Go Back   Alberta Outdoorsmen Forum > Main Category > Fishing Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #121  
Old 03-22-2017, 06:21 PM
calgarygringo calgarygringo is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: calgary
Posts: 3,004
Default

As I have mentioned in other posts the bio guys told me the bellies of most of the fish they have tested were full of bugs not fish type forage. Walleye need that type of food to grow and flourish and bugs do not provide that. Trout may make more sense if they leave it alone but as many of us have suggested why not add to shiners or similar to the lake and get them going.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #122  
Old 03-22-2017, 06:30 PM
RavYak's Avatar
RavYak RavYak is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: West Edmonton
Posts: 5,174
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Walleyedude View Post
According to my understanding of the situation, the number of fish initially stocked has nothing to do with the fact the population stunted. It's a direct result of the poor forage base. Add in poor spawning habitat for a number of reasons, and it creates a vicious circle for recruitment.

Walleye numbers are going to be WAY down, so I guess we're going to find out...
Number of fish stocked has to be determined based on a lakes capacity. If it has a reduced forage base then you have to take that into account and stock less fish in order to maintain a healthy ecosystem. Simply put you cannot blame the lake and not the people that stocked it. They should have stocked fewer fish and spread it out over a longer period of time making sure the lake was staying in a healthy state with forage base remaining intact and fish growing at a reasonable rate.

This is far from the only time this has happened here in AB, look no farther then Wabamun for a recent example. The lakes forage base was already taxed due to a large pike population and they decided to dump 11 million walleye in. It destroyed the remaining forage base, stunting the walleye and killing off a large portion of the pike population.
Reply With Quote
  #123  
Old 03-22-2017, 08:26 PM
AlbertaCutthroat AlbertaCutthroat is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 299
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by calgarygringo View Post
As I have mentioned in other posts the bio guys told me the bellies of most of the fish they have tested were full of bugs not fish type forage. Walleye need that type of food to grow and flourish and bugs do not provide that. Trout may make more sense if they leave it alone but as many of us have suggested why not add to shiners or similar to the lake and get them going.
So many backyard bios on this site, the lake was indeed stocked with shiners and other forage fish. The government backed out of stocking the recomended lake whitefish which would have provided additional forage. It failed, possibly due to walleye being added too quickly, possibly because of plankton, possibly because it was just a poor walleye lake, possibly because of water management considerations, etc. The lake is not there for recreation, it's main intention is water storage. I think trout is a dumb idea as well due to cost, should have managed for native pike and burbot. Oh well, at least another trout lake should thin out the city people further south.
Reply With Quote
  #124  
Old 03-23-2017, 12:16 AM
huntsfurfish huntsfurfish is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Southern Alberta
Posts: 7,350
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AlbertaCutthroat View Post
So many backyard bios on this site, the lake was indeed stocked with shiners and other forage fish. The government backed out of stocking the recomended lake whitefish which would have provided additional forage. It failed, possibly due to walleye being added too quickly, possibly because of plankton, possibly because it was just a poor walleye lake, possibly because of water management considerations, etc. The lake is not there for recreation, it's main intention is water storage. I think trout is a dumb idea as well due to cost, should have managed for native pike and burbot. Oh well, at least another trout lake should thin out the city people further south.
Pretty much agree with the bolded part.
__________________
.
eat a snickers


made in Alberta__ born n raised.


FS-Tinfool hats by the roll.

Last edited by huntsfurfish; 03-23-2017 at 12:25 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #125  
Old 03-23-2017, 12:24 AM
huntsfurfish huntsfurfish is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Southern Alberta
Posts: 7,350
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RavYak View Post
Number of fish stocked has to be determined based on a lakes capacity. If it has a reduced forage base then you have to take that into account and stock less fish in order to maintain a healthy ecosystem. Simply put you cannot blame the lake and not the people that stocked it. They should have stocked fewer fish and spread it out over a longer period of time making sure the lake was staying in a healthy state with forage base remaining intact and fish growing at a reasonable rate.

