jstelfox

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news. Just got a call this evening from Jim Rennels, who was at Bear Pond today, and he reported seeing lots of dead fish along the shore. No sign of any live fish, so it appears that it has been a complete winterkill. Most of the fish appeared to be relatively fresh, suggesting that they died fairly recently, likely succumbing to the combined effects of the delayed ice-off and heavier-than-normal snow fall this winter. This is only the second time that Bear Pond has winterkilled since it was first stocked with Arctic grayling in 1985. The last winterkill occurred in 1995, so we have been lucky to get 13 years without any winterkill after it was restocked in 1997. I'm hopeful that the grayling in Big Iron Lake made it, since there was no sign of any dead fish in the 20% that was ice-free when I was there a couple of weeks ago to replace the creel survey box. In the meantime, Wedge Pond and Quarry Lake are your best bets for Arctic grayling fishing in the Calgary area. They have never winterkilled. Jim

Great shots Jay!! Looks like lotts of Bob's rainbows survived his unintentional 2005 stocking of this creek. Hopefully you didn't catch any Arctic char. If so, please give me a call. Jim

Some responses to the questions posed above. It is unlikely that a 50-cm maximum size limit would work as well as the proposed 50-cm minimum size limit, since fishing pressure on the Kananaskis Lakes is great enough that most of the cutthroat/rainbow trout would be harvested before they reached 50 cm. As a result, it is unlikely that a 50-cm maximum size limit would greatly improve catch rates or fish size. The proposed regulation is not strictly C&R, since it still allows anglers to harvest cutthroat/rainbow over 50 cm. All that is required is for harvest-oriented anglers to exercise some restraint for a few years, while the number and average size of fish increases in the lakes. In the mean time, anglers will be able to enjoy a fishery that improves as it develops into a QUALITY FISHERY, which is something that an increasing number of anglers have been requesting in recent years. For the area west of Calgary, Upper and Lower Kananaskis Lakes provide the best opportunity to create readily accessible QUALITY FISHERIES. While the proposed 50-cm minimum size limit won't protect as many cutthroat/rainbow trout spawners as would a 60-cm minimum size limit or total C&R regulation, it will still protect more spawners than the current regulations. If, in the future, enough anglers wish to have the minimum size limit increased to further increase the average size of fish and quality of the fishery, this is something that can be done then. Speaking from experience, and also based on feedback from a number of anglers, I know that large fish can taste just as good as small fish in the Kananaskis Lakes, provided that they aren't harvested just after spawning. Spawners tend to have soft, unappealing flesh for several weeks after they have spawned, until such time as they have fully recovered. Attached is a poster that shows how much the fishery has improved since we began stocking native cutthroat and bull trout in Upper Kananaskis Lake. Considering that bull and cutthroat trout were only stocked in UKL in 2001 and 2003, respectively, and that data from Lower Kananaskis Lake revealed that bull trout can live to be at least 20 years old and cutthroat/rainbow can live to be 11 years old, the sizes of fish in Upper Kananaskis Lake should increase considerably over the next decade. In 2011 we (with the assistance of Trout Unlimited staff) will be continuing the creel survey which was started this year, and will also be gillnetting UKL to gather information on the relative survival and growth of fish stocked at different sizes in 2009 and 2010. The data gathered will also enable us to see how much more the older bull and cutthroat trout have grown and whether the proportion of sport fish in the population has increased. Cheers, Jim UKL_Poster_2008.pdf

