DaveJensen

KF - the fish killing is an NZ way. If it weren't for foreign traffic on the waters, there'd be little concern of harvest. As it is, there's some underground movements to begin restrictions on certain waters, given the knowledge of fish movement and all. IMHO, the full film "Once in a Blue Moon" is very nice with excellent footage, but left the door too open on the topic for completion by another.

Great talk about rods. Now, better start another talk about lines. DT vs WF, stiff vs supple, reliability of product, etc. There are vast differences. Take a look at how each performs on different rods, how each lays out on the water, how your casting stroke impacts the line to how it lays out. I'd rather cast my old $75 Mitchell special fly rod with my chartreuse Cortland 4wt dt floating than my $800 Orvis Helios with any other fly line. Sounds lame but the line is that important to me. Just hoping to help further the hunt for you. Cheers from a rainy place in the world today.

For anyone who's read about it or seen the video, the whole NZ mouse thing, and wondered if it's as nuts as you read about... it is. We were on a river where mice are out 2 days ago. In 15 min we saw 8 - 10 mice scampering across the rocks before the rain hit. The fish in that river are tanks - they look like dolpins surfing in the river. If you ever do anything in your life, hit NZ during a mouse year. It's not just the beech forests and mice, either. If the beech mast hits, it comes with warm, gentler winters preceding, meaning almost all waters are in good shape and trout built like shermans. I'd post shots here but don't have good internet right now. Have posted a few on our blog, mind you. Simply awesome stuff. We picked the right winter to do an extended trip.

Ken ___ oops. Braincramp in typing That's why I have friends like Neil to correct me.

Just thought of this today, I meant my comments in a fun way, not any negative manner at all. I hope the tongue & cheek was taken lightly. Good job.

Good show. Glad you had so much fun. Saw this video last night about 45 min after it uploaded - was up most of the night working on something we're producing. As a point of clarification, the river's cutts are ws with some yc genetics mixed in due to the hatchery rearing/mixing station. Glad you flew with Ahlstrom. They are the only chopper co we've flown with for several years. For anyone reading this, use Ahlstrom and you won't worry about doors falling off or worse. That, plus the fare to fly in to the Ram is about 1/2 other local companies. The operation is simply night and day superior, always has been. But I have to say, you flew to a spot that's literally a 15 minute hike from where I park my vw jetta wagon. I know why (I could see the river vis change as you flew upstream), but like I told you on the tele, I could hike you in to where the helis land in about 2 hrs... in that case it was 15 min from my car. And watch that measuring, eh? $10 says I know the next video will be shot here (45 min from my car): Cheers

Wolfie, as the person who started the project, along with my friend Barry Mitchell about 8 years ago or so now, I wonder if you have looked objectively at the situation. You can ask why only for so long before you get to the point of exasperation - at which time you either quit wondering/worrying/lobbying, or take another approach. Your ideological approach was represented well for many years, 30 as Don says, until we gave up on it. In so many years of fishing, none of us were getting checked, nobody was seeing officers away from the most common accesses on the popular rivers. The idea Barry & I had was to make sure there was adequate signage to educate the angler as to the regulations, to protect the fishery and take away the angler excuse of not knowing them if/when checked. We then proceeded to hire officers through fundraising (asking o/g & forestry cos, and the public). It started off as 1 officer that had a sat phone to call the RAP line, working the BSR and RR exclusively. This person was a TUC employee and attempted further education by performing fish id tests and further verbal education to the watershed. Few people realize that the average angler is about 25% efficient on fish id tests. Streamwatch officers are essentially saving us from ourselves. From there, John Day in Nordegg and Kevin Stalker (head of enf for ES) grabbed on to the concept, realizing their budgets were never going to increase, and used the program to their advantage as well. Since then, it has expanded slightly, though nowhere near what we had hoped. While I ceased being involved due to a lack of clear direction, lack of guiding principles and direction (which Barry called me up last year to tell me to tell him I told him so - which I couldn't do to him), it is a good project, one that is finally coming round into what it should be. I personally still have issue with how funds are directed, the level of gov direction in the program, and what % of officer time is used for its original purpose, but it is far better to have that program in existence than to simply sit back on a forum and complain, or beat our collective heads against a wall trying to lobby a gov that simply has never shown interest. You know the definition of insanity. Over the wkd, at the guide licensing mtg, Ken Ambrock came out and told the group point blank that if it wasn't for the Streamwatch program this past year, there likely would have been little to no enforcement occurring on our ES waters last summer. Sobering. Streamwatch is a great project that needs our continued support. I'd really encourage you to not spend your time questioning the why, rather, please take the time and spend it on approaching your company for a donation to the auction, or get them to write a donation chq. It would be time better spent. The Alberta advantage is that we can do these kinds of things and have our gov listen and allow a small group like ours to be adopted and given full gov powers of authority. That's a huge step that doesn't happen everywhere. Hope that helps you out a little bit. Cheers

