Fall Index Netting (FIN) summary reports

[Don Meredith]

Alberta Environment and Parks has posted on its website Fall Index Netting summary reports for several lakes netted in the fall of 2020. The information gathered will be used to set regulations for these lakes in the future.

I have included the highlights of the Wabamun report on the Wabamun Watershed Management Council website's Fishery page for those interested.

[AlbertanGP]

Thanks for posting that these were up. I've been checking on and off. There's good info in these summaries.

[dodger]

Thanks for sharing this link.

Last year was a tough one on our lakes and reservoirs. So many people out in anything that could float were fishing. I have never seen so many Pike floating around dead as I have seen this year.

Dodger.

[Penner]

Barbless, bait ban, a pike stocking program, or all 3 ideally.

[pikeman06]

Things aren't lookin too good for the pike especially. Interesting to see what the post covid number f.i.n numbers are like. Alot of these fisheries are gonna get heavy pressure this winter and upcoming 2021 open water season. I don't know how efficient these nets are at catchin bait fish but some of those lakes they catch 170 walleye and one or 2 spottail shiners....no wonder there is no recruitment of small game fish. They all get gobbled up as fingerling.

[SNAPFisher]

Would be nice to see all species listed but understand that the focus is largely on the two. At least they are mentioned in the summary paragraph. Looks interesting for some...

[MoFugger21]

Thanks for posting this.

I know very little about this process, but... Does 8 gill nets truly give a representative picture of large reservoirs like Travers and McGregor? Those are big bodies of water.

That said, I am glad to see them netted for the first time 9 years.

[Smoky buck]

Sounds like there should be some stocking of forage fish (minnows, perch, even whites in some cases) and some lakes need walleye thinned. Some lakes not listed I am catching large numbers of pike but they are skinny. Theses lakes don’t have walleye

I have had no issues catching fish but some lakes are definitely not healthy ecosystems

[Talking moose]

I think angler surveys are better than a few nets thrown in a lake.
Are the nets even placed in strategic places? Were they placed mainly in a west portion of a lake all the while a specie was was staging more less in the eastern portion in anticipation for spawn? Maybe. Maybe not.
I just feel that the seasoned anglers have a better feel for a lake than a bio that’s never been to said lake before and tosses out some nets.
Probably best to do both netting and surveys at lakes. I’m sure they must do both atleast sometimes though.

[Don Meredith]

Originally Posted by Talking moose

I think angler surveys are better than a few nets thrown in a lake.
Are the nets even placed in strategic places? Were they placed mainly in a west portion of a lake all the while a specie was was staging more less in the eastern portion in anticipation for spawn? Maybe. Maybe not.
I just feel that the seasoned anglers have a better feel for a lake than a bio that’s never been to said lake before and tosses out some nets.
Probably best to do both netting and surveys at lakes. I’m sure they must do both atleast sometimes though.

Here's a brief description of the FIN process.

I agree with you about using anglers to assess lakes, instead of using a process that kills a lot of fish.

[Talking moose]

Originally Posted by Don Meredith

Here's a brief description of the FIN process.

I agree with you about using anglers to assess lakes, instead of using a process that kills a lot of fish.

Thanks.
Good read. There is actually more to it than I thought but the process is still hit or miss IMO.
It is still a useful tool but must be used alongside other methods.
I agree, it sucks killing fish to check on status.

[AlbertanGP]

Originally Posted by Smoky buck

I have had no issues catching fish but some lakes are definitely not healthy ecosystems

+1

I've talked at length about this with local fisheries biologists. They all tell me the same thing. As an avid catch-and-release sportsman more concerned about the opportunity to catch a decent fish rather than numbers, I am in a small minority. They receive huge pressure to manage waterbodies for the vast majority of anglers who just want to catch a fish to eat it. Apparently, all those other anglers you see out on the ice want desperately to catch their one 19" walleye and eat it. Same with hammer-handle pike I guess...

[AlbertanGP]

Originally Posted by Talking moose

I think angler surveys are better than a few nets thrown in a lake.
Are the nets even placed in strategic places? Were they placed mainly in a west portion of a lake all the while a specie was was staging more less in the eastern portion in anticipation for spawn? Maybe. Maybe not.
I just feel that the seasoned anglers have a better feel for a lake than a bio that’s never been to said lake before and tosses out some nets.
Probably best to do both netting and surveys at lakes. I’m sure they must do both atleast sometimes though.

The F.I.N. surveys are a valid process that provide useful information on a lake, and I think they are at least as important as angler surveys. The problem with angler surveys...particularly with the influx of new anglers during Covid...is that the average angler is incredibly inept at catching fish. I've seen lots of creel surveys over the years where the catch rate per hour for a species might be down around 0.20/hour...five hours for the average angler to catch a fish. I go out on those water bodies during the same time as the surveys, and catch 10-20/hour. I don't consider that so much my skill as the lack of the average fisherman. Anyone worth their salt has come back to the dock greeted by a C.O. doing a creel survey and been told fishing was slow after they were just out hammering fish.

