Amateur walleye slay and rant

[huntsfurfish]

Wanting slots on some lakes without a way to control and oversee them is not good. Just what you posted on previous threads and was countered. Just sayin.

[Kurt505]

Originally Posted by huntsfurfish

Could maybe open to Tags.

Originally Posted by huntsfurfish

Pigeon and Lac St Anne are on tags already. so you are part way there already.

Gotta bump up the number of tags, there isn't enough walleye being taken out to correctly manage the balance.

[Kurt505]

Originally Posted by huntsfurfish

Wanting slots on some lakes without a way to control and oversee them is not good. Just what you posted on previous threads and was countered. Just sayin.

It doesn't matter what laws are in place if there's no way to oversee them, that's pretty much a moot point.

[huntsfurfish]

Originally Posted by Kurt505

Gotta bump up the number of tags, there isn't enough walleye being taken out to correctly manage the balance.

Doesnt have to be done overnight. Balance will come young jedi.

[huntsfurfish]

Originally Posted by Kurt505

It doesn't matter what laws are in place if there's no way to oversee them, that's pretty much a moot point.

Thats why you need more funding. More funding more test netting= quicker to see changes.

At least the way it is there is less chance of collapsing the fishery.

[Kurt505]

Originally Posted by huntsfurfish

Thats why you need more funding. More funding more test netting= quicker to see changes.

At least the way it is there is less chance of collapsing the fishery.

Seems the only fishery they're worried about collapsing is the walleye, with pike and perch just a formality.

[Brandonkop]

Originally Posted by Kurt505

Seems the only fishery they're worried about collapsing is the walleye, with pike and perch just a formality.

That right there is the key! That's what annoys me.

In California an environmental group, "Center for Biological Diversity" launched a lawsuit against California Department of Fish and Game for stocking trout without consideration of biodiversity and the impact of stocking on other species. They sorta won and the DFG stopped stocking trout in a lot of lakes and streams for this reason and had to do more research on environmental impact before future stocking. (not that I like the outcome as a fishermen because this group was trying to save some yellow legged mountain frog which I don't really care to climb a mountain to see, but that aside).

I think this is what we need in Alberta. A class action lawsuit to show that the governments fisheries management strategies have destroyed and changed native fish populations. That native perch and pike are now collapsed. Hopefully it would stop them from stocking walleye in more lakes where they don't belong. Maybe even allow us to fish the walleye out of wabamun and get it back to a trophy pike fishery.

Just need a leader. Must be some lawyer out there who knows how this stuff works and likes fishing... and wouldn't mind some volunteer moments to think if its a possibility.

[Kurt505]

Originally Posted by Brandonkop

That right there is the key! That's what annoys me.

In California an environmental group, "Center for Biological Diversity" launched a lawsuit against California Department of Fish and Game for stocking trout without consideration of biodiversity and the impact of stocking on other species. They sorta won and the DFG stopped stocking trout in a lot of lakes and streams for this reason and had to do more research on environmental impact before future stocking. (not that I like the outcome as a fishermen because this group was trying to save some yellow legged mountain frog which I don't really care to climb a mountain to see, but that aside).

I think this is what we need in Alberta. A class action lawsuit to show that the governments fisheries management strategies have destroyed and changed native fish populations. That native perch and pike are now collapsed. Hopefully it would stop them from stocking walleye in more lakes where they don't belong. Maybe even allow us to fish the walleye out of wabamun and get it back to a trophy pike fishery.

Just need a leader. Must be some lawyer out there who knows how this stuff works and likes fishing... and wouldn't mind some volunteer moments to think if its a possibility.

it's the same point I was trying to get across on the last thread. There is too much emphasis on loading the numbers of walleye, like a sacred species.

Get the balance in check and the numbers will improve naturally, with healthy fish.

At least that's what I believe will happen.

[SNAPFisher]

Originally Posted by Brandonkop

In California an environmental group, "Center for Biological Diversity" launched a lawsuit against California Department of Fish and Game for stocking trout without consideration of biodiversity and the impact of stocking on other species. They sorta won and the DFG stopped stocking trout in a lot of lakes and streams for this reason and had to do more research on environmental impact before future stocking. (not that I like the outcome as a fishermen because this group was trying to save some yellow legged mountain frog which I don't really care to climb a mountain to see, but that aside).

