Fisheries engagement

[SNAPFisher]

There will probably be a sticky added shortly for this. In the meantime for those interested:

2023-24 Sportfishing Regulation Engagement Coming Soon!

Alberta Environment and Protected Areas invites you to participate in the annual sportfishing regulation engagement, where you will be able to provide feedback on potential regulation changes for lake trout in Cold Lake and get up to date on what’s happening in fisheries!

A series of public webinars will be held where you can connect with fisheries staff and hear updates about Alberta’s fisheries.

• Provincial fisheries update (January 19 at 7:00pm)
• Northeast region sportfishing regulations (Cold Lake) (January 24 at 7:00pm)
• Northwest region fisheries update (January 26 at 7:00pm)
• South region fisheries update (January 31 at 7:00pm)
• Native trout recovery program update (February 7 at 7:00pm)

Register for all or any of the webinars, read more about updates and connect with fisheries biologists on the engagement webpage. The survey collecting public feedback for lake trout in Cold Lake will open at noon on January 19 and run until February 9.

https://www.alberta.ca/2023-24-sport...ngagement.aspx

[SNAPFisher]

And check out the Cold Lake fact sheet for those interested. Have a voice!

[-JR-]

Interesting read . Besides having a bait ban they also have 3 options .
1 - leave it the way it is .
2- slot size 65-70 cm
3- slot size 70-75 cm

I only see that a slot size will work if you have tags , because of the fishing
pressure . Lakers grow so slow that none will make it over the mark .
Those that do will just get netted out .
Not sure how Alberta and Sack. would give out tags.
I guess it would be easy if the whole lake was on one side of the boarder .lol

I guess they could have a slot size just for the Alberta side and have the Sask side closed if you only have an Alberta licence.

I would pick the lowest slot size ,this way there will be more fish in the lake over the mark to keep the lake going for years to come

[I’d rather be outdoors]

.

[Outbound]

Originally Posted by -JR-

Interesting read . Besides having a bait ban they also have 3 options .
1 - leave it the way it is .
2- slot size 65-70 cm
3- slot size 70-75 cm

I only see that a slot size will work if you have tags , because of the fishing
pressure . Lakers grow so slow that none will make it over the mark .
Those that do will just get netted out .
Not sure how Alberta and Sack. would give out tags.
I guess it would be easy if the whole lake was on one side of the boarder .lol

I guess they could have a slot size just for the Alberta side and have the Sask side closed if you only have an Alberta licence.

I would pick the lowest slot size ,this way there will be more fish in the lake over the mark to keep the lake going for years to come

I'm no expert on the Cold Lake system but instead of slot sizes, what about one fish per day over 65cm with a posession limit of 2 and ban netting on the lake?

[-JR-]

Originally Posted by Outbound

I'm no expert on the Cold Lake system but instead of slot sizes, what about one fish per day over 65cm with a posession limit of 2 and ban netting on the lake?

Thats what it used to be ,except 1 over 65 cm . Then the lake almost got fished out of fish that were bigger than 65 .So they moved it to 75 cm and over . Now 75 and over are fished out . Only have 5% chance now to get a keeper . Not good !
We need to save the bigger fish for breeding and for people to enjoy catching a big fish that they can release and catch again .

Look at pigeon Lake ,they brought in tags to remove the big walleye and the smaller walleye .
Used to catch 8- 10lb walleye. They are all gone now . Will take years before anyone can enjoy reeling in a big walleye now. Hopefully they stick to a slot size for that to happen at pigeon.Seems to be working at other lakes .

Its the only lake that has Lakers that is 3 hrs from Edmonton ,so we need to protect it now that the fishing pressure has gone threw the roof.

[-JR-]

I wonder what the head count of fish will be in one week that will come out of cold lake if we lower it to 60 or 65 cm . My guess is just over 1000 lake trout a week come July .

