Jump to content
Trout Unlimited Canada - Northern Lights Fly Fishers

flycaster

Members
  • Content Count

    40
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by flycaster

  1. We are on a slippery slope.... Although I do not disagree with the SARA amendments, we must be cautious in the response. Angling, catch and release, does in fact constitute "harm and harass"....Are we not hypocritical? Do I want full scale closures?....no...but I am playing devil's advocate... I would also submit that logging and resultant increased water temps from that logging has resulted in a significant decline in cold water species numbers ( among other factors). Does logging and its resultant effects not constitute damage to the residence of that species? It just seems that COSEWIC has no difficulty putting species on the SARA list...but doesn't really offer any productive solutions. Once a new species is put on the list...groups seek exemptions to sections 32 and 33....just sayin'... The definition above of special concern is given as“a wildlife species that may become a threatened or an endangered species because of a combination of biological characteristics and identified threats.” If the threat has been identified...shut it down....That seems to be a road that DFO doesn't have the courage to go down....
  2. Sad news.... I remember Herb from the old TU Edmonton days. He was a colorful character that will be missed.
  3. Access can be found.... A few words of advice though; 1) Swan Hills mud is among the worst I have experienced....when it rains up there....and it does...those roads/trails that were a piece of cake going in, will be murder coming out... 2) A map or satellite view is essential....those oilfield roads will lead you in circles... 3) To be safe...don't camp near either of the streams you mentioned....rain in the Hills can make these creeks rise several meters overnight! 4) Of course you can't talk about this area without mentioning Grizzlies....be cautious...enough said.
  4. Many thx Pauline!!! Works like a charm now!
  5. Thx for the update Don. That certainly is one of the problems we face....at many of our EDM TU meetings (before amalgamation with NLFT) the lack of recruitment was evident....as the room consisted of only us gray haired folk.....
  6. First visit to the new forum layout....things look fresh and great. But, I'm still feeling my way around and it will take some time to get familiar with things in the new layout. One question though; When I look at the "Fish and Wildlife Management" section...it says there are supposed to be 21 topics.....yet, only ONE topic shows up.....what happened to the older ones?..... I suppose this issue applies to the other subforums as well, but I have not had a chance to check.
  7. Don; I'm fully familiar with the area on Stauffer you speak of....and have noticed the same thing over the past few years. I'm not sure what the background is to this thead....but, my question is: what has happened to beaver management on Stauffer?....wait, I think I already know the answer to that so, let me rephrase it...why has there been no beaver management on Stauffer in recent years? Isn't ACA getting enough money from us? BTW, everytime I've been there in the past 4 years I have manually picked,poked and opened up two of the dams....only to see them rebuilt by the next outing. Perhaps it is time to get the "defender" out of the closet again....
  8. Ummmmm.....actually quite a few typo's...... Didn't purposely look for any but, two that stuck out are; 1) Don Andersen's name is spelled wrong! 2)The second "Intro to Flyfishing seminar" is quoted on page one as being April 4th and 5th....on page two it is shown as June 4th and 5th????? BTW...is there no Conservation meeting in May?
  9. First, let me say....I miss Denny's! I did not vote...but I agree wholeheartedly with "Junior". Being a flyfisherman of 30+ years, I'll also add a few thoughts; 1) The days of specialized retail stores are gone....everything is "big box" geared today. "Carry only the stock that moves out the door quickly....nobody will buy that package of baboon pubic hair". High volume, somewhat lower margin. Quality?....heck why should we carry that?...we'll sell crap that breaks in two years to get a return sale. Has anyone tried to buy a Hardy reel, a Wheatley fly box locally lately? 2) A shop like Denny's would require something called customer interaction and customer service, along with product knowledge. It would also require someone with a serious passion for the sport...and some deep pockets for the business. Most (not all) of the staff in the local shops know very little about the products they sell, even less about the items they don't....like the two mentioned above for example. Local shops don't want to pay for knowledgeable staff......they hire the cheapest, untrained people they can find...they get what they pay for. Some lack even basic social skills. We, as customers don't seem to mind.... By the way...I'm not picking on local fishing shops....it's the same story throughout the retail business... 3) Another obstacle may be the changing demographic. There are a lot of grey hairs in the sport...I'm not convinced the recruitment is there... I will differ on two of Juniors points; The fear of on-line sales should NOT be a factor....why couldn't the "Denny" like retail store also offer on-line sales in addition to the brick and mortar shop? If I recall correctly in my discussions with Reg over the years....mail order was a large component of his business. I know Dragon Troller can chime in here.... Regarding the "non-retail" Superfly shop....I think it's a non flyer. Why have the retail store as the middleman? If Superfly thinks a standalone retail store is viable....they should have the business balls to give it a try under their own banner. In summary, I think that we as customers have molded our own retail destiny.....we want the cheapest items....that's what we are getting, at the expense of service and selection. Perhaps, in time the pendulum will swing back the other way..... BTW....did I say that I miss Denny's?