Ok, I lied, I'm leaving after I type this: FT - agree with you again, all points. Consider though, the US work permit issue will be as difficult to deal with, regardless of lic guides or not. Who does the checks, who gets the border crossing guard to care about a few ff guides (in the greater scheme)? Who gets the immigration officers out of the office to the take out? How does the officer prove anyone is guiding? And if there are only a dozen complaints a year called in to any gov offices, how do they justify it as a focal point, esp if only 1 or 2 are ultimately fined? Tough stuff. Is this enough justification for licensing guides across Alberta? I'm not disagreeing with lic, just pointing out there are too many loose ends that have no answers, for as open ended as an issue as immigration is, most issues wrapped in guide lic follow suit. Do we jump into licensing just because it seems like a good idea but we can't quantify, much less qualify, why?

FT - appreciate what you are saying and agree totally if that is how it is set up. The flipside? Where is the proof that this is an issue? Where are the tracking #s, who's done them, who will do them, etc? Where is the proof that it's a detriment to our industry? Again, with all things, do we base this on he said, she said, and he must be credible? Or do we actually get tracking of this? If 10 guides see a US boat on the water, is that 10 illegal guides or is that just 10 reports of the same boat? Where's the tracking system? To jump to licensing guides before we document what the issues are and prove they are in fact issues, is dicey. Ask Mike Holmes what happens when you build houses on shaky foundations. reh - and everyone - nothing we do is any different from what anyone else can already do, if not better and more successfully - or the opposite. Anyway, I've had enough air time - sorry! Off to a little spring creek to watch the fish. If Mike doesn't do the feedback from the mtg Sat, I'll come back next week.

Mike S, The issue with licensing, is why? I can go ahead and apply and get a BC angling guide license as an Albertan. I have one as I own Fortress Lake Retreat. I can guide a ton of water in BC that isn't part of the Classified waters. I can apply for rod days on CW. BC cannot restrict me from this process, as a Canadian, though I may not get many rod days on CW. Nor can an Alberta licensing system preclude a BC resident, nor a US one for that matter. So, the question, if any of this is about bad feelings due to the Elk watershed CW, is a simple licensing system is going to do anything to limit cross border guides? No. A US guide can apply for a work permit, any Canadian is legally entitled to work anywhere in the country, and both could simply apply for and get a guide lic in Ab. On the US guide front, that's a federal immigration issue and can't be part of this process as it would be far out of a province's juridictional boundaries to comment on who can't work in Alberta. So that can't be a reason for licensing. Where the BC system checked in to regulate things was the CW classification, which essentially locked in who could do what, where, within given watersheds. As everyone knows, we're light years from doing that here, but unless you do a system very much like that, there is no way to restrict who can guide anywhere in Alberta. As you are on the email distribution list from Keith, there is a bit of a mixed message. One msg is that we're just looking at the process of licensing and keeping it simple. Then there's another email that brings up guide standards, etc, which only sets the table for something beyond basic licensing. A review board, proficiency tests, etc. So, I come to the mtg tomorrow with the suspicion that this process is simply a way of trying to get a gov mandated guide association going, to introduce a lic system to set up 4 or 5 basic industry standards. Again, why? Where is documented proof that our industry is suffering due to bad guides or because we don't have logos and stickers? Where is the proof that shows because I have a sticker, insurance, cpr/fa, show up on an association website, have paid a $500 fee to the gov that I'll be that much better off for it? Don't tell me that because I'm licensed, have insurance, have a sticker on my boat... that I am now a professional guide. No, I'm licensed. That's it. I've already done all the other things, except give myself a sticker - does the mayfly on my minivan count? (speaking of guides with minivans). We've been in business a long time, have always had ins/cpr/fa, done an ok job most days, have a nice little website, always pay my taxes (a fed and prov issue anyway), am involved in many fisheries mgt realms, have my nice little business lic, etc. How is this process going to benefit me / others like me, or benefit the new start ups which already have equal opportunity? Worse, how is spending fisheries budget $ to get this done going to benefit the resource if everyone who legally applies for a guide license is going to get one anyway and guide wherever they want? And no, I'm not p/o'd or mad, not at all. I just tend to analyze things to death in my head. There truly is very little to suggest this is going to do anything, but seems to be a good idea, though nobody really knows why we'd start this process outside of it being a good idea, but what does it accomplish? On goes the circle. Cheers, see you tomorrow.

