Harps

I used to think that most anglers cared; That more eyes means more calls to the RAP line; That people would pick-up their garbage. I don't believe that now. Piles of garbage, miss handled fish (that is an education issue- littering isn't), and pulling fish off redds have proven that. 40 comments and 1300 views of a fishing report show that people don't want to share your fishing experience- they want an easy spot. Finding a site on your own increases the value of that site to the user. Every angler that fishes there feels that it is their "secret" spot and they strive to keep it in good condition- a sense of ownership. Public resources that don't have that prideful, individual sense of ownership get abused. Tragedy of the Commons. Larger waters can handle the abuse (Missouri, Bow, Red Deer) to a certain extent. Smaller waters can't. There are some good examples in Montana right now- the Madison will now be specially regulated because of too much pressure on a very productive and heavily used river. Same happened to the Big Hole. The Oldman and Crow are not near as productive and the pressure would kill them (luckily we don't have the pressure). A single location on any of the small creeks will have fish completely wiped out without the users having a sense of ownership (higher ethics), greater than what is dictated by law (most of the little creeks have eggs in redds in June and July (Cutts still on redds in July) and then again in Aug/Sep (bulls) and October (brookies)). Luckily most of the folks that fish small streams for beautiful small fish aren't bragging about locations. I think it is good for an angler to "own" a water- that person will be a great steward of the resource. I also think that spots should be shared, but through contacts and fishing buddies- with codes of conduct around who you can bring and fishing without the invitee. I thought those codes were standard in fly-fishing, and they probably were before the internet (especially since many were keeping all fish and "your" creek might be wiped out by somebody else you shared with). So post pictures, brag about your fish if you need- but laud the secret location over everybody- be proud that you discovered it or finally convinced an old codger to take you there! Take ownership of your own secret stream (and know that 25% of the forum members may fish there also...).

I cringe every time I read a title labelled about a specific creek... but most of the time they don't mention access points or things like that. For the most part there is enough water, so there isn't a problem. But... Most folks are lazy and don't want to do the work for themselves... and that's fine. Taco posts tons of creek names, but 90% of the readers here aren't going to make the effort to explore each access they can find on a map for one that produces fish bigger than 6inches. They are going to go to the spot from FFC that was shown on the Livingstone with a big fish picture, or the spot on the Oldman that produced 17in fish (which is a big trout anywhere in the world except the Bow ). They will go to the easiest fishing possible. When you have something posted online like "Frenchman's Creek at the wooden bridge is fishing hot with green drakes right now", I bet you see people out there at the next available light. So when it comes to hotspotting... naming a launch where you started or saying you fished Oldman River tribs is fine. Telling water conditions of a river is fine. Naming an access point, flies, etc is a little overboard, unless you are privately helping somebody out (for example I'd give some pointers to someone over beer or through a PM- but I look at their past posts first as I'd hate to have some of my quieter fishing spots out on the forums).

Get a TU membership- you then get the Fly Fusion mag. If you want "how to's" go to the typical drugstore FF mags (Flyfisherman, Fly Fishing and Tying Journal). American Angler is also picking up its game and has good content. All of the above get old- stale content that is recycled in different forms every few years. I still buy them when I see an article that I'm interested in, but I don't have a subscription anymore. I have never missed an issue of Fly Fusion, but to be honest, I rarely read the whole thing as I don't find them relevant to local fishing nor cutting edge, nor creative enough. They do have good pictures though! If you want great writing and photos that are fresh, get the Drake and FlyFish Journal. These are the only two that I pay for a subscription for, but don't expect too much for techniques- and you get twitchy wishing you could go fishing every time you open one. Grays and Field & Stream also have good FF articles, but not enough to pay for a subscription.

Great post Hybridfive!! I'm waiting on 2 of the kits to be delivered to my place in Lethbridge. There are great possibilities in this world to do good with social media- I only hope that this can break through the Culture of Apathy and Entitlement that has become Western Society. We need change.

Short of the very few SLS employees in the pass, who benefits for this and how? And I'm seriously asking, I'd like some sort of cost breakdown- pro/con type of argument (like to have an informed opinion). Most of my family (Beaver Mines area) are on the fence. They've been told it will improve grazing access and reduce fire loads, but it will also increase OHV access which is the largest cause of fires and the biggest disturbance to grazing. I know many of the SLS guys and they will try to do a good job, but that is based on the best knowledge present... not the best scientific knowledge nor the precautionary approach which should be followed under such uncertain circumstances. This is a case of NIMBY but it is also more than that. Water from the Castle supplies the bulk of the water to the Oldman River. It provides for the ultimate fishing experiences in Alberta. The area has some of the best hunting, birding, some of the coolest rare plants, some of the most scenic viewscapes. It has a possibility of bringing in millions in tourism... which will be completely lost, a missed revenue op for all the local residents. But whatever... even if you question, you are typically labelled as a socialist pinko hippy that shouldn't use fuel or wear polyester clothes. There is no sustainable use-less view, only pro a Alberta industry view or a commie environmentalist view. But now I'm ranting... After this SLS, is moving their cut into the Porkies. There are some pretty sensitive streams in there... but a lot of areas that could use cleaning up.

