Go Back   Alberta Outdoorsmen Forum > Main Category > Fishing Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #121  
Old 11-06-2011, 01:57 PM
horsetrader horsetrader is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 4,018
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by helium View Post
I'm sorry my autodictionary changed "Yous to you"
In case you don't know that is "you plural yous" plural as so kindly explained above.

So many people who don't contribute, geesh.
I am afraid this post makes no relevance.

Yes I would say someone who has a sign up date for a year or two ago but has not posted has not really contributed to the forum. Just me opinion but i'm sure it is shared by a few others on this forum. The word TROLLER seems to come to mind.
Reply With Quote
  #122  
Old 11-06-2011, 02:12 PM
gl2's Avatar
gl2 gl2 is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: southern ab
Posts: 598
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by helium View Post
This is an interesting thread with good intentions that started out trying to do the right thing and unfortunately at times has turned into a bashing match and finger pointing; all with from what I can see is un-substantiated information, only experience. I also have spent some time at Travers, I would hate to see the faces of kids sitting on the dock waiting for the lake to open so that they can start fishing as I pull away with my boat because I am fortunate enough to have one or un-fortunate(BOAT - Bring On Another Thousand). For those of you who say there is lots of places for the shore fisherperson/fisherkid to fish, where the @#@$ are you talking about, have you been there, hope you like to walk. The campground is at the West end where the dock in question is, are you saying they should camp somewhere else or just drive somewhere else to fish. You wouldn't be writing about this if you also weren't guilty of fishing in the area's in question, how else do you know, are you taking others word for this? For those who say the lake is in trouble, is that because you couldn't go hammer the fish you used to. Did I say used to or still are but more people are getting better at watching you, listening to you, or talking to the so called experts, I bet you have learned a few things over the years, I know I have and that is thanks to lots of avenues, including the organization listed in this thread. I have had really good days on this lake and others, as well as really bad day, is that because the Walleye are a moving, schooling, and spawning species or are we fishing it out? I would like to try some of you waypoints to see if I just haven't found the good spots yet or have and just gotten lucky. I like to catch fish and show others including kids how to catch fish, I can release most of them with no ill effects, some just are ill hooked or I get the hankering to eat a fish, tell me the rest of you haven't and I will show you a liar for each no. My beliefs are if someone wants to keep the Walleye, any over 60ish cm’s are probably good spawners and should try to keep smaller legal fish if so desired and allowed by the law(debatable if the law is right). Again this is my belief and if someone can definitively prove me wrong I will certainly listen, can I debate the fact without being singled out?

I will be at the next meeting to meet all of the posters that feel so strongly about the regulation changes and discuss what is best, for the future good of the fishery (discuss not bicker, not everyone will have the same opinion). I don’t know all the spawning beds, but it sure sounds like some of you all know and I am glad for that. Is it because you caught really well at certain times or is there more proof? At least it looks like there has been some steps to taken by the fisheries with the good intentions of some people and WU as it was recognized by The Biologist(All the people quoting what the Biologist is saying, has he been notified his quotes are being stated in this post). All you negative posting members bashing the work of what has been done towards the good steps please comment on the work you have done to make this fishery better, besides buying a boat, I would like to hear those success stories as well. Can we start a debate over them as well?

I do agree that shutting down fishing in a lake can be a good,,, for the fish, and as someone already commented all fish not just the Walleye (Burbot and Whitefish don't eat the walleye eggs do they)(Pike don't sit at the mouth of Walleye spawning grounds and eat do they)(Someone should tell them about the closure as well). Sure hope the commercial netters, who are only taking out the evasive species, still keep selling their Walleye so I can have one every once in a while when I have enough money left from fixing my boat.

Sure glad those big noisy wake board boats slow down over the spawning beds so as to not disturb the spawning Fish, they can power up later and have fun as long as their tiny wakes aren’t causing any damage to the shoreline.

Who gets to take on all the issues, or do we start somewhere knowing not all will agree?