I think this is what we need in Alberta. A class action lawsuit to show that the governments fisheries management strategies have destroyed and changed native fish populations. That native perch and pike are now collapsed. Hopefully it would stop them from stocking walleye in more lakes where they don't belong. Maybe even allow us to fish the walleye out of wabamun and get it back to a trophy pike fishery.

Just need a leader. Must be some lawyer out there who knows how this stuff works and likes fishing... and wouldn't mind some volunteer moments to think if its a possibility.

That is interesting for sure. If things come to pass and a great cutthroat fishery like the Ram Rivers is destroyed, you might have people lining up.

Sounds like they have been in hot water in California on more than one occasion:

LISTING COHO SALMON AS ENDANGERED IGNORES
SCIENCE AND EXISTING PROTECTIONS

SUMMARY
On June 28, 2005, a coalition of forest landowners, ranchers and farmers, joined by the California Chamber of Commerce, filed a lawsuit against the California Fish and Game Commission and the California Department of Fish and Game for their decision to adopt and approve listing coho salmon as “endangered” along the Central California coast and as “threatened” along the Northern California coast to the Oregon border under the California Endangered Species Act.

The lawsuit maintains that the Commission and the Department failed to establish that the listing is necessary and doesn’t already serve the same purpose as other state or federal regulations. The lawsuit holds that the Commission failed to comply with key provisions of the California Endangered Species Act and Administrative Procedure Act in approving the listing.


FACTS AND FIGURES
FACT: The Department of Fish and Game has acknowledged that its scientific information is inadequate to support a population analysis—the core basis for listing under the California Endangered Species Act.

FACT: While landowners cannot allow a single coho salmon to be killed in fresh water, regulators allows commercial fishing operators to catch and kill coho in the ocean as a byproduct of catching other fish species.

FACT: A substantial body of research on the current status of coho salmon in Central and Northern California demonstrates the effectiveness of conservation measures in promoting both adult and juvenile coho salmon populations.

FACT: California’s listing of coho salmon as “threatened” and “endangered” unnecessarily duplicates its listing and protections measures under the federal Endangered Species Act and numerous other state watershed regulations.

FACT: Since the federal listing in 1997, California has instituted significant regulations for coho salmon and resource managers have invested more than $100 million in voluntary protection measures.

FACT: The new regulations expected to accompany the listing are estimated to cost forestland managers more than $30 million per year—with no added benefit to protecting salmon populations. This is in addition to the more than $100 million land managers continue to spend on voluntary and cooperative restoration efforts as well as nearly $20 million in timber harvest permit preparation costs, and fees paid to the Department of Fish and Game and other regulatory agencies.

[greendrake]

I detest the tag system, and I'm all for having lakes be C&R. How ever when I go to Pigeon and can catch 60-70 Keeper size fish or Wolf or Wab or calling and about 20 more just like them. I see no reason that these lakes could not afford to allow retention of 3 fish each. For a limited time example the month of June and again in Sept. F&W could monitor through creel samples and test netting to determine population density. Closures and restrictions would come from that. When I was in tournament fishing in the early 80s was when the idea of collapsed populations became a problem these closures like taxes were supposed to be temporary until stocks rebounded. That day has come, let's not let our fishing become a tag for every fish world where families who could use a supplement of protein shouldn't be penalized for lack of funds. Or we have to book in advance stream sections in a lottery system

[bobalong]

Originally Posted by greendrake

I detest the tag system, and I'm all for having lakes be C&R. How ever when I go to Pigeon and can catch 60-70 Keeper size fish or Wolf or Wab or calling and about 20 more just like them. I see no reason that these lakes could not afford to allow retention of 3 fish each. For a limited time example the month of June and again in Sept. F&W could monitor through creel samples and test netting to determine population density. Closures and restrictions would come from that. When I was in tournament fishing in the early 80s was when the idea of collapsed populations became a problem these closures like taxes were supposed to be temporary until stocks rebounded. That day has come, let's not let our fishing become a tag for every fish world where families who could use a supplement of protein shouldn't be penalized for lack of funds. Or we have to book in advance stream sections in a lottery system

A 3 fish walleye limit on lakes like Pigeon and Wabamun or any others within an hour of a major city would result in a collapse of that fishery. If you have fished these two lakes very much the last few years you have seen the hundreds of anglers that fished here even before there were tags. I am talking about back in the early 2000's.