To be fair and clear, the Atlas road is owned by SRD (it is on crown land). It was managed by Atlas Lumber and the management was taken over by SLS when they bought Atlas. Their (SLS) license says they HAVE to reclaim the road when done with the logging. SRD will not let them reclaim the road because of local recreational users and DFO will not let them take out the crossing structures and leave the banks to be destroyed by OHV use. SLS is stuck- damned if they do, damned if they don't. Why should SLS continue to be responsible and pay for a road that they don't own or use, and even more so, why should they be liable? That road is a mess (environmental-wise) and may will require enforcement action from regulators to fix it properly (or better yet, to remove it).

FOAM in Montana seems to do a good job. http://www.foam-montana.org/ The folks on the Mo can enjoy a day on the water or guide... The guide trips are on the books and numbers are on the boats so I'm sure if somebody had an issue the books could be looked at to get guiding times/income. It would be obvious if a guide floats everyday all summer but only records a couple trips. Plus guiding really is a small community and if an association was put together people would learn who is who pretty quick! There will be issues (look at the new proposed management plan on the Madison), but for the most part it seems that the system works great. It also allows river info to be disseminated out to the folks that are on the water. For rod day restrictions, look at the Big Hole and Beaverhead. There are days when guides aren't allowed to float with clients but they can do walk and wades. the guides I know down there use the time to float with their kids or friends. From a fisheries management perspective, I know a guide in S. Alberta who has whored out a ton of rivers and I have met American guides that have come up and fished where they were shown. Guys travelling from NZ mud snail and whirling disease rivers and guys leaving to Eastern USA with didymo filled boots. I know of some smaller waters that can be fished out pretty quick! And really from the Alberta public whats easier to do- register guides or impose fishing restrictions. Max has it right with random camping restrictions and opening more govt run campgrounds. Both would increase revenue to the AB Gov't and have a positive affect on the number of users in the system. Nobody will pay for fish habitat enhancements without an industry being forced or a higher value being placed on the fishery (maybe by having a guide association with income info?!?). Enforcement will not be increased without higher fisheries value. Fish and Habitat protection will not be increased (or even continued) without people standing up and saying they value a fishery and want it protected. I would suggest that you see less fisheries protection in the very near future because the fishery is seen as an impediment to development, rather than a valued resource itself. There will be no better time to speak up before it is gone.

Oh yeah... I'm all for a legit guide assn... more for regulated guiding! At least a guide assn could have a website with links to reputable guide outfits, plus the voice (associated with income and profit) would be much bigger than a two-bit fly fishing website...

Didn't read all of this yet... Alberta needs regulated guides. Period. See this thread for lots of talk on it: http://flyfishcalgary.com/board/index.php?...ulation+montana my opinion: From Montana Board of Outfitters There were some good ideas in this thread on licensing guides from last month Now I'll go back and read the comments...

I agree Don, $25 is cheap! But $25 for a BC resident to fish here is a slap in the face to Alberta taxpayers. That should go up at least to $50. Resident licences should go up, but I think penny pinching Albertan's won't accept more than a dollar or two increase, especially in these tough economic times. I really like the idea of a conservation licence (same price we pay now- C&R on flowing waters reduced catch on stocked waters) and a $10-20 extra if you want to keep fish (same regs as now). Plus maybe special stamps (ie Brook trout hunter, etc) for certain areas. And... small fee for seniors!

How many seniors pick up fishing regulation books if they don't need a licence? http://www.srd.alberta.ca/FishWildlife/Fis...parison2008.pdf Apparently Seniors in Alberta are poorer than those in most of Canada... I do like Manitoba's licence structure. And When you look at licence cost comparison we are close in residential licences, but there is room for some increases. The big thing is how obviously we undervalue fishery tourism from other provinces! I think that is the place where cost increases should go... How many non-Alberta Canadians fish in Alberta?? http://www.srd.alberta.ca/FishWildlife/Fis...rta-Feb2010.pdf Where else will the money come from???

Ouch BJ, somebody sleeping on the bench where you eat lunch? I don't recall any pro-occupy talk or even any anti-corporation blather. I asked some questions. It's your type of response that teaches folks that corporate O&G isn't accountable to anybody asking questions and doesn't give a rats ass about what Albertans think. vhawk12, I believe under Alberta legislation you can't stop a RoW from coming across your property. The best thing a landowner can do is get some improvements (new gates, better roads, etc) and to monitor the work and conditions of the sites. Part of the issue is your capitalist remark. The Federal and Provincial gov'ts subsidize the O&G industry. In a true capital market, there would be no subsidies. And on top of that, companies would have to start paying more for permitting (ie paying for the cost of a review under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act as undertaken by a number of federal agencies). We live and work in a social democracy... not a pure free market. Like it or not the elected gov't weighs the options (often poorly) and makes a decision about costs of operation, subsidies, taxes, royalties, immigration, and how many socks you can buy. This is supposed to be judged to see a benefit to all Canadians and /or our society. The numbers I put up were found by a really quick internet search... they all came from CAPP and the oil company websites- nothing inflammatory. I couldn't find out a true statement of how much money was made. I really am curious about the profits and expenditures of O&G production and exploration. I don't work for O&G but deal with the companies on the ground and at higher planning levels. A recent article in a paper stated that 45% of money spent in locally owned stores stays in the local economy while only 11% of money spent in chain stores. Those numbers are much less than I figured and I think it would be an interesting comparison to see where the money goes from "local O&G operations. This thread has been great and full of info (except for some obvious trash), but I still don't know what is real or not. Don, great questions and I'm learning a lot!