This is far from the only time this has happened here in AB, look no farther then Wabamun for a recent example. The lakes forage base was already taxed due to a large pike population and they decided to dump 11 million walleye in. It destroyed the remaining forage base, stunting the walleye and killing off a large portion of the pike population.
You dont stock lightly especially if you are starting out a new fishery or have a crashed fishery. You stock pretty heavy with hopes that they "take" and in good numbers. When they do people get ticked off, but then again, when it fails to "take" they get ticked off too. Cant win.
On the other hand it doesnt hurt to discuss it.
__________________
.
eat a snickers


made in Alberta__ born n raised.


FS-Tinfool hats by the roll.
Reply With Quote
  #126  
Old 03-23-2017, 06:44 AM
Walleyedude Walleyedude is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,701
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by huntsfurfish View Post
You dont stock lightly especially if you are starting out a new fishery or have a crashed fishery. You stock pretty heavy with hopes that they "take" and in good numbers. When they do people get ticked off, but then again, when it fails to "take" they get ticked off too. Cant win.
On the other hand it doesnt hurt to discuss it.
I can see RavYak's point that the large initial stocking had an affect on the population stunting, and I would agree to a point. However, I think with a sufficient forage base, the effect would have been drastically reduced.

Your point here is my understanding as well. You have to stock planning for the worst, and hope for the best. Knowing that the lake wasn't exactly ideal, I would have erred on the side of larger numbers too, expecting a high mortality rate.

It's a real testament to how hearty the walleye is that they survived in such numbers in a lake without a sufficient forage base and adapted to the limited available food source. Had there been a healthy bait fish population, PCR might have been a pretty amazing fishery...
Reply With Quote
  #127  
Old 03-23-2017, 06:49 AM
iliketrout's Avatar
iliketrout iliketrout is offline
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,797
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RavYak View Post
I don't know who the best contacts would be in that area but if you just send your comments to the main email they will forward it to the biologists or whoever is in charge of those decisions down there.

AEP.Info-Centre@gov.ab.ca is the email.
Thanks Rav, will do.
Reply With Quote
  #128  
Old 03-23-2017, 12:07 PM
huntsfurfish huntsfurfish is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Southern Alberta
Posts: 7,350
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by iliketrout View Post
Thanks Rav, will do.
contacting Trout Unlimited might be good too.
__________________
.
eat a snickers


made in Alberta__ born n raised.


FS-Tinfool hats by the roll.
Reply With Quote
  #129  
Old 03-23-2017, 12:22 PM
Rainbowpike's Avatar
Rainbowpike Rainbowpike is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 33
Default

Is it just me, or did they not put Chain Lakes Reservoir in the lakes/streams for ES1? It would be a pity if they actually stopped stocking trout there.
Reply With Quote
  #130  
Old 03-23-2017, 12:38 PM
walking buffalo's Avatar
walking buffalo walking buffalo is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 10,207
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by oilngas View Post
AER asked for input until early March 2017, the Regs. must have been finalized and into printers by that date. Sad really, they did not want any input it would seem.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wes_G View Post
This seemed funny to me as well. I did that survey only 2 weeks ago. I would think the regs would have gone to print well before then, which would mean they had already made up there minds with what was happening at that lake. So what was the point of the survey?
Quote:
Originally Posted by RavYak View Post
Probably two reasons. One being that if there were was ever a backlash to the change and the survey supported the decision to remove walleye then they could say that anglers agreed with the changes prior to being made.

Second reason was probably just to gauge what people thought about the change.

Most likely the change was already planned although they didn't make all the changes proposed in those most recent surveys so maybe they did take them into account.
This is probably the largest issue revealed in the new regulations.

Ignore it and face the loss of stakeholder input for a LONG time....

There is no question that this survey was produced AFTER the regulations were sent to committee for approval. Those that took the survey were Trolled!


