Go Back   Alberta Outdoorsmen Forum > Main Category > Fishing Discussion

View Poll Results: What type of stillwater trout fishery would you prefer at your favourite lake?
C&R with the chance of catching trout up to 25" 112 42.75%
Limit of 1 under 18" with a good chance of fish over 22" 47 17.94%
Limit of 1 over 18" with a good chance of fish over 20" 38 14.50%
Limit of 3 any size with a good chance of fish over 16" 49 18.70%
Limit of 5 any size with a good chance of fish over 12" 16 6.11%
Voters: 262. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-23-2011, 10:21 AM
Bigtoad's Avatar
Bigtoad Bigtoad is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 386
Default Quality Trout Fisheries in Alberta

SRD seems to be dragging their feet creating quality stillwater trout fisheries in this province. They aerate a number of lakes trying to develop larger fish and more of them, yet still allow limits of 5 fish and the use of bait. I believe the Alberta gov't even polled a number of anglers wondering if they valued quality fisheries and if memory serves me correctly, the answer was a resounding "yes." Yet there seems to be a lot of reluctance to change any regs?

Sooooo... I thought I would post my own poll and see what mixed bag we can come up with. Please post reason for choice as well so I can try to understand the rationale behind your opinion (even if it is the wrong opinion)

Cheers.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 02-23-2011, 10:42 AM
nicemustang's Avatar
nicemustang nicemustang is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Lake Lenore, Saskatchewan
Posts: 3,589
Default

I haven't voted yet...still thinking. But every lake out there can't support any of the options. Every lake is different and one has to consider the population and popular fisheries.

Seems to be a lot of fish biologists on here lately. I'm not sure of everyone's background, but I am no fish biologist. Most of the stocked trout waters are to satisfy the put and take fisherman, families looking for fun, or convenience on location or accessiblity. So changing all lakes, no. Changing a few? Maybe.

Personally I know trout ponds are put and take. So if I'm going I likely want to catch and keep a few for the table, regardless of size. Since the SRD can't manage the perch and walleye fisheries so people can eat them....then the trout lakes have to stay the way they are or poaching will be our next biggest concern (far more than it is today).

So I support taking more lakes and reducing the limit or size restrictions but not every lake can be painted with the same brush.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 02-23-2011, 10:43 AM
nicemustang's Avatar
nicemustang nicemustang is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Lake Lenore, Saskatchewan
Posts: 3,589
Default

Also one more thing. Everyone fishes for different reasons. I am not a trophy hunter and not a flower girl that feels the need to protect every living thing. So I don't support C&R only lakes.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 02-23-2011, 10:59 AM
Bigtoad's Avatar
Bigtoad Bigtoad is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 386
Default

Nicemustang, I'm aware that not all lakes can sustain each of the above suggestions. I'm assuming here that if a lake could sustain this, which preference would you have. In an ideal world, what would you want of the choices given?

Also, choosing C&R doesn't make you a "flowergirl" it just means that you want to catch something bigger than 12" and that you value the quality of your fishing more than the quantity of fish you bring home to show your "flowergirl" how big and tough you are.

Of course, it would be nice to catch and keep 5 fish all over 25" but that's just not going to happen, and if it does, it won't be happening for very long.

Cheers.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 02-23-2011, 11:06 AM
Dak1138's Avatar
Dak1138 Dak1138 is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 460
Default

I only do catch and release and wouldn't mind catching some larger fish. i think the way muir is set up is pretty good.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 02-23-2011, 11:12 AM
chubbdarter's Avatar
chubbdarter chubbdarter is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: cowtown
Posts: 6,655
Default

and we are off and running again
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 02-23-2011, 11:16 AM
Okotokian's Avatar
Okotokian Okotokian is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Uh, guess? :)
Posts: 26,549
Default

I'm having a hard time answering because I'm starting to suspect I have different expectations than most fishermen.