Neil, if you attended the initial AOAA meetings or the FOAA meetings leading up to the apparent apathetic guide showing at the FRT mtgs, you'd likely be a touch more educated as to what has been discussed. It seems that you have a history of doing what you are attempting to do here, throw darts in hopes one sticks, to ces out a conflict. It's funny to watch you through the years on forums, needling points and people, trying get a response, then when you get called out you ignore it and circle the other side of the wagon hoping the cowboy riding shotgun reacts. So it goes with you it seems. Some among us are honestly trying to figure out a way to make process work for the betterment of the resource users, in hopes that the end result is a best fit for the resource itself. There are many issues wrapped up in this one issue, each will have ramifications, and those involved need to address them as proactively as possible, to use that end vision to develop those arms if possible. If you can't see that perhaps take a step back a minute before you type anything else. Also, perhaps you can begin to support the process with progressive ideas? I haven't seen that angle from you yet. Cheers everyone. PS - the Crow fished so-so yesterday until 2 hrs before sunset then turned on in a big way, for me anyway. Boy, fishing sure is fun.

Folks, please consider: if the licensing goes so far as to limit the cross border use of guides and follows rod allocation, then you are at the point of requiring all waters in the province upon which guiding occurs to have watershed management plans, fisheries management plans, up to date biology, public reviews, etc. I'm surprised more don't see this, don't understand how much $ outside of current budgets this kind of work costs. The required 5 yr rotation of the new RDR FMP costs are quite high once the biology and public review processes are done, which is why I've had such a bugger of a time nailing Vance down to get the RDR FMP process going the past several years - there simply isn't the staff or budgets to get work done for the RDR. So what of the Ram, Prairie, Raven, etc, etc, etc all the way down the ES? I don't think that people realize the true cost of licensing guides, rod allocations (if it ever goes that far), etc. I would encourage everyone to truly examine the ramifications before this kind of effort begins. While the people of Alberta will never get value from guides, the flipside is that if guides were licensed with rod allocations, the biology would have to be as good as it ever has been to warrant the rod day use, and that would be an incredible place for fisheries mgt to be. Right now, as it pertains to trout streams, a low % of waters would have the proper bio data set to set rod day allocations. And how do you handle that? Do you say no guiding on all waters with no data set? Or do you carte blanche say everyone is grandfathered in on all waters and "scientifically" fudge the #s? Nobody can put any kind of estimate on budgets, much less critique right/wrong as there is no direction as to how this is going to unfold. The $300K was tossed out as it could be very realistic. It might be less than $50K/yr. It could be much more than $300k if rod day allocations are included. As an Ab angler, I'm chewing the fat on allocations only if it means the quality bio data was required, and helps define things like identifying waters guides can and cannot operate on based on productivity vs use. Those kinds of spin off benefits to the Ab angler are important, and are an acceptable spin off impact for the $ required to carry out guide licensing. The bigger, cross impacting, long term picture is what's important, and has been my point in this all along. Those that simply read my text and don't see the bigger picture in what I type are missing my point. Neil certainly seems to have missed it. Bottom line: depending on how this unfolds, it could really be expensive, and my point all along will be that there has to be more benefit to Albertans for the $ coming out of fisheries budgets than to just say guides are licensed. Spending $ to satisfy a turf war with no end benefit to Alberta anglers is insanity. Meanwhile, anyone worrying about the fish in all of this?

