DonAndersen

Clive, I was there during that storm. Tree limbs all over the campground. Fortunately, none through the trailer roof. Went home for 3 days - weather returned to normal and I went back for 2 more weeks. Don

Dr Bull. I'm out too. Trout to be caught, rods to be built and things need fixing before spring. Don

Guys, Is there any "refund" on Timmys' cups and those go.....am plastic water bottles. If not - why not. Don

It's Easter - you eat rabbit for easter. Yummy Don

Guys, We could debate this forever without ever accomplishing anything. Whoa there - been debating this for a week or more and a lot of folks have provided insight and ideas. So, I'm, going to look @ possible issues and others - - well....the debating society meets on Tuesday. And GB - beaten paths mean fishermen - grown in paths mean few fishermen. Mind you, there was 5 of us there today. Don

My apologies folks - should never rely on memory. ADC is right 133,000 it is for Police Outpost. Shoulda had a derby down there and invited 250.00 of our close friends to a fish fry. Sun... Pressure group are the only thing that slows the downward slide. We now have a bunch of lower/no-limit lakes & C&R waters through pressure groups. The evidence is clear. Pressure groups work! We also have a Quality Lake management policy only through the efforts of anglers that care. And Rusty, I recall when there were 7+ lb fish in Police, Dipping Vat, Beavius, Lees and on and on. Now, you might get one 2 lbs. Groceries or the lack of grits resulted in the lousy growth rate. No girts means skinny fish. As far as keeping an eye on things. F&W did a K factor on Struble in 1968 - we [me and a bunch of like-minded anglers] did another 39 years later. So much for F&W keeping an eye on things. I can send you the results if you like. K factor on Struble was cruddy. Bloom - Beaver lake and Muir lakes were several years ahead of Bullshead in reduced kill and size limits. If I recall correctly Beaver was stocked in 1999 and Muir in 2001 meaning the planning phase was about 2 years earlier. But now we have 2 C&R lakes in Central Alberta. Pressure helps. Or we can do like ADC and get things changed. Don

Guys/Gals, 1] Alberta uses a domestic strain of rainbow whereas BC uses a broader range of wild fish for their stocking program. 2] BC's broad range of trout allows fish managers to stock fish that are suited to the water quality 3] All Female trips are the top of the heap when it comes to quality fish. Alberta won't be using them. Costs too much. BC uses them all the time 4] Jacking is sexual maturity w/o sexual act. Think of them as steers. They look like spawners but don't spawn. Jacks generally die. 5] Stocking trips is pointless if a kill fishery is allowed. 6] The food resources in Police Outpost Lake may take 2>3 years to recover if the stocking #'s are decreased to 0 And lastly and most importantly, triploids may make the problem of over-stocking even worse. Rather than the fish dying @ 4>5 years, they last longer resulting in more fish chasing ever smaller amounts of food resources. Examples of this type of thing abound where aeration was placed in lakes that occasionally winter killed [ Police, Alford, Mitchell et al]. Winterkill resulted in allowing the food resources to recover and the fish size to increase. If the stocking numbers remained high after areaion, this resulted in more fish chasing ever diminishing food resources and the fish size shrank. The growth rate @ Police Outpost Lake will not increase dramatically until the 250,00 fish stocked last year die which will take 3 more years. Do not expect high growth rate of Bullshead. catch ya' Don

Mudflap, The pop bottles are full of ice and are packed with the BEXT samples in order to keep them cold and reduce the flashing. The beaver dams are now the responsibility of the Alberta Conservation Association - contact Thomas Winter @ 403-845-8366. Don

flyslinger, Although the Clearwater did flow into Stauffer, the flow was controlled by what could be passed by the culverts on Clear Creek. Although it was ugly, the flow @ the B for W bridge was less than I've seen during spring run-off. regards, Don