PS. Can’t wait to see what this response starts!!! By the way I am aware of my Handle, yes I might be full of it but can’t wait to hear what the posters can come up with?

I dont think you will have to worry about sad kids on the dock if we don't do anything because if we don't, and continue to keep sucker punching our pregnant fish we all will have to find another place to go.....
Reply With Quote
  #123  
Old 11-06-2011, 02:17 PM
chubbdarter's Avatar
chubbdarter chubbdarter is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: cowtown
Posts: 6,653
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Horseshoe View Post
No thanks, I'm sure you didn't tell me where the spawning locations were as I knew years ago through Hogslayer and Rugrat.
Well , Well, I guess ive been a real fool on deciding who i can trust with information.
Thanks Horseshoe for exposing a blabber mouth......trust is broken.
Reply With Quote
  #124  
Old 11-06-2011, 04:20 PM
huntsfurfish huntsfurfish is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Southern Alberta
Posts: 7,350
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by horsetrader View Post
Well what i'm having trouble with is so many people that supposedly have been on this forum for a year or two but have contributed nothing but they all come out on this thread. One has already been banned lets continue to see what happens.
People on this forum can choose which posts to respond to and when they want to respond! Get a grip!
Reply With Quote
  #125  
Old 11-06-2011, 05:15 PM
MoFugger21's Avatar
MoFugger21 MoFugger21 is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Southern Alberta
Posts: 1,777
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by helium View Post
This is an interesting thread with good intentions that started out trying to do the right thing and unfortunately at times has turned into a bashing match and finger pointing; all with from what I can see is un-substantiated information, only experience. I also have spent some time at Travers, I would hate to see the faces of kids sitting on the dock waiting for the lake to open so that they can start fishing as I pull away with my boat because I am fortunate enough to have one or un-fortunate(BOAT - Bring On Another Thousand).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Horseshoe View Post
I went to the meeting about this closure of the west arm at Travers Reservoir. I can confirm that the west arm will be closed until June 1st, 100 hundred yards west of the dock. As discussed in the meeting, the dock and main lake will be open May 8th (Keeping this open for families & kids to fish off the dock.) Thanks to Walleye Unlimited for support on this closure on the west arm (to help with the spawning).
You don't have to worry about that, as it seems the docks aren't included in the closure.


Quote:
Originally Posted by helium View Post
For those of you who say there is lots of places for the shore fisherperson/fisherkid to fish, where the @#@$ are you talking about, have you been there, hope you like to walk. The campground is at the West end where the dock in question is, are you saying they should camp somewhere else or just drive somewhere else to fish.
This is especially true in the spring when the water level is usually at it's highest. From my experience, there is little to no shoreline to walk in the spring.


Quote:
Originally Posted by helium View Post
You wouldn't be writing about this if you also weren't guilty of fishing in the area's in question, how else do you know, are you taking others word for this?
Until someone steps up to provide the data that supports the closure, this is all most of us can go on. I don't personally fish Travers in the spring, so all I can go on is what others have said. That said, I would still like to see some hard data that shows the reason for the 'west arm' closure.


Quote:
Originally Posted by helium View Post
For those who say the lake is in trouble, is that because you couldn't go hammer the fish you used to. Did I say used to or still are but more people are getting better at watching you, listening to you, or talking to the so called experts, I bet you have learned a few things over the years, I know I have and that is thanks to lots of avenues, including the organization listed in this thread.
For me personally, see my comment above. It applies here too. I cannot comment for others obviously.


Quote:
Originally Posted by helium View Post
I have had really good days on this lake and others, as well as really bad day, is that because the Walleye are a moving, schooling, and spawning species or are we fishing it out? I would like to try some of you waypoints to see if I just haven't found the good spots yet or have and just gotten lucky.
The data that the majority of the people in this thread are looking for, including me, should speak to this.