Myself, I'd prefer to know what fish are in a lake rather than how successful the efforts of others were to catch them.

[Talking moose]

Originally Posted by AlbertanGP

The F.I.N. surveys are a valid process that provide useful information on a lake, and I think they are at least as important as angler surveys. The problem with angler surveys...particularly with the influx of new anglers during Covid...is that the average angler is incredibly inept at catching fish. I've seen lots of creel surveys over the years where the catch rate per hour for a species might be down around 0.20/hour...five hours for the average angler to catch a fish. I go out on those water bodies during the same time as the surveys, and catch 10-20/hour. I don't consider that so much my skill as the lack of the average fisherman. Anyone worth their salt has come back to the dock greeted by a C.O. doing a creel survey and been told fishing was slow after they were just out hammering fish.

Myself, I'd prefer to know what fish are in a lake rather than how successful the efforts of others were to catch them.

Yes I agree they are a good tool. And that alit of anglers are inept. That’s why I inserted “seasoned” anglers in there.
Not sure if surveys could differentiate between seasoned anglers and newbies or not. But if they could, I feel it would reveal more on a lakes overall health.

[Talking moose]

I’ll also add, that if I picked 10 hardcore fisherman to fish a lake for a week, they would know as much or more with what’s wrong or right about a lake than a bio after throwing some nets.

[DiabeticKripple]

hmmm its nothing to catch 50 walleyes a night in the summer at Travers. Big and small ones.

[AlbertanGP]

Originally Posted by Talking moose

I’ll also add, that if I picked 10 hardcore fisherman to fish a lake for a week, they would know as much or more with what’s wrong or right about a lake than a bio after throwing some nets.

I don't think the fisheries biologists are as clueless as it would seem. Again, I've found they are mandated by bureaucrats with managing lakes in a manner inconsistent with any semblance of common sense for recreational anglers that feel it is their right to eat a fish every time they dunk a lure in the water.

[Sooner]

Last summer was the first time in many years that I have not camped and fished Fickle Lake. I have fished that lake since I was a little kid, 53 now.


I seen it go from a catch and keep lake with walleye and pike to only perch and whitefish can be kept now. Never seen a perch come out and only 1 white(never targeted them though). I looked up the Fickle lake report and agree the pike are hurting big time. Sad as it used to be a fun lake for them with all the Lilly Pads and the possibility of a hog was always there.


But the walleye fishing has been fun for years. The size was small but we catch lots when the bite is on and we have seen the size of the walleye get bigger each year. The last summer I fished there we were getting some nice up and comers in the net.

No one is keeping the walleye so how is it rated so high for unsustainability? Did the bio's have a bad net day with low numbers?


Interesting info and yes a good tool but I don't agree the walleye in Fickle are or might be in trouble.

[Talking moose]

Some lakes have slow growth rates compared to other lakes. That’s partly why some lakes can have a lot of fishing pressure and still have a catch and keep.
Other lakes are far less fertile and growth is naturally slow. These lakes may have a fair number of walleye(for example) but catch and keep would deplete the lakes fast. Each lake has to be handled individually. Those province wide limits we used to have killed many lakes.
Which could be why some lakes seem to have plenty of fish but are classified high risk. Etc.

[AlbertanGP]

Originally Posted by Sooner

But the walleye fishing has been fun for years. The size was small but we catch lots when the bite is on and we have seen the size of the walleye get bigger each year. The last summer I fished there we were getting some nice up and comers in the net.

No one is keeping the walleye so how is it rated so high for unsustainability? Did the bio's have a bad net day with low numbers?


Interesting info and yes a good tool but I don't agree the walleye in Fickle are or might be in trouble.

The F.I.N. for Fickle pretty much tells you in one paragraph why its at high risk.

The length distribution shows sporadic recruitment and low
abundances of 340 to 540 mm Walleyes (Figure 2).
The 2020 FIN sample represented approximately 2.9% of
the estimated mature Walleye population size.

The lake has lackluster recruitment, meaning there are not a lot of immature fish coming up to replace the adults. You said it yourself "the size of the walleye get bigger each year".

Also note that they figure the 79 walleyes they caught represented 2.9% of the entire mature walleye population in the lake. Do the math and let that sink in for a minute...

It could be that after fishing Fickle for 40-50 years, you're a bit more adept at catching fish there than the average angler. Good anglers can catch fish at a lake right through a crash.

IF you read through a few F.I.N. reports, you will see there are several lakes with strong numbers of really big walleye, but no recruitment. Those lakes have a few really good years left in them and then they'll be done. And people will scratch their heads wondering what happened...