Uberfly is right......you need a licence to stock private ponds, and, as Sun and many others have pointed out on this board, huge problems have been created by the "bucket brigade" conducting illegal fish introductions. Alberta Agriculture has been responsible for issuing aquaculture licences since the late 1990s. Contrary to what you were told, the cost of the licence is really low, as indicated by this excerpt from Agriculture's website http://www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$departme...f/all/agdex3487 "A Recreational Fish Culture Licence allows the holder to keep cultured fish, as specified, in the water body named on the licence. This licence is intended for the recreational, non-commercial use of the applicant. Fish cannot be sold under the authority of this licence. Recreational Fish Culture licences are $10 per year or $50 for a five-year period. New applicants, or applicants who have allowed their licence to lapse for one year or more, will also be required to pay an additional $42.00 to have the water body inspected. The water body must be inspected to ensure it is situated on privately-owned land and isolated from other water to the point that stocking fish will not adversely affect the environment or native fish." Also copied below is some other key information from this website pertaining to the restricted area of the province. "What is the restricted area? There is one geographic area in Alberta where special conditions apply due to the sensitive nature of the surrounding natural fisheries. An area roughly described as the south-west quarter of the province is restricted to stocking Rainbow trout or triploid grass carp only. As seen in Figure 1, the boundary of the restricted area is irregular. If you are unsure as to the location of your water body in relation to this zone, please contact the licencing coordinator at 780-427-5083 for more information. Can I licence a pond on public land that I lease from the government? No, licences will not be issued for ponds located on public land. You can, however, receive a licence for a pond located on land that you lease if the land is privately owned. Can I move native fish, caught in other water bodies, to my pond? No, it is illegal to take, use or attempt to use live fish or fish eggs taken from public water for stocking a fish culture premise. Can I licence a pond that is owned jointly by me and my neighbour? Yes, but first your neighbour must sign the application form giving his/her consent to allow you to operate a fish culture facility. For more information, contact Janet Smalley at 780-427-5083." Jim

The post that you are looking for is on page 2 under the heading Arctic Grayling, fisheries update Jim

Don, The efforts that you and others have put in over many years to preserve and improve the quality of fisheries in Alberta are much appreciated by a lot of anglers. Similarly, I anticipate that at some point in the near future, anglers will be appreciative of the efforts made by those who took the time to send an e-mail expressing support for reducing the bag limit at put-and-take fisheries like Allen Bill Pond. However, I want to make one thing clear, and that is that the objective of reducing the bag limits at put-and-take fisheries like Allen Bill Pond is not to create "Quality" fisheries, but rather to improve the quality of the fishery by prolonging the period during which acceptable catch rates are provided. Regarding creating quality fisheries near Calgary, there are several that have been created by implementing regulation changes (e.g., Champion Lakes, Sparrow's Egg Lake, Rawson Lake, Rummel Lake, Smuts Lakes, Watridge Lake). Also, I received an e-mail yesterday from a member of this board inquiring about Cochrane Lake, which is located just west of Hwy 22 and north of Cochrane. This lake is relatively large and a portion of it was deepened by the developer before homes were built near it. If summer temperatures are not too high (e.g., <23 C) and adequate oxygen levels are present during the winter, or can be provided by aeration, then this might be an ideal candidate for developing into a Quality fishery. If any of you have information about Cochrane Lake, or whether there is public access to it, I would appreciate hearing from you. One of the things in your e-mail which I must take exception with is the following. If it is true that there are NO TROPHY LAKES IN ALBERTA, then what would you call the fishery in Lower Kananaskis Lake, where the mean size of bull trout caught in recent years has been almost 60 cm (see attached creel data summary) and over 20% of the cutthroat/rainbow trout caught are >50 cm? Regarding Round Table meetings (Rusty's post), we are planning to hold a Round Table meeting in Calgary this fall to obtain input from anglers and provide an opportunity to discuss proposed regulation changes. Cheers, Jim Stelfox Senior Fisheries Biologist, Southern Rockies Area Fish and Wildlife Division, Alberta Sustainable Resource Development Box 1420, Room 228, 2nd floor, Provincial Building Cochrane, Alberta, Canada T4C 1B4 Tel 403/851-2205, Fax 403/932-2158 Jim.Stelfox@gov.ab.ca Lower_Kananaskis_Lake_Creel_data.pdf

Sun, If we need to replenish the genetics in the future, that option is open to us. However, I don't anticipate that it will be necessary for a long time, since the Arctic grayling in Quarry Lake were established from stocking about 3000 grayling fry in 1997 and 2001, which originated from a spawn take on the Freeman River that involved several dozen adults. Therefore, there should be plenty of genetic diversity in the Arctic grayling in Quarry Lake, which are also successfully reproducing in Quarry Lake. Cheers, Jim

