Quality Trout Fisheries in Alberta

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by Heron

I guess our definition of decent is different. Perhaps decent is the wrong word. How about quality? No, too vague. How about good or even excellent fishing? I read in a McLennan book once that catching 4lb fish all day would be a kind of hell. I agree but where it now is light years from that problem.

I know there are a few big fish in a few lakes around here but not near what it could and should be.

Think how good D&^%$^% would be with a little tweaking of the laws. I have seen a lot of really big fish on stringers there and the fishing is in my opinion not what it was a few years ago.

If you are new to the Edmonton area here is how you find the lakes with bigger fish in them... look for the bait fisherman on shore. The more bait fisherman, the bigger the fish. They don't like the lakes with only 9" fish either. Never been to Bullshead but they seem to like it there.

By the way I like ice fishing too. I icefish with flys and the fish usually do not get hooked deeply. I also keep a few fish to eat every so often. I really need to go fishing! I think the only reason I keep returning to this thread is that I am genuinely amazed by the resistance to what seems to me to be a no-brainer.

I'm sure that my definition of decent fishing is allot different from "quality" fishery guys in that it doesn't include a word that equates to easy (ie easy to get to, easy to catch big fish, etc). When did easy become the trend?

Ya see, that's the problem right there. No wonder there aren't as many big fish in Lake X if everyone is taking them out. If you could educate Alberta anglers that big fish are not meant for stringers that would solve everyone's problem. Not only do most "quality" fisheries promote the keeping of only the big fish they make it illegal to keep anything but the big ones.

I can't say that I agree with the "follow the herd" mentality. It could very well be that is where the fish are but just as likely they are there because it's an easier spot to get to. To me, the more bait fishermen the fewer fish to catch. I prefer to fish lakes that those same bait fishermen are too lazy to go to because it takes more effort. So far it has worked well for me.

If you want to understand why I oppose taking put & take lakes away from people you have to put the shoe on the other foot. Let's say that you were someone that is willing to put the effort into fishing and can already catch big fish, or someone that likes catching small fish all day with the option of taking 5 to eat, or, if the size of the fish matters allot to you, someone that can catch both big and small fish with the option of keeping 5 to eat. Why would you want to give up what you have for some fellas that want to make it easier for themselves to only catch big fish?

Seriously, what is the answer to that question?

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by DuckBrat

Great, let's not do anything on account of your miniscule fears. Every fishery will be exposed to poachers unfortunately but you can bet some will be turned in. Good management of fisheries will account for these issues.

So you figure that those fears are miniscule? If you muscle your way into someones backyard do you actually think that they will just roll over and die? If what you impose on people is morally right then how can the fella that dumps a bunch of perch into the lake be morally wrong? Against the law......yes, but morally?

I think that it would be best to concentrate your efforts on reclamation projects in dead lakes and newly created bodies of water rather than taking anything away from anyone because of your perception that your way is better than theirs. Besides, that is what the SRD position is wrt "quality" fisheries.

[DuckBrat]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

I think that it would be best to concentrate your efforts on reclamation projects in dead lakes and newly created bodies of water rather than taking anything away from anyone because of your perception that your way is better than theirs.

I'm all for it because as far as a lot of supposed trout fisheries go in Alberta (especially Edmonton Area), they are dead to me.

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by DuckBrat

I don't think adding these variables would affect the numbers very much. Anglers both spin and fly, young and old, are going to be more accepting and excited by catching a fish that can battle, jump, and pull rather than winching in 6-10 inch fish all day on a stocked pond.

I keep hearing stuff like, once people are exposed to quality fisheries they will learn to love it.........they are going to be more accepting and excited by catching a fish that can battle, jump, and pull............

This is a theory that has been proven wrong. Otherwise, there currently wouldn't be a resolution to close down the "quality" fishery that people have been exposed to at Police Lake.

If you guys keep posting the same rhetoric you can expect that I'll keep posting the same fact about Police lake.