I am not a fan of the tag system either but it is an attempt by F/W to allow some harvest at this lakes, with very little personnel there to monitor. I am not sure about September but F/W have been doing creel samples at Pigeon in the summer months for years.

Unless things have changed in the last couple of years there has been a focus on walleye because they were the most popular fish in the province even though the government refused to spend money on stocking for years. I agree their plan was a fail with regard to diversified species in a lake, but fishery management with the exception of trout has been a fail for many years.

When they started closing lakes back in the early to mid 90's they did so because it was cheap. They just closed the lakes. Then they decreased enforcement and never monitored or ignored the decline in pike and perch populations even though they were told it would happen when they designated walleye as catch and release only.

They refuse to allocate the required funds for a sustained, long term plan for stocking, test netting, or enforcement and that has not really changed much in the last 15 years or so.

[pikeman06]

Stick your tags where the sun don't shine. It's like the government pours millions of fingerling with the intent that each frigging little walleye is a five dollar bill in the end. We just planted 2 million fry we get 10 million bux in the end. Where does that tag revenue go? Spend ten bux and you get 2 scrawny wallies a year, but the lakes infested with them. Right on. The test nets say it all its not just my opinion. Once the wallies are established the perch numbers drop to a single digit the whitefish numbers are at least half and the pike arent far behind. The tag system is just a cash grab that generates enough support and money from any sucker that is blind enough to pay into that system that they brainwash the general public into thinking it's sound management to totally destroy a fishery so they can recover the money from the original stocking and maybe make a few bucks if they become established. It's not management it's about dollars.

[Isopod]

Originally Posted by Brandonkop

Haha, as much as I would love to sometime I just can't bring myself to cross the line an enter the realm of poacher. I'd rather try to influence people and government to take a second look at what is happening. Maybe I'll write a letter to the minister.

I personally do not poach fish (almost exclusively C&R). That said, I have decided to not turn anyone else in for poaching, even if they are blatant and obvious about it.

As long as we have some folks who can fish for as much as they want, whenever and wherever they want, whatever species they want, while everyone else is supposed to follow strict harvest rules so that there are enough fish for the first group to take as much as they want... well, that just doesn't seem to me like the way to sustain any kind of fishery. So I have decided to turn a blind eye to it all, and when I go fishing it is largely for the experience and meeting up with friends, and I don't care about what other fishers and/or poachers are up to.

[dodger]

Just a comment on the Southern lakes/reservoirs. I'm not sure if Walleye overpopulation is an issue "yet"? Now that commercial netting is no longer allowed what happens with all the Whitefish population. Will it generate enough food to prevent stunted Pike/Walleye? Plus the Whitefish need to eat. Also the Persian Carp are here, what do they bring to the food chain as far as being food for the predator fish while they feed on everything in the lake. Then enter the Crayfish. Walleye have been eating them ( Pike? ) and the Southern reservoirs are thick with them.

Things are changing at a rapid rate and I do not think there is a simple answer to this. I have no comment on retention of Walleye but I think our provincial government better take this serious and seek out the very BEST to help with future plans.

Also, just an after thought - Mussels are now knocking on the doorstep.

Dodger.

[pikergolf]

Originally Posted by Kurt505

Seems the only fishery they're worried about collapsing is the walleye, with pike and perch just a formality.

I would say that, it is our fault. Alberta anglers have been clamoring for more and better walleye for decades. Why I don't know, I would rather catch a feisty pike over the logs that walleye are any day of the week. I would guess the popularity of tournaments has something to do with it. Everyone wants to emulate what they see on TV.

[Kurt505]

Ya, I don't get it. Some lakes are literally polluted with walleye and if you do happen to catch a pike it's like hitting the lottery, yet you can't keep any walleye. It obviously doesn't take a biologist to figure out there is a serious balance issue, I find it hard to believe that throwing more money at these biologists will fix the problem. I think if we stop throwing them money they might clue in.

