Slot limit

WayneChristie · #1 11-15-2011, 07:50 PM

Are you in favour of having a slot limit on game fish size in Alberta, and if you are, would you sign a petition to have this adopted by SRD ?

npauls · #2 11-15-2011, 07:56 PM

I am still up in the air at the best way to regulate our waters here in Alberta.

I have been told good points and bad points about a slot size.

I think the SRD has alot of research to be done before anything is change to drastically.

We have the highest fishermen/women per capita in Canada so our waters see quite a bit of pressure compared to many other places in the country.

Its a tough call to me on what should be done but I do think that something does have to change.

gor · #3 11-15-2011, 08:10 PM

keeping big spawning fish makes no sense, why is this so clear to a non educated person, but the guys in charge cant see it. can somebody explain why the guys keeping those big spawning mama's is good for our fishing future. not to mention the smaller fish taste better if you are after a feed. I have not kept a fish in years other than stocked trout or from our perch pond.
A picture last forever, a fillet about twelve hours.

BeeGuy · #4 11-15-2011, 08:12 PM

I didn't vote as I found the options a little too vague.

I like and support slot limits. I have seen many fisheries where this was a success.

The typical rules that I like for EXAMPLE on walleye:

keep 2 total between 40-45cm, and 1 over 75.

This allows larger reproductive fish (45-75cm) to breed and enables a high recruitment of juveniles. As well, it makes for a fun C&R fishery.

1 over 75cm enables trophy hunters to pick-off the elderly fish which have bred for many years.

I like these types of slots, and have witnessed many fisheries rebound during the late 90's and early 2000's with their introduction.

Part of my issue with the poll is that every fishery is unique. Species, productivity, habitat quality, fishing pressure etc.

All of these things and others need to be acknowledged when defining the slot limit. 2 fish retention may not be sustainable in some places etc

ca-ching $0.02

MathewsArcher · #5 11-15-2011, 08:14 PM

With the fishing pressure we see in Alberta how many fish would actually make it through the slot to reach maturity and spawn?

If all or most of the large fish are being caught now wouldn't they just be caught at a smaller size and never even make it to maturity and spawn.

No sure if a slot would work here given all the pressure most of our lake receive.

BeeGuy · #6 11-15-2011, 08:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MathewsArcher

With the fishing pressure we see in Alberta how many fish would actually make it through the slot to reach maturity and spawn?

If all or most of the large fish are being caught now wouldn't they just be caught at a smaller size and never even make it to maturity and spawn.

No sure if a slot would work here given all the pressure most of our lake receive.

Can you suggest an alternative?

We could definitely use more data. That is for sure.

Justin.C · #7 11-15-2011, 08:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MathewsArcher

With the fishing pressure we see in Alberta how many fish would actually make it through the slot to reach maturity and spawn?

If all or most of the large fish are being caught now wouldn't they just be caught at a smaller size and never even make it to maturity and spawn.

No sure if a slot would work here given all the pressure most of our lake receive.

I think that this would work on some lake and not others.. But I would like to try it and see...

MathewsArcher · #8 11-15-2011, 08:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BeeGuy

Can you suggest an alternative?

We could definitely use more data. That is for sure.

Wish I could, but I don't have a solution if we want to continue harvesting the resource. Unfortunately Alberta is blessed with a large population and a lack of water. Catch and Release and the tag system seem to be the way of the future for many waters.

npauls · #9 11-15-2011, 08:52 PM

I would support a tag system if the money from buying the tags went back into helping fisheries only. As of right now it doesn't as far as I know and that is part of the reason I won't buy a tag for any lakes.