  10. Yes...indeed it does. I picked up a nasty virus from there on Mar 16th....took me half a day to clean my machine. So...I haven't been back to Doc's site since. Let us know when you clean things up there Doc....
  11. dave robinson; It is clearly apparent from the tone of your last two posts that your position on maintaining status quo is one that will not be changed....and, as such I will not take the time to rebut each of your points. However, I would like to reiterate one of my points....one that perhaps you missed; "Furthermore, in ALL cases, it must be understood that any form of licensing program should NOT constitute granting of any RIGHTS to guides on any piece of water in this Province....nor should there be any implications of such." Second, although I am somewhat familiar with the BC freshwater fishing regulations, could you please direct me to the section that requires hiring of a guide in order to fish on classified waters. Could you also please elaborate on your statement that BC uses "guide licensing to restrict access to the best water in the province". In closing, given your strong opinion(s) on this subject....I would encourage you to take the opportunity to attend the meeting and voice your concerns there.
  12. The fisheries of the Province of Alberta are a Public resource. They are owned by you and I as Albertans. Every activity that PROFITS (or attempts to profit) from a resource that you and I own...must pay some form of restitution back to the rightful owners of that resource. Oil, gas and other resource companies pay royalties. Forestry companies pay fees. Why should fishing guides that use our resource be exempt from this? Why should they not contribute some of their income to go directly back into that resource? Understand that this is not an issue of trying to protect a client from a shady guide or unsatisfactory guide experience...it is an issue of trying to protect our resource and our right to enjoyment of same. In some cases...people that fish for profit are already impacting you and I, the public user, in our angling experiences. It is happening on the Bow, the Crow, The Red Deer, the Ram....and yes, even on the North Raven....just to name a few. Currently, the provincial government has NO idea how great the impact of guiding is on the recreational Albertan user. Nor do they know how great the impact of guiding is to the fishery itself. They don't even know how many guides there are....how many trips....how many fish caught....how many fish killed. With the obvious decline in the fishery in the province, it is becoming more and more important to understand the impact of what is becoming a larger and larger component of the resource user base...the guiding industry. It has taken the Provincial roundtable over three years to finally implement a ban on "for Profit" tournament fishing and take the first steps in instituting restrictions and monitoring for "non-profit" tournaments. It will take time to understand the impacts of those allowed tournaments on specific fisheries. In order to better understand the implications of guiding on OUR resource...the logical first step is to license and monitor guiding activities.....funded by monies collected from fees paid by guides, or should I say, their clients. In ALL cases the health of the fishery should be paramount....secondly should be the RIGHT of you and I, the owners of the resource, to enjoy that recreational fishery without impact from those that profit from it. Remember that the next time you fish Stauffer, and have three guides each with a client situated every 200 yards on a creek that is less than 2 meters wide in some spots. Do the guides care about your angling experience?....doubtful, I'm sure they are more concerned about the $600USD that they will collect from each of their clients. Furthermore, in ALL cases, it must be understood that any form of licensing program should NOT constitute granting of any RIGHTS to guides on any piece of water in this Province....nor should there be any implications of such. The argument that "allowing the free market to operate" with regard to the future of the fisheries of this Province...is, quite frankly, not very compelling. A final note....I would submit that the $300K number thrown out as a cost to implement such a licensing program is unfounded....and likely suggested as a scare tactic by those opposed to the licensing idea. It certainly is not costing $300K yearly for the tournament program.
  13. So, Morph1...how did you make out?
  14. @Doc...sorry, I've been away for a bit. I really only have two things to add to your reply; 1) Again, I think you are missing the focus..As I stated, I understand that identifying the total number of users is important. But that information alone tells you nothing! What is far more important from a fisheries management perspective is : What is the fish mortality as a result of user impact? In other words....for example, Our total number of users this year (excluding seniors) may kill far more fish than the TOTAL number of users next year (INCLUDING seniors). Again, I'm not opposed to licensing of seniors/kids...but the point I am trying to make is that the total number of people fishing is NOT directly proportional to the number of fish killed. 2) Regarding the "bigger picture"...perhaps I did not make myself clear here. What I was trying to say was that it is apparent that there are many other factors that have a much larger impact on the health of a particular fishery than recreational use. Some of those factors appear to be environmental...yet others are obviously industrial/resource development in nature. So, we count the number of seniors/kids that fish, we make them fish barbless, we limit the number and size of fish they can keep, we limit the times they can fish.....THEN we allow corporations to destroy the river by "mining" out the river itself...(upper Mcleod/tribs for coal, Muskeg for tar sand as examples) Another example...what do you think has had more impact on grayling distribution in this province? Overfishing...or higher water temperatures? That is why when we look for solutions...we need to fully understand the problems first.