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by DuckBrat

I'm all for it because as far as a lot of supposed trout fisheries go in Alberta (especially Edmonton Area), they are dead to me.

It doesn't matter that you think that all of the trout fisheries in Alberta (especially Edmonton area) are dead. You can sit and pout all day and it won't change the reality that they aren't.

[Doc]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

I keep hearing stuff like, once people are exposed to quality fisheries they will learn to love it.........they are going to be more accepting and excited by catching a fish that can battle, jump, and pull............

This is a theory that has been proven wrong. Otherwise, there currently wouldn't be a resolution to close down the "quality" fishery that people have been exposed to at Police Lake.

If you guys keep posting the same rhetoric you can expect that I'll keep posting the same fact about Police lake.

Actually it has been proven correct as both Bullshead and Beaver have become to popular, so popular it's hurting the fisheries. Even those who apposed it are on board now that they've fished the lakes. SRD has been getting some (prob relatives of yours) pressure to revert back only at police not the others. In my opinion, it won't go back to a safeway, the letters are flooding in for support of quality regulations.

[Pudelpointer]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

Otherwise, there currently wouldn't be a resolution to close down the "quality" fishery that people have been exposed to at Police Lake.

If you guys keep posting the same rhetoric you can expect that I'll keep posting the same fact about Police lake.

Where did you get this "fact" from Dave? Exactly who is voting on this "resolution"? You keep repeating it, but I don't think anyone is buying it.

[Doc]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

It doesn't matter that you think that all of the trout fisheries in Alberta (especially Edmonton area) are dead. You can sit and pout all day and it won't change the reality that they aren't.

Well not dead just... lame?

You consider it lazy to want to stay in the Edmonton area and catch big fish. Us city folks are so dam lazy, right? We don't look at it that way, we work hard, raise our families and want some time to ourselves and enjoy some fishing too. We want convenience, a place we can spend 4 hours fishing that didn't take us 3 hours to drive to and three hours to drive back from. Now SRD has already made convenient fishing for us, however the stocked lakes that are close by suck. Yes we have one near to Edmonton but man can not live on bread alone, how 'bout one or two more. And how about one of those where we can actually catch a 30 pounder? How about one with browns and one with cutties? You see, the quality lakes is just the tip of the iceberg, we want the best that our lakes and our gov't can give us. And they will happen. Maybe not today or tomorrow but they will happen.

Here's where the problem lies for you. We live in an area of a million people and that number will just keep growing. We have clubs and organizations that meet weekly or bi-weekly and the message is getting heard and spreading. Don't kid yourself, great fishing will come to Alberta and there is nothing you can do to stop it.

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by Pudelpointer

Where did you get this "fact" from Dave? Exactly who is voting on this "resolution"? You keep repeating it, but I don't think anyone is buying it.

In my post #140. You mean that Joe Angler didn't consult with you before raising their objections to the quality fishery there?

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

All that will be accomplished by changing put & take lakes into "quality" fisheries and C&R lakes is to turn a bunch of honest anglers into poachers.

But there are allot of worse things that could happen if you run around imposing your will on people that have fished their favourite lake for a couple of generations.

I used to fish a great little lake just outside Pembroke, ON where it wasn't uncommon for 3 of your 4 tip ups to go down at once. You could catch 10 to 15 pike on a Sunday afternoon in a few hours. The problem is, it was a stocked trout lake that was created to appease some anglers in the town of Pembroke that pushed for it's creation. One or more local fellas didn't like all of the traffic in their backyard so their solution was to dump a bunch of readily available pike into it. It didn't take long before that little lake was void of trout but on the upside, it was a great pike fishery.

The funniest part about it was that there were hundreds of stocked trout lakes in the area but you'd have to drive a bit farther to get to them. That lake is an excellent example of a few lazy anglers trying to make things easier for themselves at the expense of other people and their solution to the problem.