Quote:
Originally Posted by helium View Post
I like to catch fish and show others including kids how to catch fish, I can release most of them with no ill effects, some just are ill hooked or I get the hankering to eat a fish, tell me the rest of you haven't and I will show you a liar for each no. My beliefs are if someone wants to keep the Walleye, any over 60ish cm’s are probably good spawners and should try to keep smaller legal fish if so desired and allowed by the law(debatable if the law is right). Again this is my belief and if someone can definitively prove me wrong I will certainly listen, can I debate the fact without being singled out?
As I said before, I cannot comment for others, but I am led to believe that many people share this same sentiment.


Quote:
Originally Posted by helium View Post
I will be at the next meeting to meet all of the posters that feel so strongly about the regulation changes and discuss what is best, for the future good of the fishery (discuss not bicker, not everyone will have the same opinion). I don’t know all the spawning beds, but it sure sounds like some of you all know and I am glad for that. Is it because you caught really well at certain times or is there more proof? At least it looks like there has been some steps to taken by the fisheries with the good intentions of some people and WU as it was recognized by The Biologist(All the people quoting what the Biologist is saying, has he been notified his quotes are being stated in this post).

All you negative posting members bashing the work of what has been done towards the good steps please comment on the work you have done to make this fishery better, besides buying a boat, I would like to hear those success stories as well. Can we start a debate over them as well?
I don't know that people are bashing the work of others... It's more bashing the transparency of the whole process. No one who was actually involved in the process seems willing to fill in the 'regular joe fisherman' on how and why these changes have been implemented. I think you'd be hard pressed to find someone who was against the change if it could be shown, or communicated, the how's and why's.


Quote:
Originally Posted by helium View Post
I do agree that shutting down fishing in a lake can be a good,,, for the fish, and as someone already commented all fish not just the Walleye (Burbot and Whitefish don't eat the walleye eggs do they)(Pike don't sit at the mouth of Walleye spawning grounds and eat do they)(Someone should tell them about the closure as well). Sure hope the commercial netters, who are only taking out the evasive species, still keep selling their Walleye so I can have one every once in a while when I have enough money left from fixing my boat.

Sure glad those big noisy wake board boats slow down over the spawning beds so as to not disturb the spawning Fish, they can power up later and have fun as long as their tiny wakes aren’t causing any damage to the shoreline.

Who gets to take on all the issues, or do we start somewhere knowing not all will agree?

PS. Can’t wait to see what this response starts!!! By the way I am aware of my Handle, yes I might be full of it but can’t wait to hear what the posters can come up with?
I'm not entirely sure how to respond to the sarcasm in this post.... Surely you don't expect someone to argue the point the lake should be closed down to all boats to protect spawning fish? Maybe I'm missing something in this part, I don't know...


Anyways... In the spirit of transparency, here's where I sit with everything:

I'm all for a longer closure IF it is in fact for the long term benefit of the lake. As it stands right now I have no idea if it is, because no one has provided any data to show me one way or the other.

The people that supposedly led the charge for this closure came in here, made a post/announcement, patted themselves on the back, and then subsequently left without providing the hows and whys supporting this closure. I would just like to some transparency in the process and some data to support this.

I personally don't understand why the closure to only the 'west arm' of lake and not the whole lake, which is where some hard data would come. As I said in a previous post, I'm positive the 'west arm' isn't the only spawning grounds for walleye in the lake, and if the push is protect spawning walleye (pre/during/post), then why only one part of the lake?? It very well could be that the 'west arm' is the only spawning grounds in danger (or something to that effect), but no one is going to know for sure until some data on the state of the lake and fishery is provided.

The reluctance of people to provide answers and provide some transparency has me scratching my head, and wondering what exactly the motives are? Is it in fact to save a failing fishery? Or is there some other ulterior motive behind all of this? Until any of this is addressed, all any of can do is speculate and argue in circles, like we have currently been doing, and ultimately get no where.
Reply With Quote
  #126  
Old 11-06-2011, 05:23 PM
horsetrader horsetrader is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 4,018
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by huntsfurfish View Post
People on this forum can choose which posts to respond to and when they want to respond! Get a grip!
There you are when are you going to answer my last question to you....