  15. Sorry for this late reply...It's probably too late for morph1 to see before his trip.. But... here is the link to the Parks fishing regs(synopsis)Park fishing synopsis @ Dave; Yes I see that they have also closed Jacques year round now....it was an undiscovered little gem...it has been about a dozen years since I fished it last. As for the fishing closure of Maligne river till August 1 due to protection of the wood ducks...I know that was the "official" reason....but, did they also ban the whitewater rafters on that reach of river during that time? The mountain parks as a fishing destination?...daily fishing license + daily park pass + Hotel accomodation + gas + Jasper resaurant food...for lakes that haven't been stocked in years = the main reasons I haven't seriously fished the parks for at least ten years. For any of you that remember what fishing was like there in the 60's to 80's, compared to now...you will understand.
  16. @Morph1; I don't know where you heard about the stocking....to my knowledge, stocking in the parks was discontinued several years ago. It is part of the "plan" by one Ms Copps to let the fisheries in the Parks return to their "natural" status. In other words, no stocking of RB's or Brookies because they are NOT native. But, don't get me going on this one...as I suspect the real reason is just to reduce costs! There has been very little stocking of "non native" species ever since the Jasper hatchery shut down many many years ago...and, I think it's been at least 7 or 8 years since any non-native stocking has taken place! Back to your question...If Maligne is still ice bound, enjoy and soak up the fantastic scenery!!!! Tuber's suggestion is very good if you are keen to fish now...if Pyramid is ice free...give it a try...but not for the rainbows...the lakers are close to the surface when the ice comes off. Check the regs though for opening dates...they change frequently....I have not checked them yet for this year! I agree with TerryH...best time to fish this area of the Parks is later in the season...Maligne and Medicine are both good then...also consider Jacques Lake ( a short hike from the end of Medicine). In general, other than the spots mentioned above (and a few others) fishing in the Parks is poor...largely due to their no stocking policy.
  17. @morph1; As for license costs...go to Parks Canada website for the latest cost for this year. As for fish in Maligne...big rainbows and big brookies Although the lake may open up May 19th...I don't think the ice will be off yet. Also note electric motors only...Take more than one battery...the lake is 15+ miles long and the wind can be brutal and dangerous. Also take note of some restrictions around the outlet(maligne river)
  18. @Morph1...yes, you are correct! In many places in Europe you do infact need to take and pass a test to show competency! Also, in most European countries you must PAY to fish a stretch of river or a lake!!! Not like here where you can drive to a bridge, park, gear up and start fishing.....In Germany for example, you need a license, then need to contact the local club that is responsible for the particular stretch of river that you wish to fish....if you are LUCKY, they will allow you to fish once you pay them for the right to do so. Many reaches of water are ONLY there for club members to fish...in some places they only let you fish if accompanied by a club member. Almost every body of water is controlled by clubs or districts that grant/control the ability to fish them...in many rivers, clubs may have the right to 1 or 2 km of river...the next 2 km may be controlled by a different club/district! Fishing in Britain is similar in concept... I was at a stocked lake in Germany 2 years ago...it was more like a dugout...about 30 yards wide and 250 yards long. I didn't fish it, but was shown the area (and others) by a club member who fishes it regularly. In order to fish it...you need to be a member of the club...it costs $20 Euros for the day, plus another 5 Euros for parking...so that's about $38 Canadian in total for the day. You are allowed to keep 5 fish ( if you can catch them)...most of the rainbows I saw were about 14 inches in length. What amazed me the most though was the marker pegs in the ground on the shore...when I asked what they were for...the member told me that you are assigned that spot for the day....and can't move to any other spots. The pegs were spaced about every 5 yards or so!!!! The other issue that seems to be gaining some momentum in Europe (Germany in particular) is the ANTI catch and release mentality...there is a growing segment of the population that claims that catching a fish for "fun" and then releasing that fish constitutes "cruelty" and should not be allowed. I would not be surprised, in the near future, to see a ban on C&R...with fishing allowed for subsistence only. Yes. things are very different there...but we only need to look to Europe to see where things here may go in the future.....