I don't need to take many fish, perhaps one, maybe two. The bigger the better. But as to fish I catch and release, I really don't care how big they are. So none of the options given really reflect what I'd like. The "with a chance to" would be great if it was modified to "chance to catch a ^#&#%-load of fish!"
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 02-23-2011, 11:23 AM
HunterDave's Avatar
HunterDave HunterDave is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Copperhead Road, Morinville
Posts: 16,460
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chubbdarter View Post
and we are off and running again
Yup, I'm staying out of this one but it ought to be good.

I know, why not change the regs for Upper Kananaskis Lake and reduce the possession limit but increase the keep size in order to create a quality fishery?
__________________
“The whole problem with any issue is that fools and fanatics are always certain of their position, while wise people are full of doubt and questions.” Bertrand Russell
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 02-23-2011, 11:44 AM
flyfisherman flyfisherman is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Fort Saskatchewan
Posts: 56
Default

I would personally like to have a few lakes classified as only C&R. Having the option of going out to catch a couple of fish for dinner or going out and trying to catch a monster would be great.
I'd probably spend more time on the C&R lakes if there was the option.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 02-23-2011, 11:51 AM
Bigtoad's Avatar
Bigtoad Bigtoad is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 386
Default

I'm not suggesting all lakes should become C&R or a 5 fish limit either. I just want to know what people would prefer, recognizing that there needs to be a spectrum of fishing opportunities in Alberta and not just one choice.

I'd gladly catch and keep less fish if it means that they are bigger fish on average but that's just my opinion and I would like to hear others opinions as well and I'll try to keep an open mind.

Cheers.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 02-23-2011, 11:52 AM
AbProwler AbProwler is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: East of Ardrossan
Posts: 76
Default

Tough to give an educated un-biased answer to this. I know, that growing up in the interior of B.C. and on Vancouver Island, that I much prefered the taste of the smaller, cold, fast moving stream Rainbows than any of the larger Still water Trout. Out here, I have kept some of the 8" put and take variety.
Lets just say that after eating a few of those I became a fan of C&R.
Maybe at this time of year, a 12"-16" Trout would make a nice dinner?
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 02-23-2011, 11:54 AM
chubbdarter's Avatar
chubbdarter chubbdarter is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: cowtown
Posts: 6,655
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HunterDave View Post
Yup, I'm staying out of this one but it ought to be good.

I know, why not change the regs for Upper Kananaskis Lake and reduce the possession limit but increase the keep size in order to create a quality fishery?
your gonna be missed
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 02-23-2011, 11:57 AM
Darren N's Avatar
Darren N Darren N is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 835
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flyfisherman View Post
I would personally like to have a few lakes classified as only C&R. Having the option of going out to catch a couple of fish for dinner or going out and trying to catch a monster would be great.
I'd probably spend more time on the C&R lakes if there was the option.
I agree - having a lake like Muir (with no bait) really helps out for those that want to fish and have a hope of catching something decent. Not all the lakes should be that way but a few more like Muir would not be a bad idea. All I'm saying is spread out the options a bit more. Keep those few lakes that you can keep 5, but make some of them stricter regs so that come fall they are not fished out like Beaumont...
__________________
If there is fishing in heaven, I hope I don't catch one on every cast.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 02-23-2011, 12:17 PM
chubbdarter's Avatar
chubbdarter chubbdarter is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: cowtown
Posts: 6,655
Default

here's my opinion, for what little its worth
this is just another thread with a new paint job.
If Albertans wanted the change it would be a slam dunk, issue over, mission complete.....thousands lining up to sign petitions, protests on government steps, the government office would be hammered by emails from sportfishermen protesting your cause, the mail man would require a back operation.
Im not picking sides because this is redundant.....but the facts are if they are ignoring you or dragging their feet....the issue isnt probably getting much support.
If thats the case maybe you should respect what the majority wants, or with the greatest respect-move to where your happy with fishery management.
Im not sure where your from so this may not include you BUT im getting a little tired of all the know it alls that move here and say "well back home we did things different Alberta sucks". HAHAHA . GO HOME!!!!..p.s. most of those complainers just simply arent good fisherman(not directed at the op because i have no facts to say that)
Constructive suggestions are good but im guessing this will be a bashing of a few bait fisherman that eat a few trout every year, of which im not.
But it will be good to see a few members that kinda drifted away return again for this thread.
I wish you the best on your quest and hope the majority voice wins who ever that may be.
cd
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 02-23-2011, 12:21 PM
HunterDave's Avatar
HunterDave HunterDave is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Copperhead Road, Morinville
Posts: 16,460
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigtoad View Post
I'm not suggesting all lakes should become C&R or a 5 fish limit either. I just want to know what people would prefer, recognizing that there needs to be a spectrum of fishing opportunities in Alberta and not just one choice.
There's already more than just one choice isn't there? Different lakes different regs. Do you mean more of a certain choice?
__________________
“The whole problem with any issue is that fools and fanatics are always certain of their position, while wise people are full of doubt and questions.” Bertrand Russell
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 02-23-2011, 12:22 PM
AbProwler AbProwler is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: East of Ardrossan
Posts: 76
Default