And you are right people can and no where in my post did i say they could not so i have no idea what you are responding to but i have notice some people can't comprehend what they read. What I said was i'm having trouble with is so many people that supposedly have been on this forum for a year or two but have contributed nothing but they all come out on this thread." Nope read it again and still did not say they couldn't. All I posted was my own feelings. And just what do you what my to get a grip on???
Reply With Quote
  #127  
Old 11-06-2011, 05:29 PM
gl2's Avatar
gl2 gl2 is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: southern ab
Posts: 598
Default

I have a feeling like we have seen the last of Horseshoe....... I have emailed Terry Clayton for some more information, i will share any response i receive.
Reply With Quote
  #128  
Old 11-06-2011, 06:25 PM
chubbdarter's Avatar
chubbdarter chubbdarter is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: cowtown
Posts: 6,653
Default

All though im positive many of the posts from these 1 and 2 posters are a campaign mission to direct the thread in a different direction and bury the true questions that arent being answered. I will entertain.

Not having a boat doesnt give anyone the right to have the privalge to harass spawning fish imo.
Am i compassionate to the kids?...of course.....but what are we teaching them same kids?
If this was a hunting reg change....would all NON quad owners ask that they may road hunt pregnant does thru their truck windows?....i hope not.
If you dont own a car......should the bus be free?
It NOT a crime to own a boat!!!!
If you dont own a boat to fish the K lakes...should you be allowed to fish Smith Dorrien creek?

As far as shore fishing.....the east dam is wide open, there is even a west dam parking area that gives you access to the southern shoreline. The bay of pigs is a popular fishing area. Yes they require that for kids the dock at LBR isnt your babysitter as its obvious that is convienent. We just simply cant have our cake and eat it with every issue in life.

As far as the comments we rarely catch a legal fish in the arm.....Are legal fish the only fish that spawn?

Hard decisions need to be made if we are to believe the data thats presented now.
The only reason im siding with the data even though it still appears to be a pink unicorn is my 40+ years fishing Travers has brought up some real concerns.
Reply With Quote
  #129  
Old 11-06-2011, 11:35 PM
crestliner crestliner is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 14
Default

Have not been on for a few days spend a lot of time out of country. I read what was posted but still don't see any real explanation of what went on and how the regulations were changed. You would think there should be some paper trail some where that someone could direct me to. So far I find things very confusing. The main players seem to be Walleye Unlimited,SAWT and SRD. But I can find little to nothing as far as any contact between the three. If anyone could help me to se things a little clearer it would be greatly appreciated, it is very hard to know which way to lean when no information is available. Thank you
Reply With Quote
  #130  
Old 11-07-2011, 07:25 AM
Winch101 Winch101 is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Okotoks wilderness
Posts: 4,420
Default May Not make a difference.

I think the point is moot ....number of walleyes in the creek is relative to

feed , water temp and level . 3 yrs ago we were catching 20" plus fish in 2 ft. of water on july 15 th.....

Brian did tell me he was concerned about how the Tournaments were pounding this spawning area in the spring. This was 3 yrs ago...
So to me the Tourneys are the problem ....late opening on spawning areas on any given body of water is not uncommon , I have always debated the spawning theory here as this area is solid loon **** and every fish you cut open are full of shiners . There are milting males there but in May they are all over the lake even in W--- Coulee.

There are too many people keeping legal fish in this lake ....info and technology in the hands
of the wrong people is a dangerous thing , too many F&F's these days
( Fish and Fry )...Also too many blabbermouths on this board. " F & F " I believe should be a new club , the fisheaters unite....with membership you get a gallon of peanut oil.

This closure shows you that PC's have no plan , never have had one ,
just kinda rollin around . Now that I know that it just takes one guy to get the regs changed , I think its time to get the province wide Bait Ban movement
going .That would make those tourneys interesting , might as well just cut the cheque to Chub before it starts

Though that dock is home to a few kids , also lots of poaching going on there .