[Outbound]

Originally Posted by -JR-

Thats what it used to be ,except 1 over 65 cm . Then the lake almost got fished out of fish that were bigger than 65 .So they moved it to 75 cm and over . Now 75 and over are fished out . Only have 5% chance now to get a keeper . Not good !
We need to save the bigger fish for breeding and for people to enjoy catching a big fish that they can release and catch again .

Look at pigeon Lake ,they brought in tags to remove the big walleye and the smaller walleye .
Used to catch 8- 10lb walleye. They are all gone now . Will take years before anyone can enjoy reeling in a big walleye now. Hopefully they stick to a slot size for that to happen at pigeon.Seems to be working at other lakes .

Its the only lake that has Lakers that is 3 hrs from Edmonton ,so we need to protect it now that the fishing pressure has gone threw the roof.

I see. What about something like a max size? Say, no fish over 50cm and 1 fish per day with a 4 fish possession limt. Maybe catch and release only for part of the season or a few seasons to help the system rebound?

I'm coming at this as a small-lake trout fisherman who might only keep 3 or 4 fish total in an entire season though and I never keep the big ones. I've never been a meat fisherman, so when I do take keep fish I prefer to let the lunkers go to be enjoyed again another day. I've never understood the mindset of "oh! big fish! must keep!" or "must keep all fish!".

I can see the conundrum F&W has managing a popular fishery like this. Make it catch and release only so guys like me are happy, but the meat guys are ****ed. Make it slot sizes, and half of everyone are ****ed. Make a min or max and the meat guys are ****ed.

[eyeflyer]

With the flood of anglers going to Cold Lake now and the last few years there is probably a pretty good population of lakers coming out of there summer and winter. May not be a legal limit coming out but I'll guarantee you there is a substantial limit. The Cold Lake thread now has about 14k views in the last couple months...............just wait until guys are driving everywhere. Campgrounds, outfitters and anglers won't like it but I don't see anything but a controlled harvest (tags) or possible 0 limit for lake trout for a few years saving the laker population in that lake.

[addicted]

Maybe just 1 under 50cm. Leave the breeders alone and key in on the largest population base without taking the factory away.

Let’s big fish get big and everyone can enjoy landing one. Gives everyone a chance for a fish fry here and there.

[Elchinodiablo]

I would have no problem if Cold Lake was C & R. It is a beautiful resource that needs help now before its too late.

Sent from my SM-G991W using Tapatalk

[addicted]

One other note. When doing the survey they asked if a bait ban should be in place for this fishery. Guys remember this will affect the whole lake not just lake trout. Perch walleye pike no bait. Makes fishing a lot harder. Just my 2 cents

[35 whelen]

Originally Posted by eyeflyer

With the flood of anglers going to Cold Lake now and the last few years there is probably a pretty good population of lakers coming out of there summer and winter. May not be a legal limit coming out but I'll guarantee you there is a substantial limit. The Cold Lake thread now has about 14k views in the last couple months...............just wait until guys are driving everywhere. Campgrounds, outfitters and anglers won't like it but I don't see anything but a controlled harvest (tags) or possible 0 limit for lake trout for a few years saving the laker population in that lake.

Agreed and not to mention how many have floated down to the bottom from poor handling ,very cold weather, probably thousands and thousands every year .did the survey my vote would be catch and release.

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

[Frank_NK28]

Originally Posted by addicted

One other note. When doing the survey they asked if a bait ban should be in place for this fishery. Guys remember this will affect the whole lake not just lake trout. Perch walleye pike no bait. Makes fishing a lot harder. Just my 2 cents

Have to be careful of your wording when adding comments to the comment section if you are in favour of bait bans. I am all for eliminating "BAITFISH" being used but not bait like worms, leeches, etc which would greatly effect your walleye and perch fishing opportunities.

[-JR-]

If they do allow fish to be taken with out tags ,I believe more will be taken from the locals on an everyday level . So I would say yes to tags . But leaning more to catch and release for a few more years yet .