This meeting is a follow up to the last FRT meeting which developed a sub committee on this issue, to determine if there is need/desire for guide licensing. If you feel strongly one way or another or feel strongly to be involved, this is the mtg that will determine the next step, if there is to be one. Email Keith Rae to come, though this meeting is by invitation as it is intended to be a sub committee mtg to determine if there is merit to advance. Every guide, everyone involved in the fly fishing industry, should be at this meeting. To reiterate, the $300K/yr was a # I picked out of my head that was realistic true/real cost, given officer time allocations, vehicle/court/office costs, administration and accounting time, setting up and performing the efficiency tests, setting up ethics panels/review boards, etc, etc, pending how deep this goes. My fear here is that there will be a mismatch in our industry, given how small the guiding industry is in Alberta. This is not a US state with all sorts of big lodges, dozens of guides, and the traffic US waters get, nor is it BC that has a much larger usage of its fisheries (tidal/nt/classified waters, etc) that are the driving support $ to the program. Many of the shops cross-utilize many of the same guides on the Bow, for example. What troubles me is that if the people of Alberta want guides licensed (I believe rightfully so), then who pays for it? Why would guides not be expected to pay for it all? But, given the $ at work it is almost impossible for that to happen - that kind of $ just isn't going to come from a few guides that make $10 to 40K a year. So where does that leave us? The last thing I see as valuable, given how touchy the guide issue is (see posts on various forums), is guides seeking out licensing then turning around telling Ab anglers that there is little end result benefit to the fisheries and - oh, by the way - the program is taking $ from fisheries budgets. And that is just one issue. Guides need a voice and need to be organized, etc. However, guides are lumped in the same as commercial fishermen on the fisheries allocation for Alberta - dead last in the prioritization. That's something for everyone to consider. How does that matter? If pressure gets too high on a sensitive trout water and recreational use suffers due to guide use, given the fishery allocation, guess who's first off the bus? Licensing guarantees this as it clearly identifies the users and the rules. Everyone needs to realize the true end results of licensing. I personally have strong opinions that are very much on the side of the fish and recreational fishing, but I'll save those for myself presently. There are many great points in these posts and I'll be sure to raise them at the meeting. Thus far, from posts here, summated: Should guides be allowed to operate anywhere and everywhere, on all waters, or should there be no-guide waters? How does simply licensing guides provide added value to the customer? Licensing has nothing to do with professionalism. Simply gaining a license, FA/CPR, and insurance means nothing to the customer in terms of performance, it means the guide's asses are covered. Will licensed guides have more political clout than the average angler? If this process is for professional guides, then what are the parameters that define "professional"? If there is a board, a panel, proficiency test, watershed tests, etc, how will these operate and who pays for this? Can we keep non AB guides off our waters? (Federal issue and extremely hard to regulate) Who will do the checks? Who searches the internet to see who is guiding? Who goes on the water to investigate who is/isn't guiding? How much $ does this cost? Who pays? If COs that are already stretched to be on the water are to do the guide license checks, then who will pick up the slack for lost fisheries enforcement? Will there be a requirement of licensed guides to inspect clients' gear for invasive spp? If guides were licensed and something happened to the resource, are we going to pay millions to buy back their licenses as is the case of commercial fishing? Who will need a license? Just guides or should it not extend to shops, lodge owners, heli companies for transporting anglers (as in BC), ff schools, b&bs, shuttle companies for providing anglers a service? If you provide direct services to fish waters, should you not need to be licensed? Will there be a limit to the # of guide days? Guides are small businesses and should have to pay similar taxes, licenses, etc as a small business. What panel or process will complaints be handled through? This assumes there is a professional standard and proficiency tests, which falls under professional guides. We're not at that level, we're talking licensing only. How will guides be publicly identified (stickers, website, etc)? If there is anything else, please add it.

