Bigtoad

Who could sleep with the Bow so close and caddis fluttering about??? Best to fish and save the sleeping for later : )

Dry- parachute adams Wet fly- caddis emerger. Nymph- prince nymph Terrestrial- Chernobyl Streamer- black buggar.

Done baby! And might I say, about freaking time!!!

Thanks for the input, and I'm guessing blanket changes would be very difficult and there might be more success just picking a couple of lakes to focus on. However, what I'm suggesting isn't a massive undertaking really. 1. take what are already designated as "quality" and if they aren't already C&R, change to that, or one under 45cm. Even if they didn't do a blanket change but added a couple more as "experiments" then that would still be great. 2. as for the aerated lakes, I'm not suggesting that all of them turn quality. But some of them should be. For example, East Dollar Lake by Valleyview is aerated but is so tiny, it's probably better just left as is. However, Swan Lake, in the same area, would be an absolutely amazing fishery if the regs and stocking numbers were to change. For these lakes, the aerator is already installed and running so there must have been some support for larger fish or the aerator wouldn't have gotten there in the first place. So just take it another step further and change the regs from 5 of any size to 1 under 45cm. And reduce stocking numbers. I don't think there needs to be a lot of other lakes identified to be quality lakes; just do a better job with the ones that are already designated and take a few of the better aerated ones not currently designated and take them to the next level instead of wasting resources aerating a lake that gets pounded by stocking #'s and then by anglers. Cheers.

Justfloatin, went back to the document and there was a lot of info on methods of how they attained the data but basically, they randomly sent 5000 questionnaires to people in Alberta who held a current fishing license fill out the questionnaire. They had 1392 people return the questionnaire with which they got the data. Does that answer your question? Doesn't sound like any Safeway parking lots were hurt in the making of this data... Google the report and you should be able to find it yourself if you'd like. Cheers.

Sure, there might be some controversy but that's to be expected and isn't necessarily a reason to not do it if there is enough of a demand for it. Here are a couple interesting trends reported in the SPORT FISHING IN ALBERTA 2010 Summary Report that show some signs of hope. The perception that everyone takes what they catch home no longer seems accurate. The trend is less and less harvest and the days of the 5/day put-and-take meat fishermen are by no means finished, but the mentality is changing. This one is also really interesting, showing 53% of fishermen would rather catch less bigger fish than more smaller ones. Compared to 30% of those who want more small fish. Just looking at this statistic alone, it seems like there should be more quality fisheries than there currently are? Just thought I'd add some more food for thought. Oh, and Tallieho, can someone please post on here when fishery roundtables are happening? I've only heard of a couple in the Central Alberta area; I couldn't make the one, and didn't find out about the other until the day after it was done. Why aren't these advertised? Cheers.

Ok, so I've been thinking about the "Quality" stocked lakes in the province for a while and overall, have been very discouraged by the initiative that ASRD has put into this. They say "quality" but yet seem to be stuck in the "quantity" era. I'm tired of complaining about it and would like to do something about it and I've been thinking about creating a petition about this and sending it to ASRD to at least get the attention of the regional biologists and managers in the division. But before I were to do such craziness, I wanted some feedback on these suggestions and see how many people would actually see this as positive change. No sense going further if no one else sees this as worthwhile. Sooo.. What I am suggesting would be: 1) that the lakes currently designated as "quality" lakes would move to either 1) total C&R or a limit of 1 under 45cm, unless already designated as such. This is the system that they've used in Manitoba with great results. It keeps the big ones in the lake and you don't have the issue like the 1 under 40cm/50cm where the fish get to a certain size and then suddenly there aren't any bigger ones because they get bonked. Yet it still allows some harvest for those that enjoy it. Good compromise to me. These are the lakes currently designated as "quality": Bullshead, Police (Outpost), Kerbe’s, Muir, Champion, Muskiki, Beaver, Fiesta, Ironside, Silkstone, Lovett, Pit 24, Pit 35, Pit 45, Lower Pierre Grey’s, Figure 8, Sulphur 2) that some/most of the currently aerated lakes not designated as "quality" should be moved to that designation. If they are worth aerating, aren't they worth a little regulation change to improve the quality as well? If not, the aeration is a bit useless, is it not? And a costly bit of uselessness at that! Here is the list of aerated but not currently quality designated lakes. I've bolded the one's I think are worth switching over to "quality". I don't know some of the other ones on this list so can not comment on those: Cummings Lake, Swan Lake, East Dollar Lake, Spring Lake, Cecil Thompson Pond, Boehlke’s Pond, Hansen’s Reservoir, Mitchell Lake, Millers Lake, Birch Lake, Coleman Fish & Game Pond, Spring Lake (Stony Plain) 3) that any "quality" designated lake should be stocked at a rate of between 75-100 fish/ hectare or lower. (For instance, Beaver Lake is around 31 hectares and is currently stocked with around 3200 fish/year so it would be at the top of the stocking range). Guidelines of course, but reduce stocking is necessary in conjunction with reduced harvest to grow larger fish. Can't have one without the other. 4) that wherever possible and feasible, greater angling opportunity be provided by stocking quality fisheries with not only rainbow trout but brown trout as well. And in the case of lakes such as Birch Lake with brook trout, that browns would be added to that also. The opportunity to catch more than one species of fish at a lake, especially when those fish often inhabit different areas of the lake and exhibit different behavior, would offer a diverse challenge and go a long way to improving angler experience at these quality fisheries. That's it folks... Again, any constructive feedback or suggestions welcome. Cheers.