Here’s a short update for those of you interested in the Arctic grayling fisheries near Calgary. Last week we stocked Bear Pond, Big Iron Lake, Quarry Lake and Wedge Pond with just-hatched (1-cm long) Arctic grayling from the May 19 egg take at Quarry Lake. Since Big Iron Lake winterkilled during the 2005-06 winter, and the creel data indicates that the grayling stocked in 2006 did not survive the following winter, there is no point in fishing Big Iron Lake until 2010. By then, the grayling stocked this year should be in the 20 to 25 cm size range, provided that they overwinter. Bear Pond overwintered and there were lots of grayling rising when I stocked it. The creel data (attached) indicates that catch rates have been improving following the 2006 stocking. Because of reports that catch rates have been low in Wedge Pond and Quarry Lake, we increased their stocking rates. However, since we don’t have creel boxes at these lakes, it is not possible for us to monitor these fisheries as readily as at Bear Pond and Big Iron Lake, which have creel boxes. If some of you keep a fishing diary and would like to help us monitor the fisheries at Wedge Pond and Quarry Lake, I would really appreciate hearing from you. I can e-mail you a creel card template that you can fill out for each fishing trip. The resulting data on catch rates and size distribution will enable us to determine whether the stocking rates should be increased or decreased. By the way, the biggest grayling that we handled during the egg take at Quarry Lake had a fork length of 38 cm. Jim Stelfox Senior Fisheries Biologist, Southern Rockies Area Fish and Wildlife Division, Alberta Sustainable Resource Development Box 1420, Room 228, 2nd floor, Provincial Building Cochrane, Alberta, Canada T4C 1B4 Tel 403/851-2205, Fax 403/932-2158 Jim.Stelfox@gov.ab.ca Bear_Pond_Creel_data_summary.pdf

Good question. The reason why we don't just stock a few hundred bulls in the Elbow River is that we don't want to make some of the mistakes that were made in the past (e.g., stocking fish without regard for the potential impact that a different species or different genetic stock might have on the native stock in that waterbody). Because the bull trout in the Elbow River are genetically distinct from those in the Lower Kananaskis Lake/Smith-Dorrien Creek population -- which is the only bull trout population that we currently collect eggs from -- we cannot use the eggs collected from the bulls in Smith-Dorrien Creek to stock the Elbow River. If we were to stock bulls in the Elbow, we would have to obtain eggs from the bulls in the Elbow. This would not only be an expensive proposition considering the small number of bulls that we would be stocking in this relatively short section of river, it could also negatively impact the relatively small population of spawners and reduce the number of eggs that they deposit in the river. Finally, the adult bull trout we saved are much more valuable than a few juveniles, since they are so large that there are very few predators (other than man) that can eat them. In order to make up for the loss of even 5 adult bull trout, you would probably have had to stock at least 500 age-1 bull trout, considering the relatively low survival rate that would be expected of small bull trout in this river system. Part of the reason for the low survival of small bull trout in the Elbow River is the presence of non-native brook trout. Juvenile bull trout would have historically reared in seepage channels and small tributaries to the Elbow River. Unfortunately, these waters are now overrun with brook trout, which have been shown to outcompete juvenile bull trout. Stocking bull trout would also do nothing for the other native fish that we salvaged on Saturday (e.g., the 81 mountain whitefish), which are now in the river where they can spawn and hopefully increase in number. Not only will this mean more mountain whitefish for anglers to catch, it will also mean more mountain whitefish for bull trout to eat. A decline in mountain whitefish numbers in the Elbow River is likely one of the limiting factors for adult bull trout numbers in the Elbow River. This is part of the reason why the C&R regulations that are being implemented this year on the Elbow River between Hwy 22 and Canyon Creek apply not only to trout, but also to mountain whitefish.

