Go Back   Alberta Outdoorsmen Forum > Main Category > Fishing Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 10-13-2017, 01:54 PM
jasonrpeck jasonrpeck is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 63
Default Ram River: A Response to the Angling & Mgt Survey

An incredibly thoughtful response. Please read.

http://flyfishalberta.com/jensenflyf...ng-mgt-survey/
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 10-13-2017, 03:25 PM
3blade's Avatar
3blade 3blade is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 3,379
Default

No more friggen provincial parks. I realize the author included hunting in his vision. And I also realize the government won't.

Where the author clearly has much expertise, experience and some worth while ideas, and likely would have found ally's in other outdoorsmen, the mention of what will certainly end up as another anti-hunting effort will make instant enemies. Get off the parks train.
__________________
DEER!!! No...nope. Hay bale.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 10-13-2017, 11:03 PM
Bushrat's Avatar
Bushrat Bushrat is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,916
Default

I kinda agree that Parks might not be the best fit to control access and regulation of the area. On the other hand something does need to be done but it doesn't need to be as imposing as turning it into a Provincial Park. That opens and adds a whole new bureaucratic can of worms.

Some simple regulation changes back to single barbless hooks on these rivers, keep it catch and release, fly fishing only. We do not need to add to the already incidental kills of catch and release by allowing a 2 fish a day catch and keep regulation which will draw more people because they can keep fish, which will get abused, people catching a couple fish, frying them up back at the camper then catching a couple more to take home with them, etc. Allowing a catch limit on these streams will be abused by more than just a few people. Besides we need cutthroat in these streams for the bull trout to eat and thrive on. If they want a healthy Bull trout population, fishing out or trying to eradicate their present mainstay food source because it isn't native to that watershed doesn't make much sense. I have a feeling that original historic levels of bull trout in these particular streams before cutthroats were introduced were never really all that high to begin with.

If there were no cutthroats in the Ram, Blackstone and other systems they were introduced to there probably wouldn't be much reason for people to fish there. They are the main target species people go there to fish for in the first place, catching the odd bull trout is just a bonus. I understand the sentiment of culling non native fish from these waters but times have changed, it isn't 1850 anymore, these introduced fish are self sustaining and a huge recreational fishery has developed around it, it hasn't hurt the ecosystem of these stream bodies, in my opinion it has enhanced it. Why do they want to now destroy this world class fishery after so much effort over the decades trying to develop it.

It begs the question of what is the real motive behind these new regulatory proposals .
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 10-13-2017, 11:51 PM
RavYak's Avatar
RavYak RavYak is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: West Edmonton
Posts: 4,198
Default

Anyone who hasn't already filled out the survey should do so and make sure to say no to the closures.

AEP jumped the gun on these closures, there are lots of things they need to do first before they even think of fishing closures.

https://talkaep.alberta.ca/north-cen...gling-closures
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 10-14-2017, 06:31 AM
fatboyz fatboyz is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: rocky Mountain House
Posts: 1,250
Default

From what I read the proposed keep 2 is only for the waters above ram falls, no bulls up there. Below the falls is a 5 yr closure?
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 10-14-2017, 12:19 PM
Bushrat's Avatar
Bushrat Bushrat is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,916
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fatboyz View Post
From what I read the proposed keep 2 is only for the waters above ram falls, no bulls up there. Below the falls is a 5 yr closure?
I believe they are talking about the falls below the junction of the North Ram river and the Ram river not the Ram Falls out by the trunk road.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 10-14-2017, 12:35 PM
RavYak's Avatar
RavYak RavYak is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: West Edmonton
Posts: 4,198
Default

Yes the proposed closure is for the river downstream of the confluence between the North and South Ram Rivers and the proposed regulation change would be for the South Ram River which is currently catch and release from Ram Falls to the confluence and C&R in the fall upstream of the Ram Falls.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 10-14-2017, 01:09 PM
Marty S Marty S is offline
AO Sponsor
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,115
Default

Enough stinking over regulation. The C&R cult members wonít be happy until you canít kill a fish in Alberta. Others have proven that attempting to recycle fish has its very own high mortality rate. Or else shut it all down til you simply have a few big cuts and the bull trout are all swimming around with all the little cutthroat sticking out of their mouths.

Some common sense please.

The rest of sportsmen and women likely donít want the whole countryside shut down bit by bit and piece by piece, and we certainly donít want parks dictating to us because they definitely seem to hate us.

We need to start protecting lands and waters for sportsmen, not contribute to the systematic closure of all lands and waters through over restrictive laws etc. We are not only the most vulnerable species at risk in this province, we are endangered!

(...and now for the yelling, kicking and screaming...)
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 10-14-2017, 09:19 PM
dbaayens dbaayens is offline
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Red Deer via Rocky
Posts: 8
Default

Hey Marty,
Thanks for inspiring me... I very much share your sentiment. I believe that you are right, maybe a provincial park is not the way to go... perhaps a conservation easement administered by the ACA is a better option. A place where anglers and hunters are welcome to play within the rules and demonstrate respect for the land. Why the Ram? I'll tell you why... but to do it justice... it's going to take time... in the meantime, think about why Dave is doing his best to conserve it. It's just that good... if you ever dreamed of the perfect angling experience, well, it's a reality there (go back and look at the pictures accompanying Dave's article, words do not do them justice). As a kid, growing up in Rocky, all the best fishing stories were about the Ram... oh man, where to start. I'll start from the beginning. I was 9 years old and immediately I knew I wasn't going along.

But I'm not going to take the cheap route... you are going to get an article... the best one I've ever wrote... but that takes time. I want all of you to know this is the most spectacular fishery in Alberta; it is a wild place, where cougars mock hounds, and I want it to stay that way. I've never talked publicly about it, but now I feel I have to.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 10-14-2017, 09:28 PM
dbaayens dbaayens is offline
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Red Deer via Rocky
Posts: 8
Default

... double post
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 10-15-2017, 05:22 PM
Joe Black Joe Black is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 327
Default

SHannon wants a park in the south and one in the north. That way, both her and not head get names on a park before they get booted. If you are concerned about your access, start your lobbying now.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 10-15-2017, 05:59 PM
fishpro fishpro is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: SW Calgary
Posts: 804
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dbaayens View Post
Hey Marty,
Thanks for inspiring me... I very much share your sentiment. I believe that you are right, maybe a provincial park is not the way to go... perhaps a conservation easement administered by the ACA is a better option. A place where anglers and hunters are welcome to play within the rules and demonstrate respect for the land. Why the Ram? I'll tell you why... but to do it justice... it's going to take time... in the meantime, think about why Dave is doing his best to conserve it. It's just that good... if you ever dreamed of the perfect angling experience, well, it's a reality there (go back and look at the pictures accompanying Dave's article, words do not do them justice). As a kid, growing up in Rocky, all the best fishing stories were about the Ram... oh man, where to start. I'll start from the beginning. I was 9 years old and immediately I knew I wasn't going along.

But I'm not going to take the cheap route... you are going to get an article... the best one I've ever wrote... but that takes time. I want all of you to know this is the most spectacular fishery in Alberta; it is a wild place, where cougars mock hounds, and I want it to stay that way. I've never talked publicly about it, but now I feel I have to.
Very well said. It is very difficult for words to do the Ram River justice. Even pictures can only portray so much. The only way anyone can truly understand the beauty and magnificence of the Ram River is to be there and feel it for themselves. There are so many things that make the Ram River special (one being the fishery that has resulted from catch and release regulations in addition to the remote location), and to remove any one of those things is to allow everything else to unravel.
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 -7. The time now is 10:06 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.