The big push for Alberta to become a walleye catch and release Mecca might be coming from tournament fishing, but I think it's the family fishing trips that pay the bills over all. Call me old school, but if I can't keep a fish from a lake, I don't fish there. If everyone had that attitude I'd be willing to bet that the biologists would be rethinking their strategy. Once there's no more fishermen, there really is no need to employ a biologist to come up with a plan.

[greendrake]

Originally Posted by bobalong

A 3 fish walleye limit on lakes like Pigeon and Wabamun or any others within an hour of a major city would result in a collapse of that fishery. If you have fished these two lakes very much the last few years you have seen the hundreds of anglers that fished here even before there were tags. I am talking about back in the early 2000's.

I am not a fan of the tag system either but it is an attempt by F/W to allow some harvest at this lakes, with very little personnel there to monitor. I am not sure about September but F/W have been doing creel samples at Pigeon in the summer months for years.

Unless things have changed in the last couple of years there has been a focus on walleye because they were the most popular fish in the province even though the government refused to spend money on stocking for years. I agree their plan was a fail with regard to diversified species in a lake, but fishery management with the exception of trout has been a fail for many years.

When they started closing lakes back in the early to mid 90's they did so because it was cheap. They just closed the lakes. Then they decreased enforcement and never monitored or ignored the decline in pike and perch populations even though they were told it would happen when they designated walleye as catch and release only.

They refuse to allocate the required funds for a sustained, long term plan for stocking, test netting, or enforcement and that has not really changed much in the last 15 years or so.

I'm well aware of all you say, however you focus on Pigeon and Wab, I said there are at least 20 lakes in this position. Im saying that when retention being monitored reaches a point of stable population then protective measure go back into effect hence the close monitoring. Once the population returns to overabundance then it reverts back to retention. Many people poach, smoke weed, speed because you restrict them from it. There will always be criminal level poaching as long as there is a profit to be made. That's a whole different story. Its the people sneaking home a few that want or actually need some retention that wouldn't break the law because they wouldnt have to.

[ROA]

I remember back when you couldn't even catch a walleye in many of these lakes and it was the pike that were over populated and stunted. It's taken 15-20 years to flip the lakes around to walleye dominated. I think I like the stunted walleye fishing we have right now better than the stunted pike fishing of before.

So ya I bitch about all the dam fish I am catching and can't keep but at least I am catching more fish than ever.

[Kurt505]

Originally Posted by ROA

I remember back when you couldn't even catch a walleye in many of these lakes and it was the pike that were over populated and stunted. It's taken 15-20 years to flip the lakes around to walleye dominated. I think I like the stunted walleye fishing we have right now better than the stunted pike fishing of before.

So ya I bitch about all the dam fish I am catching and can't keep but at least I am catching more fish than ever.

Pike fight way better than walleye, so if you're just going to throw them back, what difference does it make? You'd rather catch a bunch of docile fish than some that are larger on average and fight better, with the end goal being to throw them back?

Lol.

[Walleyedude]

Originally Posted by Brandonkop

In California an environmental group, "Center for Biological Diversity" launched a lawsuit against California Department of Fish and Game for stocking trout without consideration of biodiversity and the impact of stocking on other species. They sorta won and the DFG stopped stocking trout in a lot of lakes and streams for this reason and had to do more research on environmental impact before future stocking. (not that I like the outcome as a fishermen because this group was trying to save some yellow legged mountain frog which I don't really care to climb a mountain to see, but that aside).

I think this is what we need in Alberta. A class action lawsuit to show that the governments fisheries management strategies have destroyed and changed native fish populations. That native perch and pike are now collapsed. Hopefully it would stop them from stocking walleye in more lakes where they don't belong. Maybe even allow us to fish the walleye out of wabamun and get it back to a trophy pike fishery.

Just need a leader. Must be some lawyer out there who knows how this stuff works and likes fishing... and wouldn't mind some volunteer moments to think if its a possibility.

I'm going to keep my opinions on the rest of the thread to myself. Been there, done that, definitely don't want to do it again.