Holy Cow DAVEY BOY

I can not believe you posted this? Your are effectively coming across as condoning the illegal bucket brigade. The same brigade is what you have lamented put perch in Morninville. No neighbour put the pike in...but most likely someone who ranted back then about not wanting to go with the majority and instead made a selfish decision.

That person that put the pike in there should of been roasted alive. I am positive the Bios and fish and game groups that made that decision made it smartly versus the total crap that the vandal did in return. Taking into account fishing pressure, water body size, fishing opportunities, distance etc... a decision was made... You will not give us all the facts because if we did...your story would be shot to hell. Here is another Daveyboy special...elitist rant about how the majority wanted change...yet a minority fixed them in the end.

Not impressed...

[Pudelpointer]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

In my post #140. You mean that Joe Angler didn't consult with you before raising their objections to the quality fishery there?

Not sure who Joe Angler is, but I am surprized that Terry had not asked the Lethbridge Fish and Game for our input (though I did miss the last meeting, so maybe he did). Either way it is not a "resolution" in any way, shape, or form, it is the Area Bio asking for public input into a review.

As for your other opinions, I should add that I do not necessarily agree with AB's current regs associated with "quality fisheries", in fact I think they are completely bass-ackwards. Why you would allow a limited take of the fish that you are trying to produce makes no sense to me. There are two options much better suited to management of a fishery such as Bullshead (which does NOT allow bait, BTW): a) allowing a limited catch of <x" fish, or b) a limited catch of fish between x" and X" (also known as a "slot limit").

The Crowsnest is a perfect example of a screwed up fishery. IIRC, you are allowed to keep 1 fish under 12" and 1 fish over 16" (or the cm equivalent). At the end of the season your chances of catching a fish over 16" in many parts of the river are damn near nil. IMO, fish between 12-14" should be the only fish you are allowed to keep, or at least 2 under 14". A majority of fisherman on the river catch and release and are looking for the challenge of targeting larger fish, so why not keep a small but stable number of fish for them to target?

To answer Dave's question before he asks it, yes there probably are a few fish over 16" left after the season, but there sure aren't many. Does that make it "easy" to catch big ones if they were protected? Absolutely not. You still have to catch that fish. You still have to get him him to take the hook (again, no bait) without spooking him/her, which is not easy.

FWIW, I routinely fish another river that is strictly C&R and literally boils with large fish, and I mean LARGE FISH - I have landed 25" bows and broken off fish that are substantially larger, and I have often been skunked. I average landing one good trout in an evening's fishing, sometimes more, sometimes less, it depends on how good I am at figuring out what they are eating that particular day.

At Bullshead I have had 20 fish days - every one of them over 16" and 4+ over 20". On other days I have cast my way into carpel tunnel syndrome trying to get just one fish, any size, to take my fly. So, I don't think your "quality fisheries are easy fishing" theory holds much water.

AFAIAC, there are more then enough put & take lakes in AB. Police Lake may or may not become popular as a quality fishery for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is that it is a fairly long drive and the shore fishing is limited compared to Bullshead. Police was chosen for "quality management" because of the same reason (isolation), as well as it had the least number of people like Dave who screamed and whined and b****ed about it changing, otherwise it would have likely been any other number of lakes (i.e. Beauvais).

Bullshead is often so crowded that parking is an issue. People are there because there is the opportunity to catch a large fish (not a guarantee, just a chance). There are lots of adults, but there are also many children.

Dave, I have to ask, have you fished at Bullshead or Police Outpost? Or are you just standing on principal? Do you hate big fish because they are too hard to catch? Or do you truly challenge yourself to find that one 15" fish in a sea of 8" trout?

You know, I am feeling mighty generous today. I tell you what Dave, I'll agree to keep the current regs related to stocked lakes if you agree to keep the current regs regarding archery season. Sound like a deal?

[Heron]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

Let's say that you were someone that is willing to put the effort into fishing and can already catch big fish, or someone that likes catching small fish all day with the option of taking 5 to eat, or, if the size of the fish matters allot to you, someone that can catch both big and small fish with the option of keeping 5 to eat. Why would you want to give up what you have for some fellas that want to make it easier for themselves to only catch big fish?