Thanks to the efforts of over 23 volunteers who showed up on Saturday, we had a very successful day and were able to salvage a lot of native fish that would have otherwise died when Allen Bill Pond reopens to angling on June 16. In particular, I would like to thank the 7 staff from Matrix Solutions Inc., four of whom spent a lot of time snorkeling in dry suits -- including one not very dry suit, which wasn't a picnic (eh Jesse) considering that the water was only 8C -- to locate and help net fish. In addition, Brian Meagher of Trout Unlimited Canada not only delivered 16 volunteers, but also coffee and donuts, which were donated by Cindy at the Tim Horton's on 32 Ave and 12 St NE. In the morning, we caught seven fish by electrofishing along the shoreline, but anglers caught relatively few fish, although one little girl outfished all of the anglers combined by catching 6 cutthroat trout on Powerbait with her "Barbie" rod!! Unfortunately, she lost 5 of these fish before she could get them ashore and into one of our holding cages (damned barbless hook regulation). By early afternoon, it became apparent that we weren't going to save many fish unless we resorted to the more effective -- but potentially lethal -- technique of gillnetting. The gill net was towed out into the pond by canoe, snorkelers "herded" fish towards the net, then volunteers pulled the net back ashore and we picked the fish out of the net. Since the fish were only in the net for a few minutes, there were very few (only 3) mortalities and all of the mortalities were mountain whitefish. This process was repeated numerous times until we started to get relatively few fish in each pull. The following is a brief summary of how things went. In total, we captured 95 fish, with a combined weight of 30.4 kg, from Allen Bill Pond on Saturday. Most (97%) of the fish captured were native fish (8 bull trout, 3 cutthroat trout and 81 mountain whitefish, which we released into the Elbow River) and 3% were non-native fish (two brook trout and one brown trout). Based on the sizes of the bull trout captured, it appears that at least three, and perhaps five, of the bull trout captured were adults. Considering that there are likely only about 100 adult bull trout in the Elbow River below Elbow Falls, this means that we salvaged about 5% of the Elbow River's fluvial adult bull trout population from certain death. One of the bull trout we captured had a tag (#3029). This bull trout was also the largest bull trout we captured on Saturday, measuring 638 mm and weighing 2770 g. #3029 was probably about 13 years old, as it was first tagged on September 13, 2002, when it measured 464 mm and weighed 1030 g. TUC was involved with the initial capture and tagging of #3029, as Greg Eisler and seven anglers from the Quirk Creek project helped with the capture of BLTR that day. We also caught another very large bull trout on Saturday that was only 7 mm shorter than #3029, but it weighed 460 g less. The difference in weights was roughly equivalent to the weight of the large (~350 mm) mountain whitefish that I observed #3029 eating when I arrived this Saturday morning (what a thrill that was). The whitefish's tail was still visible in the mouth of #3029 when we sampled it prior to release (see attached photo that was provided courtesy of Erik Haag). Thanks again to all of the volunteers who made this such a successful project. Jim Stelfox Senior Fisheries Biologist, Southern Rockies Area Fish and Wildlife Division, Alberta Sustainable Resource Development Box 1420, Room 228, 2nd floor, Provincial Building Cochrane, Alberta, Canada T4C 1B4 Tel 403/851-2205, Fax 403/932-2158 Jim.Stelfox@gov.ab.ca

As many of you may be aware, we restored the outlet berm on Allen Bill Pond last November and will resume stocking it, with the first stocking occurrnig in mid June. Before the outlet berm was restored, bull trout and other native fish (e.g., cutthroat and mountain whitefish) were able to enter the pond from the Elbow River and many were killed by anglers who continued to fish in Allen Bill "Eddy" as if it were still a stocked fishery and harvest fish, regardless of species or size. Now that the outlet berm has been restored, some of these fish will be trapped in the pond. To prevent native fish from being killed when the pond reopens to angling on June 16, we plan to remove as many of them as possible before the pond is stocked and return them to the Elbow River. The primary focus will be on removing bull trout, because there are only about 100 adult bull trout left in the Elbow River below Elbow Falls. To remove native bull trout, we will use several divers in dry suits to locate the larger bulls and direct shore anglers where to cast to these fish. The snorkelers may also try angling for these fish with short rods, if they aren't readily caught by the shore anglers. This project is being conducted this Saturday, May 23, between 0900 and 1800 hours. At the start of the day, the emphasis will be on catching fish with artificial lures only (e.g., flies, spinners, spoons, jigs). However, as the day progresses, and if there are still many native fish to catch, we will resort to using bait with tight lines. Although this will increase the risk of hooking mortality, it will be of less consequence than the 100% hooking mortality rate that these fish would otherwise experience in the next few months, when the pond reopens to angling and the use of bait is permitted. If you would like to assist us with catching and relocating native fish from Allen Bill Pond, please give me a call or send me an e-mail. I anticipate that we can safely accommodate up to 40 anglers without endangering the safety of the snorkelers. At present, it appears that there is room for another 20 anglers and at least two more snorkelers with dry suits. Jim Stelfox Senior Fisheries Biologist, Southern Rockies Area Fish and Wildlife Division, Alberta Sustainable Resource Development Box 1420, Room 228, 2nd floor, Provincial Building Cochrane, Alberta, Canada T4C 1B4 Tel 403/851-2205, Fax 403/932-2158 Jim.Stelfox@gov.ab.ca