When is the last time you saw F&W there ....oh ya NEVER>

This closure will be tough to enforce.....so bussiness as usual
Reply With Quote
  #131  
Old 11-07-2011, 08:34 AM
huntsfurfish huntsfurfish is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Southern Alberta
Posts: 7,350
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by horsetrader View Post
There you are when are you going to answer my last question to you....

And you are right people can and no where in my post did i say they could not so i have no idea what you are responding to but i have notice some people can't comprehend what they read. What I said was i'm having trouble with is so many people that supposedly have been on this forum for a year or two but have contributed nothing but they all come out on this thread." Nope read it again and still did not say they couldn't. All I posted was my own feelings. And just what do you what my to get a grip on???
figure it out, im sure most others can.
Reply With Quote
  #132  
Old 11-07-2011, 08:43 AM
huntsfurfish huntsfurfish is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Southern Alberta
Posts: 7,350
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Winch101 View Post
I think the point is moot ....number of walleyes in the creek is relative to

feed , water temp and level . 3 yrs ago we were catching 20" plus fish in 2 ft. of water on july 15 th.....

Brian did tell me he was concerned about how the Tournaments were pounding this spawning area in the spring. This was 3 yrs ago...
So to me the Tourneys are the problem ....late opening on spawning areas on any given body of water is not uncommon , I have always debated the spawning theory here as this area is solid loon **** and every fish you cut open are full of shiners . There are milting males there but in May they are all over the lake even in W--- Coulee.

There are too many people keeping legal fish in this lake ....info and technology in the hands
of the wrong people is a dangerous thing , too many F&F's these days
( Fish and Fry )...Also too many blabbermouths on this board. " F & F " I believe should be a new club , the fisheaters unite....with membership you get a gallon of peanut oil.

This closure shows you that PC's have no plan , never have had one ,
just kinda rollin around . Now that I know that it just takes one guy to get the regs changed , I think its time to get the province wide Bait Ban movement
going .That would make those tourneys interesting , might as well just cut the cheque to Chub before it starts

Though that dock is home to a few kids , also lots of poaching going on there .

When is the last time you saw F&W there ....oh ya NEVER>

This closure will be tough to enforce.....so bussiness as usual
Pretty much agree, good post.
Reply With Quote
  #133  
Old 11-07-2011, 08:48 AM
huntsfurfish huntsfurfish is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Southern Alberta
Posts: 7,350
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by horsetrader View Post
There you are when are you going to answer my last question to you....

And you are right people can and no where in my post did i say they could not so i have no idea what you are responding to but i have notice some people can't comprehend what they read. What I said was i'm having trouble with is so many people that supposedly have been on this forum for a year or two but have contributed nothing but they all come out on this thread." Nope read it again and still did not say they couldn't. All I posted was my own feelings. And just what do you what my to get a grip on???
"People on this forum can choose which posts to respond to and when they want to respond! Get a grip! " quote from hunsfurfish




You are FUNNY. LOLOLOLOL
you said it in the same post LOL

Last edited by huntsfurfish; 11-07-2011 at 08:54 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #134  
Old 11-07-2011, 09:16 AM
gl2's Avatar
gl2 gl2 is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: southern ab
Posts: 598
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Winch101 View Post

Brian did tell me he was concerned about how the Tournaments were pounding this spawning area in the spring. This was 3 yrs ago...
So to me the Tourneys are the problem ...