Seriously, what is the answer to that question?

Answers to above.

Big fish guy... "yee haa! I get to catch more big fish. But mixed in are some small ones and I might get on one of those 26" fish. This is dynamic and fun"

Guy who enjoys catching small fish all day... does not exist.

Take 5 to eat guy... "Wow. Two of these 16" inch fish is substantially more food than 5-9" fish!"

Also heard on shore... "My goodness, as I reflect upon my day I must say that my overall enjoyment of this experience is somehow heightened (insert fist pump).

Dude in 3k worth of fly gear... who cares.

Time will tell.

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

Holy Cow DAVEY BOY

I can not believe you posted this? Your are effectively coming across as condoning the illegal bucket brigade. The same brigade is what you have lamented put perch in Morninville. No neighbour put the pike in...but most likely someone who ranted back then about not wanting to go with the majority and instead made a selfish decision.

That person that put the pike in there should of been roasted alive. I am positive the Bios and fish and game groups that made that decision made it smartly versus the total crap that the vandal did in return. Taking into account fishing pressure, water body size, fishing opportunities, distance etc... a decision was made... You will not give us all the facts because if we did...your story would be shot to hell. Here is another Daveyboy special...elitist rant about how the majority wanted change...yet a minority fixed them in the end.

Not impressed...

Everyone knew who did it and it was the people that fought tooth nail and claw to not let it happen in their (literally) backyard. It was just that no one could prove it and the people that knew the facts kept their mouth shut about it. There were probably people in the neighbourhood that didn't condone it or participate in it but they didn't drop a dime on their neighbour either. That's how these things work in some rural areas.

You have a very, very interesting way of interpreting things. If I told you the story about how a bunch of guys were getting their basements flooded at Lac Lanonne so they got liquered up and took a track hoe down and tore apart the weir at the north end, would I also be condoning what they did?

You missed the point entirely in that if you impose your will on someone else and try to force them to conform to the way that you want them to, you will be met with resistance. I won't get into that too much as it would be too complex for you to grasp. Ignoring the fact that there are some people in this world that would resort to radical acts in order to stop someone from changing their way of life is akin to burying your head in the sand. If you don't think that it is pertinent to the discussion that is your prerogative, however, knowing how things work in urban areas, I think that it is an issue that should be of concern IMO.

You are not someone that I would go out of my way to try and impress so you can forget about that right now.

[Speckle55]

Just for info there has been only 1 Rainbow caught that was in the 20 lb range and it was from either a Big Lake or a Lake that had special amount of food conditions .. the other 3 rainbows came from that lake and were netted By David Donald Canadian Fisheries Biologist they were 4 when he netted and were from 20 lbs to 24 lbs in 1980 ps the Alberta record was 5 yrs old.. u can get his bio online.. so lets look at the lakes in question .. do you have the food source to get a rainbow to grow that big even if you have only that one fish in that lake.. is the growing season long enough .. meaning winter months don,t count unless you add a aerator .. and then you need to added something to add to the plankton and zoology to get them to grow bigger and more which will go all the way up food chain to your Rainbow meaning he will be on allmost steroids or growth hormones.. in those special conditions that is what has happen in the big River/Lakes i mention Diefenbaker /Kootenay.. the other place i name is like a fish farm >> East of Edson rv park .. and the Alberta Fish Hatchery.. even in those conditions it takes so many years to get BIG FISH .. and you are adding high amounts of food to get those.. are you getting the picture.. sorry to burst your bubble .. those lake(quality Lakes) you will fish good for the first few years then back to normal for that lakes food source .. unless you have a addition to that source .. the lake has only so much potencial you might have to put 10 fish in every 4 years and you will get no fish past 10 lbs as the growth rates can't be improved for that lake unless man interviens

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by Pudelpointer

You know, I am feeling mighty generous today. I tell you what Dave, I'll agree to keep the current regs related to stocked lakes if you agree to keep the current regs regarding archery season. Sound like a deal?