Guys/Gals, Here is some educational materials for your reading enjoyment. A couple of things that are interesting: 1] The male trips used in Alberta may "jack" and exhibit spawning chatacteristics. Jim Wagner says that Alberta fish don't Jack. 2[ Brian Chan, venerable Fish Bio. previously from Kamloop area, suggests that "jacking" is most apparent in very productive waters. 3] About 1/2 of all males that "jack" die @ age 2 Copied below are some educational materials: From the site below is copied: http://www.gofishbc.com/specstrains.htm Non-reproductive treatments In addition to the development of different strains, the FFSBC has gone one step further and developed special treatments for some of the strains to further enhance the angling experience while protecting wild populations through preventing potential genetic interactions. These treatments are triploidization and the creation of all-female stock. Such treatments increase the cost on a per-fish basis but the benefits can be substantial. Currently, the majority of lakes in BC are stocked with diploid (2N) rainbow trout. However, some treatment has been applied for releases into almost 40% of lakes to improve the fishery and minimize interactions with wild populations of fish (Table 1). Triploidization (3N) – Currently, the FFSBC induces triploidy through the application of hydrostatic pressure shocking or heated water to the eggs shortly after fertilization. This technique results in the retention of the second polar body normally extruded shortly after fertilization creating three sets of chromosomes instead of the usual two sets. The result is sterility in both males and females. This triploidization method can achieve 100% triploidy if the technique has been optimized for the species. The benefits of sterility include increased size due to the fact that energy usually diverted into reproductive development can go to somatic (body) growth, and the inability to reproduce or mate with other hatchery or wild individuals. Sterility is different depending on the sex of the fish. Female triploids are hormonally and functionally sterile 6 (i.e. no ovary development or behaviour changes). Male triploids are infertile but still produce hormones that cause changes associated with maturation including deterioration of flesh quality, early mortality and the development of testes and other secondary sex characteristics. In addition, they demonstrate “false” spawning behaviour, including migration and interactions with other fish on the spawning beds but an inability to reproduce. All-female (AF) – The creation of an all-female population of fish is labour-intensive. The FFSBC produces all-female populations of fish by crossing sex-reversed females with normal females. To create sex reversed females, normal fry are exposed to testosterone derivatives to halt ovary development and produce normal testes. These “masculinized” females remain genetically female (XX) but functionally male although the sperm must be expressed by hand as these fish do not develop a sperm duct. Once mature they are crossed with normal XX females to create all-female progeny for release. The benefits of all-female stock include slower maturation in females compared to males, and therefore more time available to the fishery, larger fish, and no male drop-out from the fishery associated with precocious maturation (or “jacking”) and high post-maturation mortality. In addition, the stocking of all-female progeny in the absence of males effectively creates a functionally non-reproductive population. All-female triploids (AF3N) – The production of AF3N fish for stocking derives the benefits of both processes. In addition, the double treatment ensures that the small percent of individuals that may be missed during the triploidization process are still unable to reproduce because all progeny are all females. In an email from Jim Wagner we get: Don: Currently Alberta is only using the Triploidization (3N) process. The fish culture program has examined the All-Female process and the managers are concerned about the amount of labour and space that this program would require. We intend to review it further once we have perfected the 3N process for all of Alberta's trout species and strains. Please contact me if you would like to discuss this further. Jim Wagner Provincial Fish Hatchery Specialist Edmonton, Alberta (780) 427-7959 Don: There is nothing in the information I have given you that is proprietary so you can use it. One point of clarification is that we are working on perfecting the 3N process for all of Alberta's DOMESTIC trout species and strains. We are not currently trying to triploid any native species (i.e. CTTR, BLTR or Athabasca RNTR). I would also caution you on referring to "jacking" rates in 3N males. BC uses natural trout populations and we do not know if the 3N process is increasing the rate of "jacking" over what occurs naturally. Alberta observes a very low incidence of "jacking" in its domestic brood stocks. Jim Wagner For further discussion on the why and wherefor's of trips on the site below we find: http://www.flybc.ca/forum/index.php?showtopic=8443 Hi Don, The issue of precocious male drop-out has been well studied. So to set the stage, precocious males are defined as males who sexually mature as they approach 2 years of age. In any population of salmonids there will be a percentage of males that are precocious, it is natures way of ensuring there will be some males to spawn with the females if the older, bigger males do not make it to the spawning grounds. What we have found in BC is that the rate of precociousness has a strong correlation with the productivity of the lake. In nutrient rich lakes such as Roche, Jacko, Tunkwa, Leighton, Dragon the incidence of precociousness can be as high as 75% or more. For example, if 10,000 yearling Pennask rainbows were stocked into a high TDS lake in the southern interior of BC, theoretically there would be 5,000 males and 5,000 females. Of the 5,000 males, 70% could become precocious, that means 3,500 of the 5,000 males could sexually mature at 2 and a very high percentage of those mature males will die from the maturation process. So, the number of fish making it past age 2 and entering the fishery as 2+, 3, 4 and 5 years is reduced. The elimination of precocious males or males in general does make it easier to control the overall population of trout in the lake. Remember we are talking about lakes where natural reproduction is not available because of being landlocked or having only seasonally flowing inlets or outlets. the research on precocious males led to the development of all females and then triploiding and triploid all females. Hope this helps you out, cheers, Brian And so ends your education. All trips are not equal. regards, Don