There is to be an angling guide licensing mtg to discover whether there is interest enough to warrant licensing the angling guides in the province. "Ladies and Gents, On behalf of Keith Rae, I am sending you the attached draft agenda and a compilation of comments for your information and review before the meeting on Saturday, October 24, 2009 at Beacon Heights Community Hall, Edmonton. If you have any questions or concerns or wish to advise of your attendance, please contact Keith directly." keith@gethookedfishing.com It would also be interesting to read posts from: - guides who won't be attending, either in support or not in support of licensing. - fishermen who are/not in support of licensing, and their reasons. - people who have any ideas as to how the licensing program will be funded and functions performed. With a likely true cost of several hundred thousand dollars annually and what will likely result in only a few dozen companies (with ind guides rolling under larger rather than pay their own fees), the math doesn't add up. If anyone has any ideas, please post (and no, I'm not ignorant as to the likely reactions to such a leading question but someone has to be realistic and ask the dummy questions). Do anglers want $300K +/- taken annually from fisheries budgets to have a licensed guide program (Ipicked a # but it will cost something substantial)? Replies? Cheers & TIA

Have had several folks that have gone. They all say the same thing that Brian touched on regarding the fishing. It is that good. Caveat: The key thing to note is the travel arrangements changed last year which precluded a few of our guests from going. It used to be that you could fly Alaskan up the coast and catch a connector to the Russian airport all things north fly out of. That was changed and now you have to head way west of there, layover in some Asian country, then catch a connector before laying over to catch a connector, then heli in to the river camp. The deal as of this past year and likely next year as well is 2 1/2 days of travel either side. The other factor is to consider that even when you arrive, it is again a heli connection - if there is weather and you are group 4 of 6 groups flying to the 3 or 4 rivers and the heli gets stuck in at one outpost due to weather, you sit and wait for it to get back before you fly out. One fellow this year told me he spent 5 days actually fishing of what protracted to be a 14 day trip, originally booked as a 9 day trip. His thought was not to go back until the connector directly from NA to the northern Russian hub (sorry, can't recall the town name) is reconnected, which may/not happen. The loss of that apparently shut a few companies down due to connection/travel time. Worth investigating further as the logistics could get $. Hope that helps.

Nice shots. Just got a new monitor today and your shots popped out well. The pool near that boulder in the 2nd last pic in the 2nd set is a doozie. Head back in late Sept and you'll find a couple - few dozen fish. Really nice water. Doesn't look as good as it really is.

Good for you getting into the sport. As BBT touched on, the gas plant area can be good. In fact, what I would do is float the river if you have a canoe or small boat. The key to the Bow in that reach is to time the fishing to the dam releases. I'm not down on the water as others are, though have never had an amazing experience on it, but it is very nice water and has some good fishing. The key, observe the dam release times, realize that it takes time for fluxes to flush through, and make a point of being on the water when things are low and weather is in your favor (ie, a cloudy day with any kind of hatch while the levels are down). Also keep in mind you aren't too far from the RDR drainage - FallenTimber, Dogpound, Little Red, and tribs, as well as the whole K Country and some decent fishing in the Upper Bow near Canmore. Add in that an hour or so away is the Livingstone, the Highwood and Sheep, and you have a ton of quite good trout water close at hand, without having to fight Calgary traffic to get out. Have fun.

Let me put it this way, I have a 3 part, full feature article series starting next issue of the Canadian Fly Fisher Magazine, titled "So, you want to be a fly fishing guide?" I could write a book about the subject, and there's no shortage of stories to be told. It takes a look at the psychology of, the economics of, and the guide-client relationship (aka communicating expectations). Hopefully it will be received in the light I wrote it. It was a risk writing it, as there are some out there that would love to bury a guy for stepping out with this kind of piece. I would encourage anyone who has ever thought about embarking on any kind of a guide career to seriously consider some of the points I mention before jumping in. For those that don't, it's a break even on life endeavor, at best. If I could, the lead to the series: "I sit in front of my computer, my mind jumping from thought to thought like a pinball. I could write a book on the subject, how can I condense my thoughts to words that reflect the true essence of my world? Every day I am on the water with a guest is a story. Every off season spent marketing our company to garner bookings leads to a self fulfilling tail spin of keeping us doing what we do. It’s a life that gives you all you can take but takes more from you than most people can handle, which is why so few of us survive even 5 years in this business. There are days where I stand on top of the world in pride that I’ve accomplished a great deal, coming from nothing and growing into success in a difficult industry to do so. There are days that I feel so insignificant, that my contribution to society is passed over with so few recognizing it. After 13 years of guiding fly fishing, there are no more answers to either extreme than the first day I shook a customer’s hand." Hope that provides some perspective.