I will comment on this though. The absolute last thing I ever want to see is a USA style lawsuit or legal battle over our fisheries. I can't think of anything more ridiculous or that would be a bigger waste of money that could be used to actually improve the fisheries and fisheries management.

The ONLY people that win in that kind of a litigious "I'm gonna sue you" situation is the lawyers.

[ROA]

Ya possibly they fight "better" but it's still a stunted fish so it's not it's much of fight. Also many of the lakes were pretty fished out even for pike as everyone was keeping 5. When I was a kid we would fish all day for a couple pike. I'd still rather catch fish than not, people don't appreciate what they got right now and how bad it was 30 years ago in some of these lakes.

Another thing, the amount of people I see out fishing now is nuts. I would guess it is up by a factor of 10 on many lakes yet I am still catching fish as good or better in some cases.

[Kurt505]

Originally Posted by ROA

Ya possibly they fight "better" but it's still a stunted fish so it's not it's much of fight. Also many of the lakes were pretty fished out even for pike as everyone was keeping 5. When I was a kid we would fish all day for a couple pike. I'd still rather catch fish than not, people don't appreciate what they got right now and how bad it was 30 years ago in some of these lakes.

I remember fishing 30 years ago. Huge perch in most of the lakes, you wouldn't catch 50 walleye in a day, but you'd always catch 5-10 of them, and I'd catch at least 1 pike in the 15-25lb range every year. The fish population was more diversely spread out. I agree that they left the catch limits too high for too long, but the way they remedied it was a knee jerk reaction that has created a whole new, equally damaging situation.

I bet if they had dropped the limit from 5 down to a slot size of 2 back in the early 80's we'd have a healthy, well balanced fish population today.

[SNAPFisher]

Originally Posted by ROA

I remember back when you couldn't even catch a walleye in many of these lakes and it was the pike that were over populated and stunted. It's taken 15-20 years to flip the lakes around to walleye dominated. I think I like the stunted walleye fishing we have right now better than the stunted pike fishing of before.

So ya I bitch about all the dam fish I am catching and can't keep but at least I am catching more fish than ever.

Good to hear that you are catching more than ever

I remember growing up to pike fishing you are referring to - 5 o diamonds and whole lotta pike. Why can't we have it both ways? Great pike fisheries and great walleye fisheries.

Pike fight better, lb for lb, than walleye imho. Pike can attain amazing sizes comparative to walleye and hunting big pike hens like that...well that is a whole other game and challenge.

Speaking of central AB lakes, where I see an imbalance is lakes like Gull and Sylvan in particular where the walleye limit was zero for so long and yet the pike limit stayed and still is at 3 per day…

I’m not sure the logic in that. Maybe a few years at that, fine, but to continue that kind of imbalance to this day is not good for the balance just on predators in those lakes alone.

Do you fish Gull? If so, what do you think of the pike fishing there now to say 10-12 years ago? How about even 5 years ago.

[SNAPFisher]

Originally Posted by pikergolf

I would say that, it is our fault. Alberta anglers have been clamoring for more and better walleye for decades. Why I don't know, I would rather catch a feisty pike over the logs that walleye are any day of the week. I would guess the popularity of tournaments has something to do with it. Everyone wants to emulate what they see on TV.

Good point, and I agree.

You think also how easy it is to get but also the crazy variety of baits now. Add in X times more anglers and limits that worked before, even 5-10 years ago, are not going to work now.

[bobalong]

Originally Posted by Kurt505

I remember fishing 30 years ago. Huge perch in most of the lakes, you wouldn't catch 50 walleye in a day, but you'd always catch 5-10 of them, and I'd catch at least 1 pike in the 15-25lb range every year. The fish population was more diversely spread out. I agree that they left the catch limits too high for too long, but the way they remedied it was a knee jerk reaction that has created a whole new, equally damaging situation.

I bet if they had dropped the limit from 5 down to a slot size of 2 back in the early 80's we'd have a healthy, well balanced fish population today.