I am not sure if you can blame the tournaments entirely but i will say is i find this post extremely difficult to read. How can anybody in a position like that believe that there is a problem and still promote a act that compounds the problem???. For anybody who didn't believe Horsetrader when he said there was a conflict of interest, well here is the proof. and it looks like we all know where the loyalty lies.
Reply With Quote
  #135  
Old 11-07-2011, 09:39 AM
horsetrader horsetrader is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 4,018
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by huntsfurfish View Post
figure it out, im sure most others can.
??????????????
Reply With Quote
  #136  
Old 11-07-2011, 09:49 AM
horsetrader horsetrader is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 4,018
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by huntsfurfish View Post
Your funny
Quote:
Originally Posted by huntsfurfish View Post
I was making a point, only you as usual has taken it out of context.
But your still funny
[QUOTE=huntsfurfish;1149310][I]"
You are FUNNY. LOLOLOLOL





I guess well there is no answer you have to have something to say
Reply With Quote
  #137  
Old 11-07-2011, 09:51 AM
horsetrader horsetrader is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 4,018
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by huntsfurfish View Post
"People on this forum can choose which posts to respond to and when they want to respond! Get a grip! " quote from hunsfurfish





you said it in the same post LOL

Yes because it was a QUOTE and it still does not say they can't do it.
So what is your complaint.
Reply With Quote
  #138  
Old 11-07-2011, 12:14 PM
gl2's Avatar
gl2 gl2 is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: southern ab
Posts: 598
Default

i just got off the phone with Terry Clayton and here is what i learned....

1- there has been no study done to provide hard facts as why these changes are taking place, these changes are just being made to protect the fish that spawn in the west arm ( as we have ice later and later fish are spawning later and later and this would ensure fish spawn in peace)

2- there was test netting done on the whole body of traverse but nobody has gone over that data yet, thus no conclusions have been made. these tests were not done to provide data for the changes being made in the west arm.

3- the idea that Terry does not believe walleye spawn in the west are is not true as he clearly identified as these reg changes to protect the spawning fish.

4- there has been no boundary set as to the closure, its still being worked on by the srd. he told me that he is waiting for input from land people. they are still a ways off of deciding on how much water this extended closure will impact.

this was not a long talk but i did express my concern as to where the boundary will be. i can only hope that its not 100m west of the dock and we do the right thing for the fish.
Reply With Quote
  #139  
Old 11-07-2011, 12:18 PM
AK47's Avatar
AK47 AK47 is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Calgary
Posts: 836
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Winch101 View Post
There are too many people keeping legal fish in this lake ....info and technology in the hands
of the wrong people is a dangerous thing , too many F&F's these days
( Fish and Fry )...Also too many blabbermouths on this board. " F & F " I believe should be a new club , the fisheaters unite....with membership you get a gallon of peanut oil.
This is getting ridiculous, so now anglers who are keeping legal size fish are the problem? Are you really serious about it??? I and some other anglers who kept walleye from Travers are "wrong people"? Quite insulting I must say
Would you like it to be catch and release only? Turn it into Pigeon lake with overpopulated small and stunted walleye?
__________________
I intend to live forever. So far so good
Reply With Quote
  #140  
Old 11-07-2011, 12:26 PM
Freedom55 Freedom55 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Perdue SK
Posts: 1,570
Default

And here is me pondering whether to apply for a spot in next year's SAWT or keep my distance from Travers.
Fished this reservoir two or three times for walleye and by golly, didn't I keep one once!
Reply With Quote
  #141  
Old 11-07-2011, 12:46 PM
horsetrader horsetrader is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 4,018
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AK47 View Post
This is getting ridiculous, so now anglers who are keeping legal size fish are the problem? Are you really serious about it??? I and some other anglers who kept walleye from Travers are "wrong people"? Quite insulting I must say
Would you like it to be catch and release only? Turn it into Pigeon lake with overpopulated small and stunted walleye?
X2 It has Been proven a few times unfortunately that a C-R lake is not always a healthy lake. You must have a harvest of fish to keep the numbers at a size that will allow the fish to grow at a healthy rate. To few fish chance of losing the fishery, to many fish and the lake stunts and you still lose a great fishery.
There is a delicate balance. The harvest of fish has to be monitored and adjusted in accordance.
Reply With Quote
  #142  
Old 11-07-2011, 12:54 PM
pickrel pat pickrel pat is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 7,268
Default