It would be nice to see a zero limit allowed outside 20 ft of the shore line ,this way it allows you to have a shore lunch or fry one up on the boat .
And a high fine if you bring one home or to your campground site .

[58thecat]

Catch and release for a few years, then a draw system for tags but must fall into a slot size for a few years then repeat process all over again.

This is regarding lakers in cold lake.

[Frank_NK28]

There was lake in my old hometown in Ontario that had naturally occurring Lakers. Like Cold Lake it had experienced a substantial collapse in the fishery many years back. The first thing was a complete closure on Laker fishing for 10 years. Then a split season was enacted where you could keep 1 fish between 22 and 23.5 inches. The season for retaining a fish was 1 week in July and 1 week in February. Other than those two seasons it was C&R only. 30 years later it is still run the same way and the fishing is fantastic. The lake has plenty of 15+lb Lakers though you rarely see them caught but a few are caught each year. The average fish caught would be nearly identical average size of Cold Lake at 4-7lbs. They spawn off an underwater rock hump near a friends cottage and we would go out at night and watch them when the MNR would be there doing fish counts under a big spotlight. No reason Cold Lake could not be done the same way, two limited seasons, retention with a tight slot size that allows a few fish to be caught while protecting the big breeders.

[Smoky buck]

Originally Posted by Frank_NK28

There was lake in my old hometown in Ontario that had naturally occurring Lakers. Like Cold Lake it had experienced a substantial collapse in the fishery many years back. The first thing was a complete closure on Laker fishing for 10 years. Then a split season was enacted where you could keep 1 fish between 22 and 23.5 inches. The season for retaining a fish was 1 week in July and 1 week in February. Other than those two seasons it was C&R only. 30 years later it is still run the same way and the fishing is fantastic. The lake has plenty of 15+lb Lakers though you rarely see them caught but a few are caught each year. The average fish caught would be nearly identical average size of Cold Lake at 4-7lbs. They spawn off an underwater rock hump near a friends cottage and we would go out at night and watch them when the MNR would be there doing fish counts under a big spotlight. No reason Cold Lake could not be done the same way, two limited seasons, retention with a tight slot size that allows a few fish to be caught while protecting the big breeders.

There is a lake in BC that is managed very similar after a major decline. It is only open for retention in July and February 1 over 50cm and 2 under 50cm the rest of the year C&R. Lots of lakers in the 6-10lb range and 15+lb fish are caught a decent amount.

I lack experience with Cold lake so can’t speak on that population but there is many examples of mixed management with small seasonal openings being effective

[Frank_NK28]

Originally Posted by Smoky buck

There is a lake in BC that is managed very similar after a major decline. It is only open for retention in July and February 1 over 50cm and 2 under 50cm the rest of the year C&R. Lots of lakers in the 6-10lb range and 15+lb fish are caught a decent amount.

I lack experience with Cold lake so can’t speak on that population but there is many examples of mixed management with small seasonal openings being effective

I am trying to recall two lakes in B.C, I know one is Revelstoke where on top of your provincial fishing license you require a license specific to that waterbody. With that license comes an annual quota. The license has the months of the year along one edge, numbered days along another and species on another. As soon as you retain a fish you are required to notch out the month, date and species immediately. Failure to do so results in being fined if caught with a fish in possession w/o the license notched. Once you have used up your notches you have reached your annual quota and can no longer retain or possess fish from that waterbody. If memory serves back when I fished there in the 90's the annual quota on Lakers was 4 per season. I would be more than happy with that kind of a system on Cold Lake too. There is lots of good options.

[Curtsyneil]

Throwing back the big ones seems to be working on other provinces water body’s. Maybe adapt to Sask and Manitoba ways and the lake might turn around for the better and still allow eater fish and trophy fish to be caught. It’s not to hard to figure out on what works and what doesn’t.