Ok... fine... I'll bite. Way back when I was in highschool a friend and I were coming back late at night, probably from fishing or hunting. Hadn't been drinking or eating any weird "shroons" that we found along the way either. I was driving a gravel road a couple of km's from my house in the country. It was an overcast night and toward the horizon in front of us we saw a flash of light that lit up the clouds. We both initially thought it was lightning from a distance storm. It "blinked" again and we realized it was above the clouds but the clouds in that area lit up. It looked like distant lightning but definitely wasn't. It blinked again and we both looked at each other wondering what it was. (And this is where it gets crazy). It blinked again above the clouds and then suddenly broke through the clouds and flew through the air toward us and in a second was about 50ft above the trees on my driver's side and began moving along with us. It was probably 5-10+km's away when we first saw it blinking and it was next to us in seconds. I've been to airshows; F-18's don't come close. I slowed to about 50km's and rolled down the window and stuck my head out to look up at it, as my friend grabbed the wheel to keep us on the road. There was no sound of engines or anything else. And it was big, probably 30-50ft across. Not sure of shape (I would guess spherical but it was hard to tell) but there were several blinking lights. We were freaking out but still managed to make a couple of anal probing jokes as I slowly drove up the road about a km and then went up our driveway. It silently followed us all of the way and when I turned up the driveway, it held back a little, stopped, turned and slowly went over the trees and out of sight back in the direction we had just came. Didn't get much sleep that night.. or following nights. I'm not going to say it was aliens but it was definitely an Unidentified Flying Object. I've never seen anything move as quickly as it did, or hover like that without a sound. And perhaps it is the military test-driving prototypes, but if that is the case, they need to put this thing in production A.S.A.P. cause it's awesome. And I wouldn't believe me either if I heard this so I won't take it personally if you don't. It was pretty crazy. Cheers.

Ok, first off, I did sign it and think the effort is commendable. However, if I could add one bit of constructive criticism it would be in the layout and information of the website itself. Took me quite a while to "filter" through the various articles and info, which are well written, but almost to the point of being unaccessible to the average Joe. After reading through several articles myself, I was under the impression the petition was for all of the key issues listed. So I was a bit befuddled when I saw the list of suggestions on the petition itself. They just didn't have a whole lot to do with the bulk of the key problems discussed or the examples given. Not that I didn't agree with what was on the site or the petition itself, just that the info didn't match. It was kind of like going to a steak house and they give you a big menu, and then when it's time to order, they tell you all you can do is order from the salad section. You'd be a bit confused too. At least that was my experience and might be why others aren't jumping in to sign. Felt too much like a political platform page where the actual platform is not clearly identified and the content is nebulous and vague. Cheers.

I know this one isn't on your list either but I would assume "they" would have it on sale too. I have a Pflueger on my 4wt and I absolutely love it. Fought some 20"+ fish on the Bow with it like a champ. No problems at all so far and the drag is really smooth. Really purdy as well.... Got it for just over $100. At the time, I almost bought an Amundson, which I was glad I didn't. Friend's brand new one had the drag crap out on him at Fortress lake, 26km from the nearest road. Good thing he didn't catch any of the big boys or he might have been in some trouble. Cheers

What about just enforcing a speed limit like they have on lakes? Bring your jet boats; just don't fly around on them. Or have a max hp size of 25 or something. (perhaps that's what the 2 stroke option is for above?) Banning gas engines altogether smacks of snobbery and elitism and although a very good point could be made about the safety of power boats on the river with so many drift boats and drunken rafters, I think there are too many people who wouldn't like the idea that it would never come to fruition. You should do the poll here, and then put the same poll on the OA forum and see what kind of numbers you get. I think it would be quite different. Cheers.