catch and release has stunted the wabamum pike.
Reply With Quote
  #143  
Old 11-07-2011, 12:55 PM
pickrel pat pickrel pat is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 7,268
Default

before people came to this land, were all the walleye stunted?
Reply With Quote
  #144  
Old 11-07-2011, 01:00 PM
Gust Gust is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 6,408
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pickrel pat View Post
before people came to this land, were all the walleye stunted?
not sure,,, were there people here before us and if there were, did they eat fish, and if they did eat fish, did they catch them by rod or net or other, and if so, were they keeping that oh so delicate balance working?

what were the catch limits and size limits, if there were people here before us?
Reply With Quote
  #145  
Old 11-07-2011, 01:30 PM
MoFugger21's Avatar
MoFugger21 MoFugger21 is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Southern Alberta
Posts: 1,777
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gl2 View Post
i just got off the phone with Terry Clayton and here is what i learned....

1- there has been no study done to provide hard facts as why these changes are taking place, these changes are just being made to protect the fish that spawn in the west arm ( as we have ice later and later fish are spawning later and later and this would ensure fish spawn in peace)

2- there was test netting done on the whole body of traverse but nobody has gone over that data yet, thus no conclusions have been made. these tests were not done to provide data for the changes being made in the west arm.

3- the idea that Terry does not believe walleye spawn in the west are is not true as he clearly identified as these reg changes to protect the spawning fish.

4- there has been no boundary set as to the closure, its still being worked on by the srd. he told me that he is waiting for input from land people. they are still a ways off of deciding on how much water this extended closure will impact.

this was not a long talk but i did express my concern as to where the boundary will be. i can only hope that its not 100m west of the dock and we do the right thing for the fish.

Thanks for the update gl2! Really appreciate it!

I'm still processing how I feel about what has transpired previously in this thread, and this info... Sigh...

Hey gl2, I don't suppose in your conversation it came up as to why only the west arm is being closed for longer, and not the whole lake?? I know you said your convo was short, just curious if this was mentioned at all.
Reply With Quote
  #146  
Old 11-07-2011, 01:47 PM
gl2's Avatar
gl2 gl2 is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: southern ab
Posts: 598
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MoFugger21 View Post
Thanks for the update gl2! Really appreciate it!

I'm still processing how I feel about what has transpired previously in this thread, and this info... Sigh...

Hey gl2, I don't suppose in your conversation it came up as to why only the west arm is being closed for longer, and not the whole lake?? I know you said your convo was short, just curious if this was mentioned at all.
no problem mo, its just the west arm that is being looked at right now to protect the spawning fish as the spawn has been later and later in recent years. i believe that the info collected during the test netting will bring on further changes but i can only speculate on what they would be at this time. but until then i think we should all support the extended closure as protection.

as a side note i am very concerned about where the boundary will be. i know some of you complain about the dock being closed but i think the closure should go well into the west arm.
Reply With Quote
  #147  
Old 11-07-2011, 04:32 PM
huntsfurfish huntsfurfish is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Southern Alberta
Posts: 7,350
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by huntsfurfish
There was no conflict of interest. Brian was working on protecting the fish for walleyes unlimited. The arm was shut down in the first place by their work.

As president of SAWT he and other presidents have had tournments on Travers which included all open waters.

It would have been a conflict of interest had he not had the tournaments there! More info has come to light in the last year or so which influenced the changes for this year. I suspect that SAWT will follow the rules this year as well! And I believe Brian has lobbied for the changes for this year as well.


And I bet it could have been closed earlier if SAWT had made it off limites for their tournaments it would have shown SRD that even fishing groups were in favor of the closer to help the fishery.I don't see how the SAWT can't follow the rules this year like every one else. You know there is a saying that rings very true "A BAD VOLUNTEER IS WORSE THEN NO VOLUNTEER" think about it.
__________________
Straight from the horses mouth!