I think that this comment should be addressed on its own and since the reply should be shorter I'll reply to it first.......Are you delusional?

I think that we both know that SRD position on the allocation of "quality" lakes is not going to change so in that regard you are offering me nothing. As far as me wanting crossbows included in archery only season, I already hunt with a crossbow so I will neither personally gain or lose from any decision made either way on that.

Now, if you want to grease my palms with something, it might be something to consider.

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by Speckle55

Just for info there has been only 1 Rainbow caught that was in the 20 lb range and it was from either a Big Lake or a Lake that had special amount of food conditions .. the other 3 rainbows came from that lake and were netted By David Donald Canadian Fisheries Biologist they were 4 when he netted and were from 20 lbs to 24 lbs in 1980 ps the Alberta record was 5 yrs old.. u can get his bio online.. so lets look at the lakes in question .. do you have the food source to get a rainbow to grow that big even if you have only that one fish in that lake.. is the growing season long enough .. meaning winter months don,t count unless you add a aerator .. and then you need to added something to add to the plankton and zoology to get them to grow bigger and more which will go all the way up food chain to your Rainbow meaning he will be on allmost steroids or growth hormones.. in those special conditions that is what has happen in the big River/Lakes i mention Diefenbaker /Kootenay.. the other place i name is like a fish farm >> East of Edson rv park .. and the Alberta Fish Hatchery.. even in those conditions it takes so many years to get BIG FISH .. and you are adding high amounts of food to get those.. are you getting the picture.. sorry to burst your bubble .. those lake(quality Lakes) you will fish good for the first few years then back to normal for that lakes food source .. unless you have a addition to that source .. the lake has only so much potencial you might have to put 10 fish in every 4 years and you will get no fish past 10 lbs as the growth rates can't be improved for that lake unless man interviens

Don't discount frankenfish............I'm pretty sure that these "quality" guys are not above doing that kind of thing in order to create big fish to catch.

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

So you figure that those fears are miniscule? If you muscle your way into someones backyard do you actually think that they will just roll over and die? If what you impose on people is morally right then how can the fella that dumps a bunch of perch into the lake be morally wrong? Against the law......yes, but morally?

I think that it would be best to concentrate your efforts on reclamation projects in dead lakes and newly created bodies of water rather than taking anything away from anyone because of your perception that your way is better than theirs. Besides, that is what the SRD position is wrt "quality" fisheries.

Gezz Dave.

I guess when the Province lowered the trout limits to 5 from 10 a day you felt morally justified to poison as many trout streams and destroy as much habitat as possible. Regulations change to meet the needs of the anglers and the management of the resource accordingly.

As per my previous post...using regulations to justify illegally stocking perch. Man o man...yes siree you sure got my goat. My impressions of your ideas generator have gone to a new low.

Your typing this is giving this as an excuse to any vandals wanting to express their selfishness on others.

Inexcusable.

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by Pudelpointer

Not sure who Joe Angler is, but I am surprized that Terry had not asked the Lethbridge Fish and Game for our input (though I did miss the last meeting, so maybe he did). Either way it is not a "resolution" in any way, shape, or form, it is the Area Bio asking for public input into a review.

As for your other opinions, I should add that I do not necessarily agree with AB's current regs associated with "quality fisheries", in fact I think they are completely bass-ackwards. Why you would allow a limited take of the fish that you are trying to produce makes no sense to me. There are two options much better suited to management of a fishery such as Bullshead (which does NOT allow bait, BTW): a) allowing a limited catch of <x" fish, or b) a limited catch of fish between x" and X" (also known as a "slot limit").