As I seem to be the only one here that posted anything about growing up somewheres else, It would seem the above reference would be directed in my direction. Of course I never said anything about how it was done there or that it sucked here, so I must have taken the above out of context.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 02-23-2011, 12:33 PM
chubbdarter's Avatar
chubbdarter chubbdarter is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: cowtown
Posts: 6,655
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AbProwler View Post
As I seem to be the only one here that posted anything about growing up somewheres else, It would seem the above reference would be directed in my direction. Of course I never said anything about how it was done there or that it sucked here, so I must have taken the above out of context.
nope not at all...but the fishing section is loaded with very derogatory comments....none made by you....sorry i never meant that directed at you.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 02-23-2011, 12:37 PM
Daceminnow's Avatar
Daceminnow Daceminnow is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,137
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nicemustang View Post
Also one more thing. Everyone fishes for different reasons. I am not a trophy hunter and not a flower girl that feels the need to protect every living thing. So I don't support C&R only lakes.
flower girl - that's awesome! be careful you might get yourself a new handle.


QUOTE=chubbdarter
Im not sure where your from so this may not include you BUT im getting a little tired of all the know it alls that move here and say "well back home we did things different Alberta sucks". HAHAHA . GO HOME!!!!..p.s. most of those complainers just simply arent good fisherman

chubb i seen another name calling in you're future!
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 02-23-2011, 12:44 PM
AbProwler AbProwler is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: East of Ardrossan
Posts: 76
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chubbdarter View Post
nope not at all...but the fishing section is loaded with very derogatory comments....none made by you....sorry i never meant that directed at you.
Nah all's well C.D., as I said, "I" took it out of context.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 02-23-2011, 12:49 PM
chubbdarter's Avatar
chubbdarter chubbdarter is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: cowtown
Posts: 6,655
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Daceminnow View Post
flower girl - that's awesome! be careful you might get yourself a new handle.


QUOTE=chubbdarter
Im not sure where your from so this may not include you BUT im getting a little tired of all the know it alls that move here and say "well back home we did things different Alberta sucks". HAHAHA . GO HOME!!!!..p.s. most of those complainers just simply arent good fisherman

chubb i seen another name calling in you're future!
Pffffftttt

the constant we need this we need that....for example not directed at anyone
look at the walleye discussion in southern alberta.....never a well based opionion with facts...most dont know where they even spawn.....yet Alberta sucks at walleye management.....back home in province x we did it this way. just because you cant catch a fish doesnt make it the governments fault.....take a good long look at your self. Or go fishing where you can catch a fish.
southern alberta walleye fishing is superb!!!
maybe what people really are asking for is the government to genetically raise stupid fish???....and change the regs to say.....2012 catching regulations....instead of the 2011 fishing regulations
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 02-23-2011, 12:49 PM
Bigtoad's Avatar
Bigtoad Bigtoad is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 386
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chubbdarter View Post
Im not picking sides because this is redundant.....
Really?

Quote:
but the facts are if they are ignoring you or dragging their feet....the issue isnt probably getting much support.
See, here you go picking sides.

And it's not true. The gov't has found that there is a growing number of anglers in Alberta that want more quality fisheries. So the SRD dragging their feet may have very little to do with what most fishermen want. It might just mean that they are inefficient, underfunded, and undermanned.