Tako, The electrofishers I talked to were not stupid at least as far as I could tell but they were ignorant. Definition of ignorant is: stupid refers to lack of ability while ignorant refers to lack of knowledge As far as consulting firms - heard stories - have no first hand knowledge. catch ya' Don

Granddaughter - son side - we raise outdoors people. Don

TroutSlayer, Since I was a boy, my family and I have targeted whitefish. Raised in Turner Valley, it was on the Sheep or Highwood, later when I was in Pincher, the Oldman and Waterton. Now I'm in Rocky, the fall>winter trips to the tailwater of the Red Deer for whitefish keep me barely sane. And I'm not alone. I don't think that I've ever been on the Red Deer w/o seeing @ least a couple of more guys with some days upwards of a dozen or so. The not so secret whitefish fraternity are out there. catch ya' Don

Mudflap, Thanks for your note. I've caught several thousands of samples over the years of working in gas production. AGAT sent me "kits" with the required sample bottles, custody transfer documents and instructions. Where I was really screwed up was the required herbicides + pesticide tests. The County Ag guys were a real help here + a number of folks that responded off forum. The HC's are fairly clear. AGAT couriers pickup their customer's samples @ 2:00 pm @ National Oilwell in town. The BETX is the only concern and I've got my water filled frozen pop bottles all ready to go. If you see anywhere something that I missed, please give me a shout. regards, Don

And it isn't just fishermen!! Recall one fall when fishing the Oldman below the damn. F&W were electroshocking the big bulls that migrate up river every fall to spawn and hauling them above the dam. Asked the young guy whether or not they were putting any whitefish in with the bulls. He looked @ me dumbfounded till I explained to the youngun that any farmer knows you can't grow cows on summerfallow. When I suggested about a 1/100 ratio of bulls to whitefish, he still didn't get it. So, tain't only fishermen who haven't a clue. catch ya' Don

Rickr, Watched the program. Saw how three previous Alberta Premiers looked at things. Realized that Peter Loughheed got it right and wished for Danny Williams, the premier of Newfoundland to move out here. That boy has balls. And rick, watch the show. Would give you an historical perspective of Alberta. Just wished Ft. MC. was located @ Canmore. Wonder how things might be different. Don

