Harps

Hey Jeff, Who did you ask about the Carp? From what I know, you CAN NOT fish for them (it is signed stating that you can't fish for them too). The city spent alot of money putting them in the Lakes and they don't want them removed or harmed (like anything can harm a carp). I was also under the impression that they didn't want them taken and moved to other locations. But that was based on earlier conversations and looking at the signs last spring... maybe I'll take a look again tonight. For real carp fishing, the Missouri River has a large population in Great Falls. Cheers,

I think they can co-exist in many places, where the situation is right. Each just needs to find a niche. Unfortunately, there are many places where, in order to co-exist, one of the species has to experience a population decline (basic environmental carrying capacity). In one of my creeks that I've been fishing for over 20 year, I have seen the cutts (cuttbows) pretty much disappear. Maybe pure cutts would have survived better? I think the changes in the creek from road construction, and the changes to the beaver dams and the flooding all had an impact and the brookies were able to withstand better than the cutts. Without the brookies, would the cutts be doing better? ... Brook trout are invasive non-native when they aren't desired; They are introduced non-native when they are. It all depends on current fisheries objectives. Asian carp were brought here on purpose, as were starlings and rabbits to Austrailia and goats to Hawaii. Poor management decisions in the past shouldn't limit current actions.

Brook trout fry emerge from the gravel in early-mid spring. Cutthroat fry emerge in late spring to mid summer. There is not much growth in the cold winter months. Brookies also Brook trout 1) displace cutties, then 2) replace them in a western environment. Brookies displace cutts through competition (depleting resources) and preventing access (territorial behavior). Brookies also prey on cutts more readily (many experiments have shown increased predation on cutts due to the later emergence). And in some places introducing brook trout introduced disease from hatcheries and other waters. On top of that cutts may be more suceptable to man made changes to the ecosystem involving sediment transport to the streams... brookies can spawn on finer materials unlike cutthroat.

Read the best comment on CBC:

Thank you Don!

Sundance... there are underwater cameras. Dustin, There are many good examples on this board (and others) and they get pointed out. Of course, there isn't the conflict so less people view them (RileyS put it better than I would). Like posted before, check out ThisisFly and Catchmag for great fish photos and article. SexyloopsTv on youtube has some quick fish handling, and keeps fish in the water, the New FF is great for fish handling. Oh and fish handling aside... IL and HW were charged, not for fish handling but for poaching (fishing out of season, snagging, etc). Whether you handle fish rough or not, you'd better follow the law that is there to protect the fish.

The best pictures are of fish in and near their natural environment... Bass are tougher than trout in the sense that they live in warmer, less oxygen rich environments and can withstand longer periods out of the water (like Jack said). They still die due to angler mishandling, and there are many reports on panfish C&R from the US that indicate that. They are also suceptable to population harm when the fishing season is open while they are on their nests. Big bass pulled off nests= a lost generation. They are aggressive while defending their territory and are easily angled. BTW Fishing show hosts aren't shining examples of how to handle fish... or how to follow the regulations. Just looking at most FF mags will show you that we need more education on how to handle our resource... I read a good quote this morning that sums it up: "Take care of the Fish, and the Fishing will take care of itself." -Art Neumann, former TU president http://www.cbc.ca/news/story/1998/04/16/fish980416a.html (and a number of writeups from online:

Read old articles on Sexyloops and practice casting movements with a pencil. http://www.sexyloops.com

Fish Pro, I stick with Rogers for my personal phone... it gets better coverage in the S forestry area than my telus work phone does. All though my telus phone picks up a signal along 22 near Chain Lakes.

Mike, Do you think if parks implemented a broad angling based non-native removal program more people would fish? I'd like to see more hiking trails, liberal keep rates of brookies (mandatory ID tests for park licences), and lots of 'cook your own fish on the campfire' type campspots... That was one of the best things when growing up, camping near a creek with a fresh brookie on the fire... mmmm. As it stands, I doubt there is enough angling in the parks to have any impact on non-natives (especially since most anglers don't want to carry brook trout out while hiking, or throw fish on the bank near a camping spot... its just bad bear policy). I see great value in having vast spaces with little human access, but a selfish side of me wants to visit those places, just to test the fishing a little bit. It would give us a great benchmark in regards to managing other places... whether it is looking to create bigger fish or how to minimize impact, while providing excellent access. I've spent some time on the tundra alone, out of radio contact the only sign of humans the planes way overhead... when you get over your fear of the big grizzly that passed by, you really understand how insignificant you are, but also how important your thoughts are, and further- how important an individual is when it comes to influencing the gears of society. In that regard, I'm conflicted... parks with no trails, walking access only will get few visitors, but areas like that create the type of people that have huge impact to environmental polocy. On the other hand, easy access to "wilderness" will alow children (and families) to experience a small part of the awe associated with real wilderness. Although, in the past everybody experiencing a little bit of wilderness hasn't helped protect it.