This is one reason I put the poll up. I wanted to see a sample of outdoor enthusiasts and what their preference was for trout fisheries here in Alberta.

Quote:
If thats the case maybe you should respect what the majority wants, or with the greatest respect-move to where your happy with fishery management.
After the poll is finished Chubbdarter, lets see who really needs to move. It hasn't even been up for a day and already there is a very large majority that seem to value quality over quantity. Hmmmmm... interesting.....

Cheers.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 02-23-2011, 12:54 PM
chubbdarter's Avatar
chubbdarter chubbdarter is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: cowtown
Posts: 6,655
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigtoad View Post
Really?


See, here you go picking sides.

And it's not true. The gov't has found that there is a growing number of anglers in Alberta that want more quality fisheries. So the SRD dragging their feet may have very little to do with what most fishermen want. It might just mean that they are inefficient, underfunded, and undermanned.

This is one reason I put the poll up. I wanted to see a sample of outdoor enthusiasts and what their preference was for trout fisheries here in Alberta.



After the poll is finished Chubbdarter, lets see who really needs to move. It hasn't even been up for a day and already there is a very large majority that seem to value quality over quantity. Hmmmmm... interesting.....

Cheers.
hahahahaha im not moving....im not complaining i cant catch fish
i see the old gang is logged on.....lol
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 02-23-2011, 12:57 PM
tbosch's Avatar
tbosch tbosch is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Red deer
Posts: 1,141
Default

It wouldnt bother me if I was not able to ever keep another fish. I think if things were left to nature, its obvious a balance would come back to our waters and there would be good quality fisheries everywhere. Just my opinion.
__________________
Give a man a fish, feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, feed him for a lifetime. ><///(0
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 02-23-2011, 02:08 PM
1/2 oz Bucktail's Avatar
1/2 oz Bucktail 1/2 oz Bucktail is offline
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Grande Cache
Posts: 144
Default

So here we go. I have seen this issue brought up so many times over a number of message boards. Most of the time (but not always), it is started by a flyfisher who is ****ed because all he/she catches are little stockers. Now there is nothing wrong with fly fishers as I am one, but this debate is getting damn old and tired.

Maybe we should look at creating some privatized lakes similar to those found in gated communities in both Edmonton and Calgary. Create a fishing club at protected/restricted access lakes where some of the people looking to catch large stocked trout.
(Yes it does sound lame to me........ Large stocked trout that is, maybe its because I am lucky enough to live in a place where I don't need a stocked slough to be my only source of fishing).
Fees collected for the club can be used to purchase larger fish for stocking as well as covering costs for aeration. The managing comitee of said clubs/lakes can make managment decisions as to restricting any fishing in the event of poor conditions (high water temps in the summer). I don't know how this would work, but I imagine alot of the ****ed off flyfishermen would be happy to have a place where they can all hang out together and compare their amazing catches of genetically modified plastic fish that they so expertly bobber fished (oops I mean strike indicator) from a swamp with their custom built fly rods (dammit, there goes my sarcasm again) far removed from all of those horrible parents and little children who love to be outside learning the joys of fishing regrdless of fish size (wow, I sure am letting the sarcasm slip again).

Anyways not sure if the whole private lake thing would work, but it does seem like it could solve the frustrations of a few bobber fishermen (sorry I meant to say still water fly anglers). As I kind of mentioned before, I am pretty sure that most children do not care if all they catch is little stockers, the same goes for the parents, grandparents etc who take these kids out to learn how to fish.

Wouldn't it suck if you were a kid and all you had for fishing was a trout pond nearby that got turned into a bait ban C&R pond? Yeah I am generalizing a bit but I think that most get the picture.

Sorry to all of the flyfishers that i know I offended. I just never got into the whole still water flyfishing thing (not enough patience for it).
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 02-23-2011, 02:33 PM
Bigtoad's Avatar
Bigtoad Bigtoad is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 386
Default

1/2 oz Bucktail, it would suck if you were a kid and all you could find anywhere were C&R fishing where bait wasn't allowed. But that's not what we're talking about here. There are LOTS of community ponds and lakes around designated for just such a purpose. What Alberta doesn't have is many lakes designated as quality or trophy fisheries for those that want to catch bigger fish.