Can somebody tell me if I'm reading this right? http://www.capp.ca/library/statistics/hand...px#wkGDLnNxs3E1 Looking at CAPPs data: In Alberta O&G spent +$37,000 million in 2010, $3,500 in royalties, $5,800 in exploration, $15,600 in development and $12,100 in operations. ($10,000 Million increase from 2009 with only $300 mil increase in royalties paid?!?) Sales= $74,623,072,000,000 in 2010 a $10,000,000,000,000 increase in sales from 2009) Same data... that's $176,000 million paid in royalties to Alberta over 60 years ($702,000 mil spent total). In the same time over $1,200,000,000 million was the value of the producers sales. That's: $1,211,122,012,000,000 Revenue from 1947 to 2010 for $702,877,800,000 Spent (only $176,249,300,000 in Royalties). Oilsands spent $34,216,000,000 total with $3,747,000,000 in Royalties... Made???? Shell only made a $7.2 BILLION profit in the last quarter, (only 2x last year) and BP only made $4.9 BILLION, and Exxon only $10.F'n3 BILLION (not Alberta but whole companies). Where does the money go? This line is offensive to any Alberta landowner that has been trying to make a profit despite having O&G companies demand the right to put pipelines under every quarter section, and having to be evacuated due to sour gas leaks, and having now explosive well water, and etc, etc. Seems the standard original conservative values of Rights don't apply when a corporation wants to take them... right to property, right to clean water... and now they are discussing bringing a sales tax to Alberta?!? How is that fair when we still subsidize O&G? This makes my head spin...

I picked up the 12ft Yamame last spring and used it a couple times over the year. I had higher expectations, but each time I used it I found myself at a spot, wishing I could shoot line or wishing it was shorter. I often had issues with the rod and leader being too long for the task and had issues dapping in any breeze. I still have it and used it recently, it is fun and fish on it are great, but I think a light and short flyrod and reel is still a better tool for small streams (the tenkara rod excels in pocket water). My first experience with it: http://www.sexyloops.com/2011.shtml?0607

Thanks guys! The secret to growing fast is eating feedlot beef!!

Wish I had seen it... Did anybody copy it?

Talk to Dave Jensen on this forum or on his blog. He picked up Lyme Disease in Washington State this spring. http://flyfishalberta.blogspot.com/search/.../lyme%20disease Gotta get treated fast and hard to minimize impact! Info: http://www.canlyme.com/

Beaver ponds aren't considered Lakes and ponds, they inherit the regs of the flowing water that flows in or out of them. If the river flooded the pond or if the pond is formed from a tributary to a river or creek... stream regs apply! http://www.albertaregulations.ca/fishingre...neral-regs.html If you were in ES1: Likely, any bait use was poaching. Call it in.

I wonder why they're e-fishing?

Priceless!!!!!

TP has it all in his post! Great Answer, and the picture reminds me of Prudoe Bay (and everywhere in that godforsaken (beloved) dark and white landscape!) Too bad Columbia bought Baffin boots... they haven't had the same quality.

Check out this write up (complicated site navigation, but great info) http://www.rubicon-trail.com/4WD101/4x4.html

http://www.fsccanada.org/news/spraylakesawmills.htm SLS is up for FSC re-certification.

... I stand corrected on one point. Taco kills brookies.

Otters will eat in places that are packed with fish... they will target easy food first (suckers/ forage fish), then they will take trout they can get if it is worth the energy... then they will move on. The streams will be fine. Like Freestone said, it is part of the natural system. We don't kill rainbows and cutthroat and brookies and browns because they eat other trout. Kill the suckers, kill the cormorants, kill the pelicans, kill the ospreys, kill the beavers, kill the coyotes, kill the gophers, kill the wolves, kill the bears, kill the otters... we SUCK at managing nature! Oldschool management does not work, we are the problem, not them... How many human culls have you been on? The bigger issues are habitat issues and overuse and harvest. It is all about balance and we don't have the knowledge or budgets to even start to think that we can manage these systems. They won't wipe out all the trout, the same way they haven't wiped out the trout in all those other great fishing places and in all those trouty places of the past. We should be proud that we have stream systems in a good enough condition to support otters again!