[kouleerunner]

Judging by the rapid increase in population over the past 10-20 years, it would suggest that the Status quo is working well. I really don't understand the bait ban. If the population is significantly and steadily increasing, why would a change be warrented? I would be very concerned that a change in regulations at this time would disrupt the dynamics of the population.

And as mentioned, there are other games species in that body of water, eliminating bait would significantly affect the success rate of anglers.

I'm against the idea of change for the sake of change, and I don't see enough evidence here to justify change. It's currently working well.

[Smoky buck]

Originally Posted by Frank_NK28

I am trying to recall two lakes in B.C, I know one is Revelstoke where on top of your provincial fishing license you require a license specific to that waterbody. With that license comes an annual quota. The license has the months of the year along one edge, numbered days along another and species on another. As soon as you retain a fish you are required to notch out the month, date and species immediately. Failure to do so results in being fined if caught with a fish in possession w/o the license notched. Once you have used up your notches you have reached your annual quota and can no longer retain or possess fish from that waterbody. If memory serves back when I fished there in the 90's the annual quota on Lakers was 4 per season. I would be more than happy with that kind of a system on Cold Lake too. There is lots of good options.

Annual limits are used for multiple species both salt and freshwater in BC not all involve buying a special license either. All fish kept are recorded along with additional information. Steelhead you even have to leave the body of water you retained a steelhead from for the remainder of the day

Lots of tools used across North America when it comes to managing fishing pressure/retention. It just a matter of what fishermen are willing to put up with and the combination of restrictions needed to limit harvest without having negative impacts of fish stocks

But I lack knowledge with cold lake so I have no idea what the answer is

[Jamie Black R/T]

Originally Posted by Smoky buck

I have no idea what the answer is

Here lies the issue IMO.

What exactly is the problem?

Nobody can agree what the problem is. Makes it very tough to find a one size fits all solution. The trophy guys dont care if they can keep any fish and the fish eaters dont care if they catch any trophies.

I believe managing it for trophy size with C&R or very restrictive harvest can work. I do NOT believe any type of regs with a liberal harvest will be sustainable in the long term here. Theres just far too many hungry mouths here. Alberta needs to grow out of the "fish fry" era and look back fondly on those days as they are gonzo.

[Curtsyneil]

Originally Posted by Jamie Black R/T

Here lies the issue IMO.

What exactly is the problem?

Nobody can agree what the problem is. Makes it very tough to find a one size fits all solution. The trophy guys dont care if they can keep any fish and the fish eaters dont care if they catch any trophies.

I believe managing it for trophy size with C&R or very restrictive harvest can work. I do NOT believe any type of regs with a liberal harvest will be sustainable in the long term here. Theres just far too many hungry mouths here. Alberta needs to grow out of the "fish fry" era and look back fondly on those days as they are gonzo.

Far too many lakes around for hungry mouths to just choose cold lake lakers to eat. That would be the last fish I would want to eat and I’m sure some would say the pike out of cold lake are 100 times better eating then the trout.

[CBintheNorth]

Originally Posted by Jamie Black R/T

Here lies the issue IMO.

What exactly is the problem?

Nobody can agree what the problem is. Makes it very tough to find a one size fits all solution. The trophy guys dont care if they can keep any fish and the fish eaters dont care if they catch any trophies.

I believe managing it for trophy size with C&R or very restrictive harvest can work. I do NOT believe any type of regs with a liberal harvest will be sustainable in the long term here. Theres just far too many hungry mouths here. Alberta needs to grow out of the "fish fry" era and look back fondly on those days as they are gonzo.

The problem is there is a disease starting to spread in the lakers in Cold Lake. Almost like a ringworm that develops under the skin. It's disgusting and although it is unknown for sure, it most likely leads to the death of its host.

The disease is spreading faster every year as the fish density increases. There are more fish in the Lake now than nearly ever before. So far, Biologists don't know what it is or what causes it to manifest. Damage while handling has been brought up as a suggestion by the biologist.