Rav,

Your explanations, while possible, are indicative of an autocratic system, which may actually be functioning outside of the law. There is a legal obligation for the government to consult with the people of Alberta. Using post-mortem surveys will not satisfy a judicial review of the government's consultation obligation. I don't doubt at all that this WAS an attempt to fill the requirement, but one that in all likelihood would not stand up in court. Someone at F&W dropped the can, worms everywhere.


As importantly, why is F&W spending critically endangered funds for a survey that
is irrelevant?


Someone should look very deep into this situation with the surveys.
Pressure from the stakeholders to get the consultation process horse first is necessary for real pubic input to exist in any future management decisions.

Bitch all you want here, spend your nickel, but if the recreational fishing community doesn't get F&W in order regarding consultation, it is all pointless.
__________________
Alberta Fish and Wildlife Outdoor Recreation Policy -

"to identify very rare, scarce or special forms of fish and wildlife outdoor recreation opportunities and to ensure that access to these opportunities continues to be available to all Albertans."
Reply With Quote
  #131  
Old 03-23-2017, 12:41 PM
slough shark slough shark is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Airdrie
Posts: 2,371
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by huntsfurfish View Post
Agree, also suggested the tigers in the survey, PCR way better place then Heningers Reservoir that was on the list.
Heninger has a lot better potential for trophy trout fishery than pcr. The forage base there is so big that it can be hard to catch fish simply because they are always full in fact they could stock it with a lot more fish no problem on the food side of things, it also has WAY lower pressure, 2 years ago I was the only one there on the July long weekend. Pcr has and will continue to have burbs, pike and walleye which probably doesn't bode well for trout.
Reply With Quote
  #132  
Old 03-23-2017, 01:49 PM
huntsfurfish huntsfurfish is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Southern Alberta
Posts: 7,350
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by slough shark View Post
Heninger has a lot better potential for trophy trout fishery than pcr. The forage base there is so big that it can be hard to catch fish simply because they are always full in fact they could stock it with a lot more fish no problem on the food side of things, it also has WAY lower pressure, 2 years ago I was the only one there on the July long weekend. Pcr has and will continue to have burbs, pike and walleye which probably doesn't bode well for trout.



Ideally, I would like to see both get some, but if it was only one then PCR would likely be better in that it would serve more communities and support more fish.
__________________
.
eat a snickers


made in Alberta__ born n raised.


FS-Tinfool hats by the roll.

Last edited by huntsfurfish; 03-23-2017 at 01:55 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #133  
Old 03-24-2017, 03:29 PM
ORV's Avatar
ORV ORV is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Vulcan County
Posts: 1,382
Default ice conditions

anyone know what the ice conditions are at pcr?

will it be be open next weekend other than at the bridge?

Orv.
Reply With Quote
  #134  
Old 03-24-2017, 07:29 PM
Habfan's Avatar
Habfan Habfan is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,721
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by slough shark View Post
Heninger has a lot better potential for trophy trout fishery than pcr. The forage base there is so big that it can be hard to catch fish simply because they are always full in fact they could stock it with a lot more fish no problem on the food side of things, it also has WAY lower pressure, 2 years ago I was the only one there on the July long weekend. Pcr has and will continue to have burbs, pike and walleye which probably doesn't bode well for trout.
Diefenbaker Lake in Sask has lots of predators, ask the Conrads about the 40 lb rainbows they catch. Crawling Valley had lots of pike and burbot, rainbows were over 10 lbs when the government decided to stock it with walleye and shut it down to retention. The walleye are old and not reproductive in Pine. That is the only reason they are opening it up to retention. In a couple years when the walleye die off from old age, people will being saying that it was fished out and the government screwed up a good lake, to take people out to teach them to fish for walleye. The fact remains that these fish are not going to reproduce, are going to die, are not going to grow without baitfish present ! The only good thing the gov. did with this lake is open it to retention before it is to late. Then again the shores might be covered with dead fish when the ice melts !!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:53 AM.


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