[Gbuss]

If you look at wabamum lake for example. How often do you find big schools of bait fish. Minnows or shiners. Not to often or any lake in alberta for that. Now if fish and wildlife want to do a bite of a study they would set up a hatchery on a lake that produces the native bait fish for that lake. Dump a billion 1"-4" bait in the fall or spring to help reduce presentation on the fry in the spring. Age classes of fish will start to grow helping to bring in bigger heather fish. In this theory the main sport fish would focus on eating these bait fish over their owen fry as a food source. The fry would be given the chance to thrive and the larger breeding fish a food source. It would make it more difficult to catch these fish as they would have an abundant of food but anglers would also have the option to use the live bait from the hatchery while they fish. Just a thought. What are your guys thoughts on this.

Gbuss

[Talking moose]

Originally Posted by Gbuss

If you look at wabamum lake for example. How often do you find big schools of bait fish. Minnows or shiners. Not to often or any lake in alberta for that. Now if fish and wildlife want to do a bite of a study they would set up a hatchery on a lake that produces the native bait fish for that lake. Dump a billion 1"-4" bait in the fall or spring to help reduce presentation on the fry in the spring. Age classes of fish will start to grow helping to bring in bigger heather fish. In this theory the main sport fish would focus on eating these bait fish over their owen fry as a food source. The fry would be given the chance to thrive and the larger breeding fish a food source. It would make it more difficult to catch these fish as they would have an abundant of food but anglers would also have the option to use the live bait from the hatchery while they fish. Just a thought. What are your guys thoughts on this.

Gbuss

How do you know the billions of minnows released won’t compete with gamefish fry for food?
Could possibly wipe out a whole year class of gamefish?

[whitetail Junkie]

Originally Posted by DiabeticKripple

hmmm its nothing to catch 50 walleyes a night in the summer at Travers. Big and small ones.

X2 and there are about 5 other southern lakes with the same results....lol

[Gbuss]

Originally Posted by Talking moose

How do you know the billions of minnows released won’t compete with gamefish fry for food?
Could possibly wipe out a whole year class of gamefish?

A billion bait fish would take the pressure off the fry for being eaten. Stocking them in the fall would also give fry the summer to eat all the food they can and then the game fish would be eating the shinners/minnows all winter helping increase their size. Also a billion baitfish would be a drop in the bucket for the amount of walleye and pike in wabamum. I think they have stocked a few million walleye and well they have been reproducing. But the bios would be able to tell what would be a sustainable number to put in in the end. I think it would be a great little project to be on and one that would benefit lakes in need of bait fish.

Gbuss

[Talking moose]

Originally Posted by Gbuss

A billion bait fish would take the pressure off the fry for being eaten. Stocking them in the fall would also give fry the summer to eat all the food they can and then the game fish would be eating the shinners/minnows all winter helping increase their size. Also a billion baitfish would be a drop in the bucket for the amount of walleye and pike in wabamum. I think they have stocked a few million walleye and well they have been reproducing. But the bios would be able to tell what would be a sustainable number to put in in the end. I think it would be a great little project to be on and one that would benefit lakes in need of bait fish.

Gbuss

Yup. I get your theory. And think it’s a good one. But I’m just trying to weigh in any negative impacts it could have. Since you asked for thoughts.

[DiabeticKripple]

Originally Posted by whitetail Junkie

X2 and there are about 5 other southern lakes with the same results....lol

tags could be implemented. slot size 43-55cm.

[buckman]

Originally Posted by Talking moose

I think angler surveys are better than a few nets thrown in a lake.
Are the nets even placed in strategic places? Were they placed mainly in a west portion of a lake all the while a specie was was staging more less in the eastern portion in anticipation for spawn? Maybe. Maybe not.
I just feel that the seasoned anglers have a better feel for a lake than a bio that’s never been to said lake before and tosses out some nets.
Probably best to do both netting and surveys at lakes. I’m sure they must do both atleast sometimes though.

Agree 100% whether its fish,game or any other wildlife there surveys are in my experience way off.

[buckman]

Originally Posted by Talking moose

I’ll also add, that if I picked 10 hardcore fisherman to fish a lake for a week, they would know as much or more with what’s wrong or right about a lake than a bio after throwing some nets.

Such a great idea.

[Smoky buck]

Originally Posted by Talking moose

I’ll also add, that if I picked 10 hardcore fisherman to fish a lake for a week, they would know as much or more with what’s wrong or right about a lake than a bio after throwing some nets.

The right anglers I would agree but there are some hardcore anglers with off the wall theories out there too.

[Gbuss]

Originally Posted by Talking moose

Yup. I get your theory. And think it’s a good one. But I’m just trying to weigh in any negative impacts it could have. Since you asked for thoughts.

I appreciate the feed back. I think alot of bios think dump the fish in but never do a survey on the bait in those lakes. If your putting fish in they need a source of food to be sustainable. I know I have not heard of them stocking bait fish has anyone else heard.

Gbuss