  19. @Doc....you should never assume...LOL I think Don is still out at Whiteswan. Although I don't disagree with you that seniors/littluns' should be required to be licensed...I do think everyone is making more out of the importance of this user segment than we need to. Yes, if you look at the demographics...you are correct the average age of a LICENSED angler is increasing. But the fact remains....we have added 1 million people to this province since 1985...and in that same time frame we have lost 130,000 yearly licensees. Surely you don't expect me to believe that ALL those 1 million that came here now fall into the seniors/children category....if anything seniors typically LEAVE our province to head to the "wet" coast. Actually, I will try and find current demographics, but I suspect the average age in the province did not go up. BTW, senior licensing was approved to be further investigated at the previous RT...so...we are slowly getting there. My point is ; we need to focus on the bigger picture... For example...you can have a total user count....but if you read my previous post...that information (although important) in isolation, tells you NOTHING! Additionally....you can have all the info to your hearts content regarding the user side...but it doesn't do squat for you if you don't have any scientific/biological information on the status of the fishery. Getting user info is simple and relatively inexpensive...getting the government to throw dollars into scientifically analyzing the health and capabilities of each specific fishery in order to make any sort of realistic "management" decision will be the hardest part...especially in light of a declining user base. Regarding your last paragraph...I agree fully... Regarding the plan...I have two thoughts. 1) Keep slugging away on all fronts 2) But focus on the bigger picture...don't put all your energies into whether there should be things like 2 fish limit here and not there, whether seniors/children should pay for a license, or whether licenses should cost $3 more per year...etc,etc. I dare say there are much more critical issues affecting the viability of our fisheries resource in many areas other than recreational user impact. The deforestation of our east slopes, continual resource development and environmental factors (amongst many others) all have a larger impact on the quality of some fisheries than quibbling over the walleye tag costs... For example, just speak to Neil W about what's about to happen to the Muskeg R....how many people know about it and does anyone care...apparently not. One final thought on "management" and focus of energies; What I see happening is that we are treating the symptoms...NOT the cause. Symptoms are readily visible and relatively easy to treat...BUT, the problem NEVER goes away. It's like finding out you have to fill your gas tank up a lot more often lately...it just keeps emptying faster than normal. Treating the symptom is easy...just keep adding gas....BUT the root problem remains. Treating the cause is more difficult and in the short term more costly...you analyze the problem to find out you have a leak in your gas tank...then you need to repair the tank. The problem goes away. You need to look deeper folks...that's not to say give up on the little things...but, Hell, don't forget about the bigger issues. Great discussion....
  20. @Scratch and snowolf....you guys really should attend the round table sessions. You will get a good view of thoughts by the individuals that represent these groups. As for the subject in question....speak with Brian or Emmerson...they were both there when this matter was discussed. @Pauline; The numbers I quoted are for LICENSED anglers. Yes, there is no way to tell how many seniors, children, criminals (un-licensed anglers) or pelicans are fishing. Those "unkowns" were also fishing in the mid 80's as they are today. Regardless, my point was to illustrate that the user base is declining despite a doubling of our population. I assume your point was to show proponency towards licensing of seniors/children. If so, fine...but the current WIN card licensing system does NOTHING to manage the fisheries in this province. It does NOT tell us where the person fishes. It does NOT tell us what species the person targets. It does NOT tell us how often that person fishes. It does NOT tell us how successful that person is. It does NOT tell us how many fish that person kills. What it does tell us is the persons age, his address....and MOST important, his/her weight!!!! Obviously critical fisheries management tools!!!!! Although licensing of senior/children will perhaps more accurately reflect the total number of legitimate users....the current WIN information system gathers none of the info I have spelled out above.....which are far more important as a management tools. A final point regarding seniors/children....what folks should be pushing is for inclusion of child limits with that of the licensed adult.....ie NO more if I take 5 kids out, I can take 6 limits!!!! Oh, and by the way Scratch, snowolf....see what the AGFA thinks about that one......