Gust · #10 11-15-2011, 08:56 PM

This is from 98

The Province of Alberta began its new walleye management strategy in 1996. Waterbodies across the province were classified into one of four walleye management categories. In southern Alberta, all waterbodies were classified into one of two categories, which are collapsed/newly stocked or vulnerable. Reservoirs and lakes in the first category have a zero catch limit (catch and release) while waterbodies in the vulnerable category have a maximum possession of three walleye, all over 50 cm. The majority of southern Alberta reservoirs were stocked with walleye from 1990-1993. In response, an inventory and assessment of 11 reservoirs was undertaken in 1996, 1997, and 1998 to determine the effect of the regulation change and to evaluate the walleye stockings. A secondary purpose was to determine overall fish community structure in the reservoirs. The main sampling method was beach seining and the secondary method was gill netting.

In addition, three test-angling days were held at three reservoirs. The reservoirs were Milk River Ridge, Crawling Valley, and McGregor Lake. For Milk River Ridge, members of Lethbridge Fish and Game were invited to angle for walleye. Anglers caught the walleye and held them until Alberta Conservation Association staff arrived to transfer the fish to the ACA boat for sampling. Sampling involved taking the length, weight, and a pelvic fin for ageing.

There were 33 anglers from Lethbridge Fish and Game participating in the test-angling fishery. They caught 228 walleye and 17 northern pike in 169 hours of fishing. This resulted in an overall catch rate of 1.35 walleye per hour, and 0.10 northern pike per hour. The northern pike catch rate is misleading in that anglers were targeting walleye, and you catch walleye at different locations in the reservoir than you do pike. For comparison, the catch rate for walleye in Crawling Valley was 1.64 fish per hour and was 0.78 walleye per hour at McGregor Lake.

The majority (70%) of the measured walleye were age 4, which corresponds to the 1994 stocking of 2.5 million walleye fry. The next most common age class (22%) caught by anglers was age 7, which corresponded to the 1991 stocking of 100,000 walleye fry. Walleye fry were only stocked in 1994 and 1991, so the results show that 92% of the fish caught by angling were the result of stockings.

What percentage of the walleye could have been kept if Ridge Reservoir was a vulnerable fishery, instead of a catch-and–release fishery? Our calculations show that only 12% would have been considered legal. Most of the walleye caught were between 33 – 38 cm (13 – 15 inches).

There is evidence of natural recruitment of walleye in Milk River Ridge Reservoir. The highest recruitment rates in southern Alberta were found at Crawling Valley and Keho reservoirs. Ridge Reservoir ranked 6th out of 11, which was similar to Sherburne and Travers reservoirs.

According to Alberta's Walleye Management and Recovery Plan, changes to the management status category (e.g., from collapsed to vulnerable) will be based on five biological characteristics. These are: age-class distribution, age-class stability, growth, age-at-maturity, and catch rate. Growth, age-at-maturity and catch rate meet the criteria for changing the status categories, however, the age-class distribution and age-class stability do not. The walleye stock in Milk River Ridge Reservoir is based almost exclusively on the stockings of the early 1990s. Harvesting these stocked fish before they have an opportunity to reproduce will lead to another collapse of the walleye fishery. The age 7 walleye are reproducing now (that is why we find young-of-the-year walleye) and the age 4 walleye will begin spawning over the next two years. In order to change the category we need to have biological evidence that the current young-of-the-year survive, reach sexual maturity, and spawn successfully.

All of the biological characteristics needed to change Ridge Reservoir from newly stocked to vulnerable category are not present now, and the evidence will likely not be present for the next few years. It takes time to build up a walleye stock, whereas over-harvesting can collapse a fishery within a year or two. If anglers wish a self-sustaining walleye fishery, then they must have patience to wait for the walleye population to recover.

If you wish more information on the walleye studies, please contact Trevor Council at 382-4354 or write to Alberta Conservation Association, 2nd Floor YPM Place, 530 – 8 Street S., Lethbridge, AB, T1J 2J8. For information on the management of walleye populations in southern Alberta, please contact the Natural Resources Services' offices in either Lethbridge (382-4358) or Brooks (362-1232).