"There are reason's the best casters in the world don't use hundred dollar rods.... " As an fyi, many of the US tournament distance casters use TFO rods. If you've been to a few events down in the USA, you've seen a lot of "cheap" rods used by a lot of these folks. Just before you get swayed to go that direction, the flip side is that very few of these, when interviewed by <I forget>, actually used these rods to fish with due to preferences. It was in a magazine website article a year or two ago. Hope that helps both sides.

Thanks Al. I had heard varying reports through the summer and into the fall from a few different folks and was curious what the final outcome of specific meetings were. That sounds like a pretty good set up - one that would allow this to work well, considering last spring it was quoted as considerably higher for TU CAB. Hopefully this is a universal % for all chapters and fundraising sources as it's an excellent program. An across the board set of guiding principles and values has been needed to deal with such issues and several others from day 1 and hopefully they are being dealt with now. I know I haven't been directly involved for 3 years now but I guess when you've been a sounding board behind the scenes for quite some time you hope for the best outcome. Thanks for the update and have a great Christmas.

ADC - Could you specify as to whether 100% of the raised funds will go to the Streamwatch program or is TUC now taking 25 or 50% of the raised funds as per what I am hearing? This wasn't what Barry & I had hoped for when he & I started Stramwatch 5 or 6 years ago now but it looks like a positive step. I am curious as to what the final decision was on this as it now pertains to a province wide org, as a subsidiary of TUC? Barry & I didn't get around to this when we spoke this week. Thanks for any info.

I'm afraid that our friend Mr Andersen has again drifted the Chernobyl across a pool, and it appears to be the wrong pool. Clearly the right bait to get a rise, mind you. To clarify, the provincial level FRT was originally intended to be a bit of a higher level meeting with attendees from various lobby groups with a few members at large who were specifically, personally invited for input on specific issues. I have not attended these, though have been asked to attend I have not because I am more interested in the regional level meetings - on one and trying to get another going. The Regional level meetings, of which there is currently only one region doing this (more in a second), are far more open door minded. The Red Deer Region FRT meetings cover quite an area and a broad spectrum of fisheries - warm and cold. The concept drafted by bio Vance Buchwold is to host an annual meeting that addresses fisheries issues in our region, and holds presentations of fisheries work as well as discussions of the work and items of inportance to attendees. The regional meeting puts forth suggestions to changes for that region, to which the provincial level FRT is supposed to look at in its meetings and either adopt, throw out, or park. Because there is only one region doing this at present, it's difficult to follow procedure. Now, I have talked to Dave Christiansen and Steve Herman about getting a SES FRT mtg going for our ES trout fisheries and Dave maintains that this is likely forthcoming. The same format and concept will likely apply. What I would suggest is that the folks from the Calgary area contact their local bio for their region and say, the guys in the Red Deer Region have theirs, the SES region is likely to get their regional level meetings, can we set something like this up for the Calgary region? If this could happen, then we would get a better procedural system of having the open door regional meetings across the province where Joe and Jonny and the Jill's of the world can be involved in the F Mgt process, while the provincial level - that is repped by the lobby and interest groups, as well as political reps and bio reps all have their say - as those are the three bodies that impact regulations change in this province. Frankly, the information sharing and ideas that come out of these kinds of meetings are very good. The bee in my bonnet right now is getting the RDR F Mgt Plan back into gear, to reopen it and to implement whatever changes come from the process of public, political, and biological input. The whitefish #s are way down, walleye way up, browns hit and miss, and pike sporadic. I have a commitment from Vance to look at this and start process come Dec - Jan, so hopefully this will occur. This is the kind of thing that happens on the Regional level, and I'd encourage folks to try to get their bios to open the door to their own regional meeting. A F Mgt plan on given watersheds are important, a useful tool that could incorporate input from streamwatch, tu, etc. An Oldman River F Mgt Plan likely exists, and this regional level FRT discussions would be exactly where input would be garnered, and regular folks like us can get involved. So, give your local bios (biologist, btw) and see what you can get started. It's all really interesting stuff.