The Crowsnest is a perfect example of a screwed up fishery. IIRC, you are allowed to keep 1 fish under 12" and 1 fish over 16" (or the cm equivalent). At the end of the season your chances of catching a fish over 16" in many parts of the river are damn near nil. IMO, fish between 12-14" should be the only fish you are allowed to keep, or at least 2 under 14". A majority of fisherman on the river catch and release and are looking for the challenge of targeting larger fish, so why not keep a small but stable number of fish for them to target?

To answer Dave's question before he asks it, yes there probably are a few fish over 16" left after the season, but there sure aren't many. Does that make it "easy" to catch big ones if they were protected? Absolutely not. You still have to catch that fish. You still have to get him him to take the hook (again, no bait) without spooking him/her, which is not easy.

FWIW, I routinely fish another river that is strictly C&R and literally boils with large fish, and I mean LARGE FISH - I have landed 25" bows and broken off fish that are substantially larger, and I have often been skunked. I average landing one good trout in an evening's fishing, sometimes more, sometimes less, it depends on how good I am at figuring out what they are eating that particular day.

At Bullshead I have had 20 fish days - every one of them over 16" and 4+ over 20". On other days I have cast my way into carpel tunnel syndrome trying to get just one fish, any size, to take my fly. So, I don't think your "quality fisheries are easy fishing" theory holds much water.

AFAIAC, there are more then enough put & take lakes in AB. Police Lake may or may not become popular as a quality fishery for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is that it is a fairly long drive and the shore fishing is limited compared to Bullshead. Police was chosen for "quality management" because of the same reason (isolation), as well as it had the least number of people like Dave who screamed and whined and b****ed about it changing, otherwise it would have likely been any other number of lakes (i.e. Beauvais).

Bullshead is often so crowded that parking is an issue. People are there because there is the opportunity to catch a large fish (not a guarantee, just a chance). There are lots of adults, but there are also many children.

Dave, I have to ask, have you fished at Bullshead or Police Outpost? Or are you just standing on principal? Do you hate big fish because they are too hard to catch? Or do you truly challenge yourself to find that one 15" fish in a sea of 8" trout?

You know, I am feeling mighty generous today. I tell you what Dave, I'll agree to keep the current regs related to stocked lakes if you agree to keep the current regs regarding archery season. Sound like a deal?

Joe Angler is the average everyday Alberta angler. They are the guys that do not belong to a fish club and just enjoy going out fishing. Those are the guys that banded together to make the "resolution" to get rid of the "quality" fishery at Police. If you don't think that it should be called a "resolution" simply because these folks aren't part of a registered organization....... Do you think that the area bio woke up one morning and decided to create two proposals regarding the future of the "quality" fishery at Police just for chits and giggles?

You and I are 100% in agreement with what you stated about the regs being bass-ackwards. I have made numerous alternative suggestions throughout the course of this thread, one of which included slot allocations. IMO there is no acceptable alternative for the "quality" fishery proponents. If you skip over the BS posted on the thread you will find that there was some very intelligent points made IMO.

Ya see, when you post things like being able to catch big fish down south that gets me allot confused. People on here keep stating that there are no big fish down there. Why can some people catch them while others say that they aren't there.......other than in Bullshead?

Yeah, that's the way to do it. Find a place where there aren't many people to complain so you can railroad a "quality" fishery in. There are too many people at Beauvais lake to fight. Wonderful. And then ya wonder why people would dump a bunch of perch in there.

No, I have never fished in either Bullshead or Police. Nor have I fished at Muir that is just 30 kms away from here. I can already catch big fish up to +/- 20" without having to go to the local fish farm if I put the effort into it. It's probably not as EASY or as MANY but none the less I still catch them. I don't hate them at all. I enjoy the challenge of catching them but I don't eat them, that's what the smaller eatin sized ones are for.

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

Gezz Dave.

I guess when the Province lowered the trout limits to 5 from 10 a day you felt morally justified to poison as many trout streams and destroy as much habitat as possible. Regulations change to meet the needs of the anglers and the management of the resource accordingly.

As per my previous post...using regulations to justify illegally stocking perch. Man o man...yes siree you sure got my goat. My impressions of your ideas generator have gone to a new low.