You would probably lose that bet then. The later spawning/staging just occurred the last 2 years. Not all changes are going to be as quick as you demand! Information comes in from the tournaments as well, not just weekend sport fisherman. Its easy for you to sit back and criticize and stir. SAWT has been a leader and innovator in Tournament fishing and “being better for and wellbeing of the walleye”. Many trails have since adopted methods we started. An example would be on the water measurements and release rather than transport back to a fixed weight station. I believe much of the SRD recommendations on tournaments were adopted from us. Info is collected in the form of catch rates and other studies. I will go through my other posts on here and try to simplify them so you might understand. Hope this helps! (I hate typing). I can talk about it better than I can type it.

Does anyone else not understand what Im trying to say? Or is it just horse?

Last edited by huntsfurfish; 11-07-2011 at 04:46 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #148  
Old 11-07-2011, 04:42 PM
huntsfurfish huntsfurfish is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Southern Alberta
Posts: 7,350
Default

Well I just went back to all my posts on this thread and was going to try and make them more clear, but I dont see a problem with what Im trying to get across. Me thinks Horse is just tying to get me stirred up? But that seems to be his style.
Reply With Quote
  #149  
Old 11-07-2011, 04:46 PM
gl2's Avatar
gl2 gl2 is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: southern ab
Posts: 598
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by huntsfurfish View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by huntsfurfish
There was no conflict of interest. Brian was working on protecting the fish for walleyes unlimited. The arm was shut down in the first place by their work.

As president of SAWT he and other presidents have had tournments on Travers which included all open waters.

It would have been a conflict of interest had he not had the tournaments there! More info has come to light in the last year or so which influenced the changes for this year. I suspect that SAWT will follow the rules this year as well! And I believe Brian has lobbied for the changes for this year as well.
And I bet it could have been closed earlier if SAWT had made it off limites for their tournaments it would have shown SRD that even fishing groups were in favor of the closer to help the fishery.I don't see how the SAWT can't follow the rules this year like every one else. You know there is a saying that rings very true "A BAD VOLUNTEER IS WORSE THEN NO VOLUNTEER" think about it.
__________________
Straight from the horses mouth!

You would probably lose that bet then. The later spawning/staging just occurred the last 2 years. Not all changes are going to be as quick as you demand! Information comes in from the tournaments as well, not just weekend sport fisherman. Its easy for you to sit back and criticize and stir. SAWT has been a leader and innovator in Tournament fishing and “being better for and wellbeing of the walleye”. Many trails have since adopted methods we started. An example would be on the water measurements and release rather than transport back to a fixed weight station. I believe much of the SRD recommendations on tournaments were adopted from us. Info is collected in the form of catch rates and other studies. I will go through my other posts on here and try to simplify them so you might understand. Hope this helps! (I hate typing). I can talk about it better than I can type it.

Does anyone else not understand what Im trying to say? Or is it just horse and I think Mofugger?
if horseshoe was the president of wu and knew or even suspected the problem of fishing pressure on spawning fish in clearly one of the biggest spawning areas on a body of water then to me his biggest commitment is to the fish giving birth and not the total at the weigh boat in a sawt tourney. you can tell me till your blue in the face on how sawt does all this good for the fish, but plain and simple they knew the problem, and continued to harass these fish.
Reply With Quote
  #150  
Old 11-07-2011, 04:48 PM
huntsfurfish huntsfurfish is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Southern Alberta
Posts: 7,350
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gl2 View Post
if horseshoe was the president of wu and knew or even suspected the problem of fishing pressure on spawning fish in clearly one of the biggest spawning areas on a body of water then to me his biggest commitment is to the fish giving birth and not the total at the weigh boat in a sawt tourney. you can tell me till your blue in the face on how sawt does all this good for the fish, but plain and simple they knew the problem, and continued to harass these fish.
They wernt sure of the problem till recently! IT was largely the weather from the last two years that caused the problem!
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 12:33 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.