And I don't think private lakes are the answer. It stinks of elitism and I don't think just the wealthy and their buddies should be entitled to catch monster fish while the rest aren't given the opportunity.

Which brings me to my last point, about insinuating that fly fishermen can't catch big fish so they bitch about the regs. This isn't the case. What I am concerned with is that with 5 fish and the use of bait, on MANY waters, no one is given the opportunity to catch big fish.

What I want in this poll is to see, if given the option, what opportunities fishermen would want.

But hey, if you're happy with a mediocre trout fishery in Alberta, that's fine, I would just like there to be more options for people who want to put the time and effort into catching big fish. I don't see that here in Alberta.

Cheers.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 02-23-2011, 02:39 PM
Bigtoad's Avatar
Bigtoad Bigtoad is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 386
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HunterDave View Post
There's already more than just one choice isn't there? Different lakes different regs. Do you mean more of a certain choice?
Well, I'm interested in what the numbers from the poll tell us. Right now, well over 50% of the voters would prefer bigger fish and keeping only 1 or total C&R.

If you look at the current tout lakes, I believe there are roughly 300 stocked lakes in Alberta, of which, roughly 10 or less have special regulations on them to try and achieve a quality fishery. Although there is some choice in what type of fishing you'd like to do, the choice doesn't seem to measure up to the preference that is out there.

Cheers.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 02-23-2011, 02:57 PM
1/2 oz Bucktail's Avatar
1/2 oz Bucktail 1/2 oz Bucktail is offline
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Grande Cache
Posts: 144
Default

There is/are an amazing trout fishery(ies) in Alberta, well above what some would call mediocre where fish over 30 inches are common and no stocking or aeration is required.

What are these magical spaces that I speak of you say?

They are our western streams, creeks and rivers, where at the proper time and location any fisherperson (gear or fly) can tie into the badest mofo of the eastern slopes. Yup the bull trout.

Oh wait bulls are char and not trout. I gues my argument falls.

These fisheries can also be home to amazing grayling, bows (both native and introduced), whites (very underrated), cutts, introduced browns, brookies (the devil, the downfall of flowing water in the west).

Maybe we should focus money, management, and enforcement on our rivers and streams to ensure that we maintain healthy, viable populations of our beloved native fish species. The bulls, grayling, athabows and in some locations the cutties.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 02-23-2011, 03:08 PM
dragon dragon is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Leduc
Posts: 483
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tbosch View Post
It wouldnt bother me if I was not able to ever keep another fish. I think if things were left to nature, its obvious a balance would come back to our waters and there would be good quality fisheries everywhere. Just my opinion.
Are we not part of nature? I know this is highly debatable but I'm sure 'man' was been fishing in these waters far before regulations and stocking...woudl not infuencing fish populations throught size quotas and stocking create a quality fishery? I can't answer it
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 02-23-2011, 03:08 PM
1/2 oz Bucktail's Avatar
1/2 oz Bucktail 1/2 oz Bucktail is offline
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Grande Cache
Posts: 144
Default

In regards to your poll. Do you think that by posting on a forum for avid hunters and fishermen you are effectively capturing the views of all of the users of Alberta's stocked waters? Yeah sure you have over 50% on this forum saying that they would value better quality fisheries but the people answering the poll may only account for 10% of the people fishing these lakes. So once again to reiterate what was said by a previous poster.... are better quality fisheries, ie trophy class trout ponds (that always makes me laugh) what the fishing masses want? Or is it the want of the few who choose to voice their opinion on a website that probably covers a very small demographic?

Just some thoughts.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 02-23-2011, 03:11 PM
dragon dragon is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Leduc
Posts: 483
Default

Is there not more to creating trophy lakes than controlling the number of fish harvested from such loactions? Food supply, temperature, lake size, natural predators, Humans in other ways than angling all contribute to fish development.

The reason we may not have trophy lakes could extend far beyond qunatities caught and released. I'm not saying it doesn't have an affect on fish sizes but trophy fish are trophy for a reason...
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 06:48 AM.


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