December 1998

Justin.C · #11 11-15-2011, 08:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MathewsArcher

Wish I could, but I don't have a solution if we want to continue harvesting the resource. Unfortunately Alberta is blessed with a large population and a lack of water. Catch and Release and the tag system seem to be the way of the future for many waters.

The problem is that tag system is a cash grab... We pay for a licence and then pay for a tag.... Why dont I go to safeway.... Way cheeper after you figure out all costs... How about we stop all comercial fishing....that will leave a whole bunch of fish for us....

Stewie · #12 11-15-2011, 09:15 PM

Rather see a slot limit size... I understand that some like to keep fish to eat and thats fine with me... I do it myself from time to time... but dont understand why in order to keep a fish it has to be over a certain length... they dont taste as good as a smaller fish and why keep a huge breeding female... for me, when I catch a big one a picture is all I want, let someone else have the same opportunity to catch a trohpy fish and let her breed so other generations can have the fun we all have now...

HunterDave · #13 11-15-2011, 09:22 PM

The way that I see it is that we already have a slot size limit in Alberta with the tag system. It does put a cap on the number of fish potentially removed however it also stipulates the size of the fish that can be taken out. Up this way they opened Isle Lake, Lac Ste Anne and Lac Lanonne this year to a slot size limit tag system. Unfortunately, Isle Lake winter killed so we have to start from scratch with that one again. However, Lac Ste Anne had a 0 - 43 cm and a 43 - 50 cm slot size limit and I believe that Lac Lanonne's was 0 - 43 cm.

To answer the OP's question......absolutely we should have a slot sized limit in Alberta waterways IF the bodies of water can support it.

npauls · #14 11-15-2011, 09:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Justin.C

The problem is that tag system is a cash grab... We pay for a licence and then pay for a tag.... Why dont I go to safeway.... Way cheeper after you figure out all costs... How about we stop all comercial fishing....that will leave a whole bunch of fish for us....

Like I mentioned earlier. It is a cash grab as of right now but would you support a tag system if you could get more tags to harvest fish through out the year and all the funds from buying the tags goes right back into supporting fisheries instead of lining the pockets of politicians?

It would be similar to the tag system for hunting but you could buy more tags then you can for hunting. It isn't ideal but I think it would help fisheries funding a ton and people could still keep some fish.

brohymn2 · #15 11-15-2011, 09:30 PM

id support the slot size, does anyone know if its effective in calling lake?

Justin.C · #16 11-15-2011, 09:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by npauls

Like I mentioned earlier. It is a cash grab as of right now but would you support a tag system if you could get more tags to harvest fish through out the year and all the funds from buying the tags goes right back into supporting fisheries instead of lining the pockets of politicians?

It would be similar to the tag system for hunting but you could buy more tags then you can for hunting. It isn't ideal but I think it would help fisheries funding a ton and people could still keep some fish.

The problem is that is DOES NOT go back in to anything it goes in to a general revenue account and then the finace minister makes more cuts to our environment.... No thanks. If they had tags that did not cost extra over and above the $3 draw app I might be in on that but I think we need to be varey careful on this one as it is almost better to go to Sask or BC and pay way more to fish and have real fun and can keep something if we want as they have more water and way better managment to have a great fishery.

Hey by the way I am not knocking your Idea. I am just not willing to pay way more money to give more$$$ to a polititions pention... I like the fact you are trying to come up with a plan or some ideas to better it in AB...

Black Stim · #17 11-15-2011, 09:40 PM

I would sign a petition that bans people from asking questions like "Are you in favour of having a slot limit on game fish size in Alberta, and if you are, would you sign a petition to have this adopted by SRD?" based on no site specific context or information related to the fishery.

Heck, it works in Saskatchewan, why not here? Definitely no immediate differences come to mind between their fisheries and ours. With their low angling pressure, they could make almost any regulation and say it works.