GB... Certainly I would like to have a yearly data set. Certainly I realize that it is only a snap shot in time. But - we got what we got! F&W DO NOT have the money to run the data sets every year. I thought there was trouble brewing about 8 years ago from the lack of bugs in Section #4. Seems like the data that we do have bears this out. I waited for the next population run & then 2 more years before the report was available. Confirms what I saw. Now, I could follow your suggestion, wait for somebody or me to fund 10 years of population data. Sure could!! And wait another 2>5 years after that for somebody to do something. Sure could!! And them that makes that 23 years from the time I first thought there might be a problem. And I thought the glaciers moved slowly. F&W manage within the resources available to them. Most of the time, it is by their seat of their pants or best guess or the moon is in the right phase. Most of the time they get it right. They don't have the resources and never will. If private citizens wish to undertake responsibility for what is essentially theirs, why O why would anyone get in their way. In the meeting last fall with F&W, they wished to remain as the studiers of Stauffer but didn't have the resources to do it. The yea old Catch 22. They wanted to have Dept of En. take water tests. Well, that was a bust. Stauffer is the inverse of "build it and they will come". Used to be lots of anglers there. Seen upwards of 12 vehicles @ access points. Not any longer. Wonder why? I guess the anglers are voting with their feet. As far as angler data sets, I've looked for them. Most anglers don't keep logs. And please read the comments below that I posted previously. No flood, drought or high temps - it's a spring creek - get it. "PS: A couple of things must born in mind is the work the has gone into the creek since the early 70's and was virtually completed by 2000. The big bounce in fish numbers occurred fro 1970>1985 when the exclusion fencing was done in all sections except for the top section in #1. Then they tapered off or fell. This seems counterintuitive. One would think that the numbers, as each part of the creek was rehabed would stay high or get higher. Didn't happen. Most curious. Further, unlike most streams, Stauffer rarely suffers any type of high water and flooding with the major source waters as springs. Sure, it's been high, but raging floods haven't happened. It's truly a benign environment as compared to other streams in Alberta. " Curiously, unlike most years, I haven't seen any early black stones yet or boatman in the quiet water. Still watching. To give you an idea how bad things are within F&W. A K Factor test was done in Struble Lake in 1968. A group of anglers did another in 2007. That's about 39 years between data sets and there would not have been one done in 2007 w/o anglers pushing for it. Ever wondered if a farmer did it that way. Tossed his cows in a field and 39 years later the neighbor finally looked @ the cows and gave the owner a report. Think I've about beat this to death. Give me a call when you have raised enough money for the data sets and I'll sit and watch and certainly make comment. Oh crap, I just realized. I'm 62 -by the time your data sets are done, decisions made and action plan developed, resources secured and anything accomplished - I'll be dead. regards, Don

Jonny5, I'll attempt to answer your questions. 1] I don't have the raw data. I could contact the writer and see if he'll release them. Let me know on this one. 2] I think your are looking @ sections 1>2 regarding brook numbers/biomass. What the data doesn't show is the $80.000 and 3 years of work that was spent through Barry Mitchell and my efforts stabilizing 6,000 tonnes of silt, rehabing about 3/4 mile of stream length in these section. If this work was not done, I'd think that the brook trout would have nearly disappeared. Prior to the work in section # 1, there were few trout, now there @ some at least. 3] The brown trout #'s in section 2 - 1985 @ 1300>2005 @ 400, section 3 - 1985 @ 500>2005 @ 200, section #4 1985 @ 900> 2005 @ 300 - overall the decrease is about 300%. During the same period of time, the fencing for nearly all upstream sections was completed and the habitat enhanced. 4] Section 4 is the one that fared the best in terms of habitat replacement/repair and has had exclusion fencing for many years. I used to fish that area a lot- hardly worth the effort now. Few bugs. The land and area by in large has not changed in many years. It's a mostly a cattle raising area. Sent you email via site regarding further testing & livers. PS: A couple of things must born in mind is the work the has gone into the creek since the early 70's and was virtually completed by 2000. The big bounce in fish numbers occurred fro 1970>1985 when the exclusion fencing was done in all sections except for the top section in #1. Then they tapered off or fell. This seems counterintuitive. One would think that the numbers, as each part of the creek was rehabed would stay high or get higher. Didn't happen. Most curious. Further, unlike most streams, Stauffer rarely suffers any type of high water and flooding with the major source waters as springs. Sure, it's been high, but raging floods haven't happened. It's truly a benign environment as compared to other streams in Alberta. regards, Don