  21. Ok...first a few points of clarification; 1)Total # of licensed anglers in Alberta has declined from a peak of just over 340,000 in the mid 80's to 212,000 in 2005. Another point to note here is that in that same time frame the population of Alberta increased by 1 Million people ( almost a 50% increase). In 1985, 14.3% of the population had a license....today that number is 6%. 2)As for increased enforcement...we have been fighting to get additional funds put towards this for years. If I recall, there are some monies allocated in that area this year. 3)Morph...if you see infractions...please use the RAP line....if they get enough complaints about specific lakes, they will make a point of patrolling more frequently. 4)Daves' post "Why shouldn't the angling opportunities, limits and methods represent all types of taxpaying anglers. At this time I believe those who want quality fisheries, rather than harvest fisheries are underrepresented." Regarding the first sentence...well in fact they are...and that is one of the balls F&W has to continually juggle. Regarding the second sentence....totally agree...but who is to blame?.....ALL OF YOU!. For your information, the make up of the last Round table consisted of about 70% AFGA members...and they are the ones who for the most part want harvest opportunities ( implementation of walleye tags is a direct result of that). So, who do you think the gov't listens to? 5)Regarding special regs lakes....I refer you to #4 above....the AFGA made it clear they are NOT in favour of special regs lakes. Furthermore F&W have said they would not support another C&R Ironside style lake. There are no easy answers to these situations....but I can say the following; A declining fishery user base does not bode well for the resource...as less and less licences are sold...the dept becomes less and less important for the gov't...that means less and less $ will flow into it. Folks here need to speak up and be heard...attend the meetings...show the gov't that you care...tell them how you want things to change. Think outside the box....don't just think trout...don't just think C&R...understand that there are many different types of resource users....think how changes affect them. Gov't moves at a glacial pace......we need to chip away slowly.....change takes time. Hopefully some of us will live long enough to see some of that change......
  22. King Salmon pretty well nailed it in his description... I used to fish it regularly years ago....decent fish but just not many of them. Then for some reason it just seemed to slow down to nothing...so I haven't bothered to go out there much anymore. I did stop there late this summer...didn't bother fishing...really bad algae bloom...and the interesting part is that even the baitfishers have stopped going there ...so, that tells you something. Judging by the height of the weeds on the berm, not many folks at all have been going there. One other thing...in addition to the sticklebacks...this pond had a massive population of HUGE snails...don't know if they're still there....
  23. Although I see that a representative from F&W attended the first meeting in GP, I hope that NNFC understand that they must abide by the new "tournament" fishing guidelines as spelled out by SRD. Furthermore, it will be interesting to see how they will be able to "work" within the "limit" guidelines.....It was my understanding that in the walleye tourneys this year even though a fish was "caught and released"...it was deemed to be "in possesion" by SRD. In other words if the lake limit is 2 (as an example)....the competitors will only be able to weigh/measure 2 fish in total per day....even if they are released! SRD has said:you caught the fish, it is in your possesion to weigh it....it counts in your possesion...what you do with it (even if you release it) does not change that. Don't know how those rules would work on a "catch and release" fishery as a fish that is entered into the competition is deemed to be in posession....so I guess technically it wouldn't be possible. Perhaps they will be able to get an exemption because as they say they are not removing the fish from the water. Anyway, these guys better hash it out with the higher ups at SRD before they get too far down the road with this.... With that being said, I will add my personal thoughts regarding tournament fishing events....I don't think they should be allowed in this province. I note these guys say they are a non-profit organization....and that was one of the criteria deemed to be necessary to allow these types of events in this province yet, I do not see any direct benefit from this event that would go back into OUR resource. Remember they will be using OUR resource....effectively taking the lakes out of commission for the event time frame. I don't think you'd want to be fishing those lakes while those events are on.... Do you want any group to send 50 or 60 flyfishers down to Stauffer for 3 or 4 days for a tournament?...what if those are the only 3 days YOU can get down to Stauffer in the year. Think about it....it can happen...and has already happened to some degree. Don't get me wrong...I think the conservation symposium is a great idea...but if they want to have a tournament do it on private stocked water.
  24. Hope you do better than we did yesterday....The two of us spent the morning upstream of the Highwood mouth....nothing. Spoke to 3 others there...no luck either. About 2 foot vis....expect it to be murky d/s of the Highwood as it's puking solid mud into the Bow. Spent the afternoon at Policemans...nothing. Did see 3 risers though. Only about 1 foot visibility. The only other guy fishing there had no luck either. Funny thing...didn't see anyone drifting all day...that says it right there. Hope you do better.....
  25. Interesting....Have heard the same story about the highway and railway in Jasper National park as it affects stream crossings. They know there is an impediment to fish passage, but they say it's too expensive to do anything about it. Pretty hypocritical to say the least...Parks want to revert back to the original fishery from stocking, yet they won't do anything to restore it's own damage to the original fishery!!!! About the Swan Hills...Don, are any of these crossings new?....I am sure new roads/culverts need to meet DFO/Environment criteria..... BTW the Swan Hills area is so bad, I can show you exposed pipelines right in the creeks...been there for years, don't know if they've been abandoned or not...but, nothing's been done.
×
×
  • Create New...