A couple years ago myself and a group of anglers that fish the lake a lot met with the area biologist, the Cold Lake Mayor, and ESRD members, including Jason Nixon.
While overall health of the lake was the primary concern, keeping users of the lake happy was also on the list.

When surveyed, most people wanted to be able to keep a fish to eat. Unfortunately, due to the length of time needed for lake trout to reach maturity, finding an answer that balances all aspects was not simple. There are a large number of fish of a certain size range, but also a large number of anglers trying to catch them.
Through internal surveys among the group it was found that many people fishing for lake trout desired keeping a fish. Unfortunately, the average boat caught and released dozens of fish per trip (some in the 100's).
Fish mortality during warm temps can be extremely high for lakers, especially when the anglers are not educated in handling cold water fish (or any fish at all for that matter). This may very well have caused higher mortality in these lakers than if higher retention was permitted.

Most people that I personally surveyed who indicated they would keep fish, also indicated they would most likely stop fishing once they had their daily limit.

With this information, the two major ideas brought forward by the group to reduce the number of small fish in the lake while allowing an acceptable harvest and still maintaining overall lake health and positive reactions among area visitors were:

A) A tag system- this would allow a known Harvest quantity of a controlled size as dictated by harvest surveys and population studies. Unfortunately Saskatchewan wanted nothing to do with tags.

B) A slot size which allows fish of a size that have spawned at least once to be retained, but a small enough slot that a reasonable number of fish may make it through to become major breeders of trophy size.

Not sure where the exact slot sizes came from but I'm going to guess the area biologists.
In both cases, an annual population study is desperately needed to monitor the program.
Doing nothing is not an option in my opinion.
While many people are saying they love catching 40-60 fish/day, it is not healthy in any fishery to have that kind of density. Even for a lake as bait-rich as Cold Lake. And especially not with a new, unknown disease starting to spread among the lake trout.
Think back to the slow takeover of our central lakes by walleye.

Full disclaimer here, I do not work for ESRD, nor am I a biologist. Any specific questions regarding either will likely lead to a deer-in-the-headlights emoji.

[58thecat]

If we bring in the draw tag system sask anglers follow alberta regs just like now.
Draw tag system and a slot size may work together but if what your saying about a disease then let’s just go to a slot size like you mentioned. Keep the daily limits/possession low as it will get hammered for the first few years and then re-evaluate.
I just ask for all who are interested do the survey and have your say.

[mlee]

I'm always C&R on cold but selective harvest probably makes sense for a while. That said they could limit harvest season to july-august when fish mortality is the likely the highest anyway due to pressure and water temps.
I filled out the survey....I'd be fine with a bait ban as well as barbless hooks on cold.

[AlbertanGP]

Originally Posted by mlee

I filled out the survey....I'd be fine with a bait ban as well as barbless hooks on cold.

It might be worth looking into a single hook regulation as well like they have on many trophy laker waters in B.C. Single barbless hooks make for quick releases.

[Jamie Black R/T]

Lots of good suggestions posted here and lots of work to do. Looking forward to taking in the information session tonight online regarding cold lake specifically.

Originally Posted by Curtsyneil

Far too many lakes around for hungry mouths to just choose cold lake lakers to eat. That would be the last fish I would want to eat and I’m sure some would say the pike out of cold lake are 100 times better eating then the trout.

I agree. Over 75cm doesn't help IMO. The smaller fish you catch 100 of would eat way better if you could keep those.

[SNAPFisher]

Originally Posted by mlee

I'm always C&R on cold but selective harvest probably makes sense for a while. That said they could limit harvest season to july-august when fish mortality is the likely the highest anyway due to pressure and water temps.
I filled out the survey....I'd be fine with a bait ban as well as barbless hooks on cold.

I agree. They are fond of 5 year plans....but something like 3 seasons with continued measurement would not be very risky. After that assess and shrink the season if needed.