I like reading these debates, despite what people may think about value. I think our opinions are influenced by what we read from all media, including internet forums. I also believe there is alot of valuable info available that can educate policy makers and regulators that may occasionally visit these forums. At the very least an intelligent person will look for peer reviewed science to support an opinion or debate it, based on what they've read here... In that regard, I'm still curious about peoples opinions of managing fishing in parks, and opinions for and against. If you have nothing of value to add, don't post; if somthing pisses you off here, leave or post a 'value-added' response (I hate policy wonk terms). So getting back on track... if we can quit the pissing match and stick to debate, I'd like to continue learning. ** I'm of the opinion that the fisheries in BNP and JNP are minor compared to the fisheries available in the surrounding area just outside of the parks (largely due to resource access). Limiting fisheries in the parks and impementing a policy to encourage native fish propogation would be fine by me, as I doubt it would impact many people's fishing. Am I wrong? Or should I go back to the rock I've been hiding under for the past few months... NEBC, I'm curious about this report (assumming it's relevent to jetboats and salmonids)... for those of us that aren't worthy, but may have access, how would I go about finding it? for those of you not familliar with the MK: http://www.fs.fed.us/rm/pubs/rmrs_p027/rmrs_p027_104_109.pdf This is all I have on jetboat (or any boat) access concerns in BC: http://www.llbc.leg.bc.ca/public/PubDocs/b...sReport(v6).pdf

University of Lethbridge represents... and I agree (amazingly with the majority of experts). If the experts say a toy is bad, I won't argue it being pulled off a shelf. Same with bad food and faulty cars. If the experts beleive in human affected climate change, why shouldn't I? You believe that ozone depleting CFC and acid rain causing sulfates were bad... why not human added greenhouse gas emissions, above what would be natural? And it's global climate change, not warmer weather in Calgary.

Jetboat impacts on salmonid eggs. Merry Xmas; Happy Holidays; or my favourite... Bah Humbug

I'd support the removal of many of the non-natives in the Nat'l Parks too... I also support some limitations to fishing if it is a biologically supported approach (no to fishing spawning fis, maybe limit wading while redds are in the gravel, etc) I also think it would be fine to close a creek for (no more than) a couple of years to help a re-introduced native population establish.... It's all about long term availablity (other wise knon as sustainability). BTW Neil, Great article on Riprap in the Alberta Outdoorsman.

I've noticed a huge improvement on my knees with a Serrapeptase treatment (2 months now) and it seems to have helped my sinuses also. Or it all could just be in my head?

Seniors should definately be required to have a licence. As it stands now there is no requirement for them to even get the regs book. Charge the Win card fee and 5-10 bucks a year for admin costs. Under 14 shouldn't have to pay, but only catch and release unless with somebody holding a licence. I hate to see a family of 5 walk away with 25 trout even though the 3 kids are under 7 years old. That's $60 in licences... now add 4 grandparents and 20 more trout for an extra $0 a year. How is that reasonable? 10 days of fishing the limit is 450 trout for that family unit at only $60 a year. And that can occur how many times over how many years at how many lakes/rivers in Alberta? No license, no keeping fish. period.

It's true... same with folks from Ontario and Canada and the US of A, etc. Votes, letters to MPs/MLAs, etc The public pushes the government. If you flush drugs down the toilet or use harmful substances that won't be taken out of the sewage, then you ARE part of a problem. I am part of a problem, I do my best to minimize it, but I have accepted that I have an impact. I live in Alberta... I am Alberta (unfortunately a verys small part of Alberta, but my riding is Liberal). If you live in Calgary, you have a say... you are Calgary. Max, It's good to know about those marshes. I think they are a great idea and should be standard at every end of pipe, from irrigation to stormwater to sewer. I think they do a good job at preventing temperature pollution, trapping nutrients and chemicals, and moderating flows to the river... plus they provide great habitat for bugs and stuff that trout eat! I don't really know enough about what Calgary does for the river...

Is this topic from a recent news event? Calgary Storm Water management There is alot of crap running into the river... much of it toxic. The city could have SWM ponds, catch basins, treatment wetlands, etc, but they cost money and that is not what Calgarians are complaining about. If you want better SWM talk to your alderman/council. For some reason folks like de-icer... allows people to drive faster? The word snow causes accidents in Calgary, so I'm not sure if it makes things safer. A better option would be to limit the speeds to under 50km and provide more mass transit. The crap in the sewage system is different from stormwater and the best way to stop that is to stop flushing pills down the drain and get rid of societies dependence on birth control drugs. Also stop buying (and using) products that have sodium larreth sulfates (and other hormone impacting chemicals) which might affect gender. If you live in Calgary... you are Calgary.

I love it! But I have to agree with Taco (to a point). We are mis-managing our fisheries and promoting the put and take mentality. The majority of the lakes should be managed for large fish and maximum recreational value, as opposed to protien sources. I have no issue with taking fish, but those fisheries should be limited to places that winterkill each year and/or town ponds. I really don't want to subsidize the unsustainable harvests at these lakes while I rarely fish them because I don't want a brace of 9 inchers. CHange the regs, change public preception, and enforce. We could have excellent fisheries, stillwaters like BC and Montana, instead we have marginal food lakes. And... F&W enforcement should be focused on flowing waters and none stocked waterbodies (not put and takes). Parks CO's (the guys at Bullshead) should focus on put and takes in/near parks. But back to the topic, ADC I believe that bigger signs are required at Police as I regularily get guys asking if the regs have changed there beacause they heard a rumor from somebody at the lake.

Taco, you were an outlaw long before the gun registry.

Every officer I know supports it.... Registration, I mean.

You'd be very hard pressed to find a coyote in Alberta that is 100lbs You'd have a tough time finding them over 50. SRD page on coyotes: http://srd.alberta.ca/BioDiversityStewards...ogs/Coyote.aspx

Only Coyote fur accepted! I won't deny I don't have a fur rimmed hood... why does that sound really bad?

The streamwatch officers get special status under the fisheries act allowng them to issue citations, where a uniform, check licenses, etc. They are not just college students, but trained enforcement staff employed by the province (paid by the streamwatch program). Anybody can collect info and send it to the RAP line. You need special status to check licenses. Collecting evidence requires a Peace Officer and a warrant.

It is a shame that that happened. Quite a rare occurrence though if I'm not mistaken. I still like coyotes and prefer there company to most people.