Your typing this is giving this as an excuse to any vandals wanting to express their selfishness on others.

Inexcusable.

Read this...............

"Police was chosen for "quality management" because of the same reason (isolation), as well as it had the least number of people like Dave who screamed and whined and b****ed about it changing, otherwise it would have likely been any other number of lakes (i.e. Beauvais)."

I don't think that your comments are representative of what most people think. Most people are simply smarter than that and don't think like you.

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

Read this...............

"Police was chosen for "quality management" because of the same reason (isolation), as well as it had the least number of people like Dave who screamed and whined and b****ed about it changing, otherwise it would have likely been any other number of lakes (i.e. Beauvais)."

I don't think that your comments are representative of what most people think. Most people are simply smarter than that and don't think like you.

Originally Posted by HunterDave

So you figure that those fears are miniscule? If you muscle your way into someones backyard do you actually think that they will just roll over and die? If what you impose on people is morally right then how can the fella that dumps a bunch of perch into the lake be morally wrong? Against the law......yes, but morally?

Read this DAVE

YES IT IS MORALLY WRONG TO VANDALIZE A LAKE WITH PERCH, PIKE, CRAYFISH, OR ANYTHING ELSE...PERIOD...END OF DISCUSSION!!!!!!!!

[huntsfurfish]

"(ie easy to get to, easy to catch big fish, etc). When did easy become the trend?"

It stopped being the trend about 20 years ago!

"No wonder there aren't as many big fish in Lake X if everyone is taking them out. If you could educate Alberta anglers that big fish are not meant for stringers that would solve everyone's problem. Not only do most "quality" fisheries promote the keeping of only the big fish they make it illegal to keep anything but the big ones."

Cmon, we are talking about stalked trout! Bresides, eduaction is happening - just not fast enough. And resistance to being educated about it is strong (isnt it hunterdave)?

"Why would you want to give up what you have for some fellas that want to make it easier for themselves to only catch big fish?'

Your kidding!

[coorslight]

why wat about when we came to canadain back in the day did we pollute canada

[huntsfurfish]

"This is a theory that has been proven wrong. Otherwise, there currently wouldn't be a resolution to close down the "quality" fishery that people have been exposed to at Police Lake.

If you guys keep posting the same rhetoric you can expect that I'll keep posting the same fact about Police lake"

Its not over yet.
Seems that there is a questionair(sp) is out at WSS in Lethbridge and from what I am hereing there is a large majority that want to see it continue longer to give it a fair chance of success.

And people will push for other lakes if it is "lost". As I said earlier, there will be more quality lakes for Alberta! But there is lots of room for both anyway(for now)

[Sundancefisher]

My experience with polls is generally if you are deemed to be taking something away or harming someone...everyone comes out in droves. If they see it as a negative they are quick to vote. We have not seen the voter turnout to this poll. There certainly is a reason to read it cause it has a ton of visitors.

However when people see it as a positive they are slow to respond cause it looks good...why worry and vote. Apathy is the biggest killer of polling. That being said the shear lack of massive public out cry on this board with a ton of people explains it...the majority of people find it either a positive or are neutral on it...

Many people voted...however not 5000...does anyone think AOF is made up of 94% elitists? Only a small majority posting so far would tend to lead you that way.

So why again do we not have 5000 voters? Cause...probably a large number rarely post...rarely bother to vote...are infrequent visitors...already signed the poll that means anything so far...the ones going to F&W...or read the thread and agree with the thoughts to improving fishing in Alberta.

Still a representative sample is a representative sample even if some try to tell you otherwise. Maybe just maybe...5 a day tiddler lovers are just as rare as the large 25 inch plus rainbows in a stocked lake.

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

Read this DAVE

YES IT IS MORALLY WRONG TO VANDALIZE A LAKE WITH PERCH, PIKE, CRAYFISH, OR ANYTHING ELSE...PERIOD...END OF DISCUSSION!!!!!!!!

