survives is the one that is able best to adapt and adjust to the changing environment in which it finds itself. Charles Darwin
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 07:17 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.