Hello. Thanks to this forum for the opportunity to reply to a few points. As I just returned from Fortress Lake a few hours ago, through the incredible late night lightning storm down QE#2, dropping a tranny or transfer case and going 60kmh in the process from Ponoka into Red Deer, I can assure you that no posts came from myself, Amelia, Byron, Kevin, Bob, Karen, Kate, and likely not Jaz. I hope I don't have to scan my plane reciept to prove my word. I certainly read forums once every few weeks or month now but have little time to follow up nor get too involved, so post very little out of respect of others on that. Apologies if I cannot reply to follow up posts as I'm on the Ram several days prior to returning to Fortress for an extended period. I have never posted under "stonefly" here and am now only found under my actual name when posting. Firewood at the campsites. At Fortress Creek there was actually still some wood at the campsite tucked under the plastic, though little as private float planes had been at the site camping the days prior your visit. We check the sites weekly as required - it was a matter of your timing on that. We're sorry for you that the timing was such. Regarding the splitting axe - you would be amazed at how many of these we replace each June with the private float planes using that site. They assume it left behind by another float plane and take it home with them, leaving hikers literally out in the cold. Note that there are only a few log cookies per week as has been the case for years to reduce over use. Our conversation: note that I did point a few things out and ensured all was well with your group, the conversation was good - like I'd ever turn a fishing conversation down. I trust the point of the blog post was taken positively as intended. The private R2 helicopters that flew down the lake - I had just sent guests and staff out on the two flights (which occur on the two BC Parks approved flight days in our PUP + wildcard days where needed) and was alone working for a few days, talking on the sat phone to Amelia as they buzzed over. Amelia can quote me on what I said about that. They had intended on landing at the public, non reserved campsite but saw you there after banking from the opposite direction. They could have camped beside you as they were completely on their own. They remained so. The boat rentals are no longer - the true value of a boat motor/boat in that location includes the original flight in, then the flight out for repair, plus lost water days in the interim, and more importantly - plus any insurance/legal issues that arise from rentals at such a location with well/poorly educated boaters. We trust people appreciate the ramifications and our decision to cease rentals of what quickly become company liabilities and losses. Regarding the elitist claim "private, trophy catch & release brook trout fly fishing in the stunning Canadian Rockies." The term private refers to our accommodations which are privately held and are withdrawn from observation as defined - it's a factual word. The remainder of the sentence is opinion that requires research to verify whether it can be substantiated to any one individual's standard. The sentence certainly reflects what people who visit Hamber Park through us or on their own merit have to say. Unfortunately I don't have the time to discuss the social issues of such an operation in this location presently. Regarding our company profile and structure, we invite anyone to investigate the cost benefit ratio of such an operation in such a location. Given the temporary status of all facilities, the Park's remote nature, very low use, and its high ecological focus and integrity, we don't believe that there needs be any negativity towards BC Parks for their approval of this PUP and its operations, given its benefits and history. It is quite remarkable. Our operations remain consistent with the vision and park plan, which we believe we've improved upon in our AOP which includes a reduction in flight days from daily flights <sometimes multiple flights each day> a few years back, to the set flight day limitations we have now through one permitted air carrier. Have a wonderful time if you visit Hamber Provincial Park by foot or air, with us or privately, and we encourage everyone to educate themselves on allowable practices within the park by visiting their website or contacting BC Parks' staff, which will likely be more an asset than other jurisdictions. Happy exploring. Dave Jensen Fortress Lake Retreat & Fly Fish Alberta