Hard to compare angling now to the early 80's there was no GPS, no underwater cameras and almost no sonar. Most ice fishing holes were all drilled by hand, few if any ATV for traveling on the ice. Can't find the link now but I believe I read there were about 85K licensed anglers in 1982, now about 250K

In 1980 there were about 2 million people, now there are over 4 million. There were none or very few of the big 5th wheel trailers and boats and motors were fairly small limiting travel on the big water. There is more knowledge available to anglers on their home and other waters than ever before in history........hardly anyone ever gets skunked any more summer or winter. Rods, reels, line, cameras, lures, sonar, mapping, electric motors, ice huts, heaters, augers, all better improving efficiency.

Most all the improvements today since the early 80's have increased angler efficiency significantly and are all factors that have contributed to the decline of our fisheries. Not really news for anyone thats been around for a while, but something to think about.

[huntsfurfish]

Originally Posted by Kurt505

Seems the only fishery they're worried about collapsing is the walleye, with pike and perch just a formality.

First fisheries collapses were Walleye. Of coarse they worry about it. People pressured gov to fix it. They did. Few people showed concern about the other species till fairly recently. Walleye will continue to be a pretty high priority in this province because they are popular.

[huntsfurfish]

Originally Posted by Brandonkop

That right there is the key! That's what annoys me.

In California an environmental group, "Center for Biological Diversity" launched a lawsuit against California Department of Fish and Game for stocking trout without consideration of biodiversity and the impact of stocking on other species. They sorta won and the DFG stopped stocking trout in a lot of lakes and streams for this reason and had to do more research on environmental impact before future stocking. (not that I like the outcome as a fishermen because this group was trying to save some yellow legged mountain frog which I don't really care to climb a mountain to see, but that aside).

I think this is what we need in Alberta. A class action lawsuit to show that the governments fisheries management strategies have destroyed and changed native fish populations. That native perch and pike are now collapsed. Hopefully it would stop them from stocking walleye in more lakes where they don't belong. Maybe even allow us to fish the walleye out of wabamun and get it back to a trophy pike fishery.

Just need a leader. Must be some lawyer out there who knows how this stuff works and likes fishing... and wouldn't mind some volunteer moments to think if its a possibility.

Thats the last thing we need.

[huntsfurfish]

Originally Posted by Kurt505

Ya, I don't get it. Some lakes are literally polluted with walleye and if you do happen to catch a pike it's like hitting the lottery, yet you can't keep any walleye. It obviously doesn't take a biologist to figure out there is a serious balance issue, I find it hard to believe that throwing more money at these biologists will fix the problem. I think if we stop throwing them money they might clue in.

The big push for Alberta to become a walleye catch and release Mecca might be coming from tournament fishing, but I think it's the family fishing trips that pay the bills over all. Call me old school, but if I can't keep a fish from a lake, I don't fish there. If everyone had that attitude I'd be willing to bet that the biologists would be rethinking their strategy. Once there's no more fishermen, there really is no need to employ a biologist to come up with a plan.

OMG Kurt you really dont get it! Test netting once every 5 years versus every year or 2 costs money!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This is in part how they determine what to do!!!!!!!!!!! Throwing money cmon. Obviously it you arent clueing in.

[huntsfurfish]

Originally Posted by Walleyedude

I'm going to keep my opinions on the rest of the thread to myself. Been there, done that, definitely don't want to do it again.

I will comment on this though. The absolute last thing I ever want to see is a USA style lawsuit or legal battle over our fisheries. I can't think of anything more ridiculous or that would be a bigger waste of money that could be used to actually improve the fisheries and fisheries management.

The ONLY people that win in that kind of a litigious "I'm gonna sue you" situation is the lawyers.

Agree, well said!

[huntsfurfish]

Originally Posted by Kurt505

I remember fishing 30 years ago. Huge perch in most of the lakes, you wouldn't catch 50 walleye in a day, but you'd always catch 5-10 of them, and I'd catch at least 1 pike in the 15-25lb range every year. The fish population was more diversely spread out. I agree that they left the catch limits too high for too long, but the way they remedied it was a knee jerk reaction that has created a whole new, equally damaging situation.

I bet if they had dropped the limit from 5 down to a slot size of 2 back in the early 80's we'd have a healthy, well balanced fish population today.

Bet you kept your limit of huge perch each time you went out too.