Obviously all of the SRD biologists are idiots, sitting in their offices all day long just dreaming up the next scheme to make anglers mad. Why would they know anything? They only study this stuff for a living. It's like a person offering up expertise to an electrician on a wiring schematic or principles of electricity because they have turned on thousands of light switches in their time.

npauls · #18 11-15-2011, 09:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Justin.C

The problem is that is DOES NOT go back in to anything it goes in to a general revenue account and then the finace minister makes more cuts to our environment.... No thanks. If they had tags that did not cost extra over and above the $3 draw app I might be in on that but I think we need to be varey careful on this one as it is almost better to go to Sask or BC and pay way more to fish and have real fun and can keep something if we want as they have more water and way better managment to have a great fishery.

Hey by the way I am not knocking your Idea. I am just not willing to pay way more money to give more$$$ to a polititions pention... I like the fact you are trying to come up with a plan or some ideas to better it in AB...

I am totally against the fact that the tag money is going to general rev. right now but if we could some how get a law passed stating that all the money from those tags has to be put back into the fisheries I think it could be a really good thing.

I totally agree with you right now about the tag system we have right now.

Stewie · #19 11-15-2011, 09:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Black Stim

I would sign a petition that bans people from asking questions like "Are you in favour of having a slot limit on game fish size in Alberta, and if you are, would you sign a petition to have this adopted by SRD?" based on no site specific context or information related to the fishery.

Heck, it works in Saskatchewan, why not here? Definitely no immediate differences come to mind between their fisheries and ours. With their low angling pressure, they could make almost any regulation and say it works.

Obviously all of the SRD biologists are idiots, sitting in their offices all day long just dreaming up the next scheme to make anglers mad. Why would they know anything? They only study this stuff for a living. It's like a person offering up expertise to an electrician on a wiring schematic or principles of electricity because they have turned on thousands of light switches in their time.

For one MAJOR difference... Saskatchewan lets you only keep one fish over a certain size... so the breeders are left to do what they do... BREED...

Where Alberta says you can only keep 3 fish OVER a certain limit...

Justin.C · #20 11-15-2011, 09:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by npauls

I am totally against the fact that the tag money is going to general rev. right now but if we could some how get a law passed stating that all the money from those tags has to be put back into the fisheries I think it could be a really good thing.

I totally agree with you right now about the tag system we have right now.

Also licences.... I know for a fact that The amount of money brought in by nonres peole to our province is unreal (hunting included) so I still have no idea why our stupid government keeps trying to destroy our resorces so no one want to come here....

Justin.C · #21 11-15-2011, 09:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Black Stim

I would sign a petition that bans people from asking questions like "Are you in favour of having a slot limit on game fish size in Alberta, and if you are, would you sign a petition to have this adopted by SRD?" based on no site specific context or information related to the fishery.

Heck, it works in Saskatchewan, why not here? Definitely no immediate differences come to mind between their fisheries and ours. With their low angling pressure, they could make almost any regulation and say it works.

Obviously all of the SRD biologists are idiots, sitting in their offices all day long just dreaming up the next scheme to make anglers mad. Why would they know anything? They only study this stuff for a living. It's like a person offering up expertise to an electrician on a wiring schematic or principles of electricity because they have turned on thousands of light switches in their time.

The problem is that as you called them..IDIOTS.... They have no proof to provide us that there ever is a problem. This is OUR provice and our resource so we have the right to ask questions and they need to provide facts... plain and simple. Not just say well this is how it is..

Black Stim · #22 11-15-2011, 09:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stewie

For one MAJOR difference... Saskatchewan lets you only keep one fish over a certain size... so the breeders are left to do what they do... BREED...

Where Alberta says you can only keep 3 fish OVER a certain limit...

A 3 fish limit in Alberta is exactly that- a limit, not a harvest recommendation. A little but of self restraint can't be that hard.

Justin.C · #23 11-15-2011, 10:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Black Stim

A 3 fish limit in Alberta is exactly that- a limit, not a harvest recommendation. A little but of self restraint can't be that hard.