You only answered one part of the question.

Now that we know that you think that it is morally wrong to put perch into a lake why not tell everyone if you think that it is morally wrong to railroad a "quality" fishery on people. And why?

Guys like you have that typical city attitude. You think that you can just go out into the country and rape the locals because there's more of you than there is of them, right? Well, here's a news flash...............some of us are country folk.

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by huntsfurfish

"(ie easy to get to, easy to catch big fish, etc). When did easy become the trend?"

It stopped being the trend about 20 years ago!

"No wonder there aren't as many big fish in Lake X if everyone is taking them out. If you could educate Alberta anglers that big fish are not meant for stringers that would solve everyone's problem. Not only do most "quality" fisheries promote the keeping of only the big fish they make it illegal to keep anything but the big ones."

Cmon, we are talking about stalked trout! Bresides, eduaction is happening - just not fast enough. And resistance to being educated about it is strong (isnt it hunterdave)?

"Why would you want to give up what you have for some fellas that want to make it easier for themselves to only catch big fish?'

Your kidding!

That's what I'm talking about! Well, they are only stocked trout so it's okay to take out the big ones. In the same post you complain that it isn't what it was 20 years ago!!! And you can't understand why there are supposedly no big fish left in the lakes. This is the attitude that needs to be educated out of people. Geez, you keep taking the big fish out and you have smaller ones.......you take the next biggest fish out and you are left with even smaller ones. This is not rocket cosmetology we're talking about here. Leave the dang blasted big fish in and take some small ones if you want something to eat!!!

[huntsfurfish]

" Well, they are only stocked trout so it's okay to take out the big ones"

Yes, and you can catch more 12"-19.9" because they are not removed 10 minutes after being stocked. Which would still allow for a harvest of fish.

Population/fishing pressure now different than 20 years ago! Dont try and tell me that was people just taking 20+ inch fish- Id call bull on that one.

Population and fishing pressure are going to demand we do things differently!

By the way a 20" fish tastes just as good as a 12!

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by huntsfurfish

Its not over yet.
Seems that there is a questionair(sp) is out at WSS in Lethbridge and from what I am hereing there is a large majority that want to see it continue longer to give it a fair chance of success.

And people will push for other lakes if it is "lost". As I said earlier, there will be more quality lakes for Alberta! But there is lots of room for both anyway(for now)

Some of you guys don't get it. I keep telling you that if you want "quality" fisheries then reclaim dead lakes or create them in new bodies of water. Then you can feel a true sense of accomplishment and take turns stroking each other while you tell each other how great you are.

Your burning desire to take put & take lakes away from Joe Angler amounts to what? A WE/THEY situation is the absolute worst thing that "quality" fishery guys should want. As soon as you put yourself under the microscope you are liable to shoot yourselves in the foot. Any failure in a "quality" lake that was created from a put & take lake is a bigger failure than a "quality" lake that is created from a dead lake or a new body of water. Even limited success in either of those would mean a victory, perhaps not as successful as hoped for, but a victory none the less.

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by huntsfurfish

" Well, they are only stocked trout so it's okay to take out the big ones"

Yes, and you can catch more 12"-19.9" because they are not removed 10 minutes after being stocked. Which would still allow for a harvest of fish.

Population/fishing pressure now different than 20 years ago! Dont try and tell me that was people just taking 20+ inch fish- Id call bull on that one.

Population and fishing pressure are going to demand we do things differently!

By the way a 20" fish tastes just as good as a 12!

Well, if they weren't taking out the big fish where'd they go then?

Yeah, and a good start would be to try to change the attitudes about big fish. "Quality" fisheries is not the only answer to everything. Try to think outside of that box.

It must be all of that mercury and such that builds up in their flesh that makes them taste better over time.

[huntsfurfish]

Guess there is no way to educate hunterdave

Sounds like someone is stuck in the past - oh well.

I read this whole thread and you have yet to say anything to convince me otherwise - no meat in what you speak man.