Guys, Suggested to F&W the idea of doing a liver check. The idea skidded along and flopped down dead. But that begs a great question. I can kill fish. I have a license. Does anyone know someone that could do a test. I could possibly get a Fishery Research License from F&W to kill a fish for sampling. The season doesn't open till July for killing legally. And ricinus, I hope I find nothing. But that doesn't prove anything. Still might be there and takes unusual circumstances to liberate the chemicals. regards, Don

Tako, I realize that not taking a background test may not be the best method but I finally looked as the thing like a pregnancy test. I only cared if she was pregnant. The who did it and where it was done will have to be answered by Govt. We do have a finite budget for the tests and they are costly. catch ya' Don

For those that are interested in the tests. I originally planned to take a background series before snow melt and run-off and then realized I really didn't care. I only cared if any of the suspect chemicals were in evidence. I was going to take 3 samples starting in the pre-runoff period and @ 3 locations. The test were going to be done over a 5 month period. The fish/population population data suggest that if there is a problem, it is likely downstream of Carr Creek so three locations seemed a tad much. So I'll be taking the tests several hundred yards below the confluence of Carr and Stauffer after mixing is complete. So the testing regime is now planned for a series of 6>9 tests @ one location over the open water season starting next week. The chemicals selected for testings are agri-business and oil company related as both are in the area. This is not to say that either of them is @ fault but they could be the source. What must be born in mind is that the decrease in fish/invertebrate populations, as Clive rightly pointed out, could be anything including natural variance in populations. Do recall the Leopard Frog. Nobody that I'm aware off has ever figure out where they went and why. catch ya' Don

Clive, The pesticides are going to be combined into one test. Awaiting quote of the cost of doing the Sevin. It's unlikely to be there but has been used for grasshoppers + it seems persistent in the environment. Tried to involve Dept. of En. They tested the water downstream of the possible effected area about 10 miles [ BETX would have disappeared by then]. The tests they ran are mostly "domestic" in nature. They pointed out that doing BETX, VOC's + other tests were way too costly, we shouldn't point fingers @ any one industry and the decrease in fish #'s was related to decrease in habitat. So like Streamwatch - if the GOVT won't do their job, guess that leaves .....................................? catch ya' Don

GopherBoy, Thanx for contributing your normal fluff and not much else. Don

GopherBoy, Whoa up there cowboy. This is NOT my data set but a data set prepared by your and my fishing license $'s to monitor populations of the stream. While I realize they are limited, they are the best there is for this creek and most importantly, are nearly the best data set available for any stream in Alberta. Are far as not being valid, I'd suggest you take up that subject with the F&W Division. They set up the timing and do the work. And if you are really interested, how about you getting several million $'s together and do a data set each year for the streams in Alberta or better than that make sure that you vote in a Govt that cares enough to fund a better data set. And if think this is bad, you outta set the data sets for other streams. Some are 25+ years old. The data sets I DO have control over is my own fishing records. Unfortunately, they about match the data set provided by the ACA for F&W. And I already have funding for the water testing required. Please reread the third last sentence in the original posting. And lastly, through the above posting, a gentleman passed the request to another who provided the expertise required. catch ya' Don

Mudflap, There have been pike there since forever. Some very good ones. If I recall correctly, the pike season is open. They make decent eating. Don't think that they effect the population much although they certainly eat trout. I've seen one catch a trout that I spooked upstream. Wasn't a pretty sight. But that's nature. Sometimes you are the grub! PS - I was there Friday before the herd. Caught a few trout. catch ya' Don