Do you think every albertan cares???? There are some cultures that take everything they canat every oppertunity... I hate to say it but it is true. We also have alot of immigrants that do not know anything about licences and stuff as they dont have anything like that were they are from... Also these guys get away with this as there is no money to have F&W officers checking things out...

This is the truth..I am not trying to be racist in any way...Also not everybody cares about anything but catching there limit just cause they love fish....They aint doing anything wrong in the governments eyes and it is legal... You and i may disagree though.

Stewie · #24 11-15-2011, 10:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Black Stim

A 3 fish limit in Alberta is exactly that- a limit, not a harvest recommendation. A little but of self restraint can't be that hard.

I agree... but why in Alberta do they make you ONLY keep fish over a certain size, where Saskatchewan says you can only keep one fish over and two under... a tight slot limit in my opinion is the way to go... I hardly keep any fish and enjoy catch and release more than anything...

Black Stim · #25 11-15-2011, 10:30 PM

The danger of a slot allowing fish smaller than a certain size is that with high enough angler pressure, fish are taken out of the population before they get to be spawning size. Then you are only counting on the older spawners to sustain the population, which will die out naturally over time and are removed with one over the slot size.

BeeGuy · #26 11-15-2011, 10:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stewie

Rather see a slot limit size... I understand that some like to keep fish to eat and thats fine with me... I do it myself from time to time... but dont understand why in order to keep a fish it has to be over a certain length... they dont taste as good as a smaller fish and why keep a huge breeding female... for me, when I catch a big one a picture is all I want, let someone else have the same opportunity to catch a trohpy fish and let her breed so other generations can have the fun we all have now...

Part of the reason based on the study above, would be that recruitment is very low and perhaps these water bodies do not provide quality spawning habitat.

npauls · #27 11-15-2011, 10:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Black Stim

The danger of a slot allowing fish smaller than a certain size is that with high enough angler pressure, fish are taken out of the population before they get to be spawning size. Then you are only counting on the older spawners to sustain the population, which will die out naturally over time and are removed with one over the slot size.

It was also stated somewhere that the sizes we have now were made that way so that the size of fish being taken home would at least have one spawning season to spawn before being kept by an angler.

I can't remember where I read or heard this and it could be totally wrong.

huntsfurfish · #28 11-16-2011, 06:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Black Stim

The danger of a slot allowing fish smaller than a certain size is that with high enough angler pressure, fish are taken out of the population before they get to be spawning size. Then you are only counting on the older spawners to sustain the population, which will die out naturally over time and are removed with one over the slot size.

Exactly.

Fish over 50 cm. Will spawn at least once, in some lakes multiple times, ensuring that the fish are self sustaining.

Start removing fish under spawning size and risk goes up dramatically! If people can keep them, they will.

packhuntr · #29 11-16-2011, 06:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Black Stim

I would sign a petition that bans people from asking questions like "Are you in favour of having a slot limit on game fish size in Alberta, and if you are, would you sign a petition to have this adopted by SRD?" based on no site specific context or information related to the fishery.

Heck, it works in Saskatchewan, why not here? Definitely no immediate differences come to mind between their fisheries and ours. With their low angling pressure, they could make almost any regulation and say it works.

Obviously all of the SRD biologists are idiots, sitting in their offices all day long just dreaming up the next scheme to make anglers mad. Why would they know anything? They only study this stuff for a living. It's like a person offering up expertise to an electrician on a wiring schematic or principles of electricity because they have turned on thousands of light switches in their time.

Hey smart guy,,, how have our fisheries ended up in the toilet? Must be someone elses job to assure these resources are HEALTHY and HERE tomorrow?

packhuntr · #30 11-16-2011, 06:59 AM

The whole problem is that people are constantly looking to find better ways to OVER HARVEST these lakes and fisheries. The outcome will remain the same no matter the recipe, stunted out and the farthest away from a healthy fishery imaginable. People need to stop worrying about thier stomach's, these little fisheries cannot handle continuous relentless sustenance harvest.