Leaderboard

When ever there is a hint of a need for closures of the Bow River and the foothill streams there always seems to be a way to deflect to other causes that impact the fish population. Unfortunately very few can be controlled under fishery management. Wastewater discharge will get cleaner, weed growth will continue to be almost nonexistent, water management policy will or will not impact the fish population, but will impact angling in the spring and early summer. Storm water discharge will increase as more concrete in laid down in Calgary. Whirling disease is here to stay but will it have an impact on the Bow trout population. Catch & Release and photo shoots are not perfect. Angling effort is increasing. and the trout population continues to decline. It seems there is only one solution that can be taken immediately to save the Bow River. Reduce angling effort! Catch & Release single barbless hook - no double or trebles. A conservation license to fish the Bow River and possibly all foothill zones. Seasonal closures - possibly going back to an open season of June 1 to Oct 30, but include the city reach on the river. An offset to these restrictions should be stocking lakes and reservoirs locally to those who want to fish year round an put fish on the fryer.

Fishteck, how exactly are you involved in fisheries management? The reason I ask is because of your comments on the “Artifishal” post where you mentioned you thought the crowd over-reacted with respect to the potential impact of fish farms on wild stocks, the cost of fish hatcheries to society, and rationalized fish farms as “ a commercial cost efficient food source”. The literal decimation of socially, culturally and economically valuable wild salmon and steelhead stocks, to the tune of millions of fish, in order maintain of cheap source of protein hardly speaks of the "enlightened" conservation ethic you seem to be promoting here. That made me take a closer look at what you’ve been saying here and in the related Bow river threads. I am paraphrasing so feel free to take me to task if I misquote, but you’ve effectively said that stocking the Bow to supplement declining stocks is off the table, changing industry practices is unfeasible, and the only practical way to preserve fish stocks is for one of the primary stake holders of the resource (anglers) to be excluded (through a combination of voluntary abstinence, by increasing the cost to access the resource, or with regulations limiting access). However, you are OK with increasing stocking and/or angling effort on other water bodies in the province. All of which will have the combined effect of reducing the recreational value of the Bow and the other streams of the east slopes, making them more susceptible to being further impacted by industry in the future. So who do you represent? Are you speaking on behalf of anglers or are you working to influence angler’s opinions on behalf of some other group?

The main change to the river from the flood was loss of mobile, midstream gravel bars. The high flow carried the gravel down to manmade collection points (flow restriction) above the weirs. Since the Bow is entirely dam controlled, no new gravel can enter the system from upstream to replenish the bars. The only source of gravel, other than the Highwood, is cannibalizing the banks. The river is permanently wider and shallower with a fixed, boulder streambed instead of a mobile gravel bed. This could result in more mud deposited in some areas.Bug habitat changed.