Gustaphson is right..........Allen Bill Pond did arise from the building of Hwy 66. It was created in 1982 when gravel was excavated from the Elbow River flood plain for construction of the highway. Fishpro...........Some people from Parks have already argued that when the 2005 flood breached the berm on Allen Bill Pond, it increased/enhanced the amount of habitat available for bull trout in the Elbow River, thus creating a net benefit. However, what it actually created is a 'sink,' since utilization of this habitat comes at a high price, with many bull trout paying with their lives. In essence, it is like arguing that the grain spilled along railway tracks in the mountains is a net benefit for grizzly bears because it provides them with a food source, when in fact it represents a net loss, given that so many bears pay a very high price — with their lives when they are hit by a train — for utilizing this food source. In reality, Allen Bill "Eddy" enhances the bull trout population in the Elbow like spilled grain along railway tracks enhances grizzly bear populations in the National Parks. If it were possible to solve the bull trout "poaching" problem in Allen Bill with increased enforcement, that would be great. However, the reality is that there are still numerous cases of illegal angling activity being observed and reported in Allen Bill by concerned anglers and Trout Unlimited staff. This is frustrating considering that Parks have indicated that it is an enforcement priority to patrol Allen Bill, that the office out of which the Parks staff work is located less than 1 km away from Allen Bill, and that there are more Parks staff available to patrol Allen Bill than there were Fish and Wildlife officers available to patrol the pond in 2005, before Parks was given sole responsiblity for enforcing the fishing regulations at Allen Bill. One of the other benefits of rebuilding the outlet berm and restoring the Allen Bill Pond fishery is that the considerable enforcement effort currently being expended to patrol Allen Bill "Eddy" could be redirected to increase patrols in areas where it is needed most (e.g., in the closed section of the Elbow River between Elbow Falls and Canyon Creek where bull trout spawn, and near the Little Elbow campground where bull trout are essentially the only fish species present). Jim Stelfox

Since the pond is too large to seine, and gillnetting would be very labour intensive and also result in high mortality, the most logical way to remove bull trout would be by angling. It wouldn't be possible to get all of the bull trout this way, but several divers in dry suits could locate some of the larger bulls and then either use rods that they had with them, or direct shore anglers to cast to these fish, so that the fish could then be caught and transferred to the Elbow River. When the berm has been built, and it is time to do this, we will certainly be soliciting any help that anglers/divers can provide. Jim

There are two reasons why we no longer stock Forgetmenot Pond: 1) Fish kills (not winterkills) were frequently reported shortly after the pond was stocked, so this is why stocking was discontinued after 1998. The cause of the fish kills is not known, but I suspect that it is probably related to the considerable amount of gas bubbles that you can readily observe rising to the surface of the pond. 2) There is substantial surface outflow from Forgetmenot Pond into the Elbow River, and therefore the potential exists for stocked rainbow trout to escape into the river. This poses a serious threat to the genetic integrity of the pure westslope cutthroat trout populations that are still present in Quirk and Prairie creeks. Placing screens on the outlet would reduce, but not eliminate, the potential for escapement of stocked fish, and would do nothing to resolve the fish kill problem. In contrast, there has never been a problem with fish kills in Allen Bill Pond. Furthremore, the stocking of rainbow trout in the pond will not threaten the genetic integrity of pure westslope cutthroat trout populations in this portion of the river, because there are already rainbow trout present below Elbow Falls and therefore the damage has already been done (the cream is in the coffee). Jim Stelfox