Pm sent. Thanks Don. Another couple Q's that I have: 1. I've heard fluoro sinks quite a bit? Can I still use it for smaller dries? 2. Can you use a surgeon's knot to tie mono directly to fluoro?

Looking to pick up some Rio Fluoroflex plus tippet before my trip at the end of the month to Manitoba (and those persnickety Stauffer browns too) but I'm trying to find the stuff for under $14.95 a spool. I've checked ebay and it's pretty similar. Looking probably for a 1x, 3x, and 4x or 5x. Any suggestions for where to get the stuff cheaper? Do you think the stuff is worth the $15 ??? Cheers.

I've done a few of those also. However, I want something that not only rides low, but hangs down in the water, so the only thing above water is the foam. Kind of a half drown, but still very realistic look. Cheers.

Thanks guys. First one took a while to figure out but once I found the right dimensions and tying order, the next couple went a bit faster. Well, "faster" meaning at least sub 30 minutes I did a baselayer of antron to help build up the bulk but still allow the fly to float. I need to tie up a couple of salmonflies with some orange/brown and maybe a grasshopper with some yellow/green and make a few smaller ones. Pretty excited to fool some of the crowd that sees 1000 chernobyl ants floating over a day... although I do love a good chernobyl. Cheers.

Was at the Central Alberta Fly tying evening the other night and we did up a woven caddis nymph.... which inspired me to make a woven stonefly nymph, which then inspired me to take that one step further and make a woven dry fly stonefly. I bent the hook about 1/4 of the way from the eye so the woven body actually hangs into the water so it's super low riding but still easily visibly with the moose wing and foam. I had pretty good luck on a similar style (without the woven abdomen) last year and can't wait to hit the banks with this thing in July. Bottom view: Side View: Cheers.

Yeah, I'm not sure why Albertan's and SRD specifically are so reluctant to go for a retention of one under 18" (or 20") like they do in Manitoba. Able to keep a pan-fry and yet still grows big fish. Seems win-win to me, but maybe that just makes too much sense for people to agree with. With that being said, I'm all for any change that helps to reduce the retention rate at this, and most other trout lakes in the province. Well done guys. Now let's do this for half a dozen other trout lakes and we're off to the races! Cheers.

x2 on the Rio Gold. I've had a couple of novice guys who have struggled to cast their rods, pick up mine with Rio Gold on it and there is an instant difference in their casting ability. Part of that is the difference in rods but I even noticed a difference when I switched over for the first time to the Rio. Now, getting those novice guys casting better was the easy part. Getting my rod out of their hands at the end of the day is the truly difficult part. Cheers.

Thanks 420 for the offer. I live up by Red Deer so hooking up to get it might be tricky but that would be awesome. Thanks for the offer! Cheers.

So why not start a new organization called "Streamwatch"? Volunteer board of directors, create mission statement and goals. Do some fundraising and all money raised goes toward the mission and goals. Sounds like this was all nearly in place before gov't got involved. Easier said than done apparently?

Going to the parkland in Manitoba at the end of May. Thought this one should be fun for tigers or browns in the shallows. I tried it on Beaver this fall just for funzies and it looks better in the water than the pictures give it credit for. When stripped, its legs go straight backwards and then when it stops, the legs go out to the side, just like the real thing. It might be better for Jacks than for trout but who knows, might work like a hot-damn. Picture quality kinda sucks... I call it "Kermie", and hope it will catch a big fat Miss Piggy Top view: Bottom view: Cheers.

Hey, they were looking for an alternative project to get behind instead, and I offered one, which is better so far than what you did isn't it? And this is Fly Fish Calgary, not bitch-and-complain-whenever-someone-offers-an-idea-I-don't-like-and-then-use-a-lot-of-hyphens-to-make-a-point Fish Calgary is it? Didn't think so. How about offer a decent suggestion then PGK or shut the *$ up. Ok then, how about pick a stream that could really benefit from some rehabilitation and put the money toward that? Although, for PGK to give his official endorsement, it'll have to be on a stream with only bull trout or Athabasca rainbows because he apparently doesn't like invasive species like browns or rainbows... Cheers.

How about putting that money into a FLIPPR type of project? Find a suitable lake, pay to aerate it, and pay for tigers, or browns and rainbows to be put into it and throw on some C&R regs. I'm guessing a new lake would have to be found instead of an already stocked one as SRD seems extremely reluctant to change current regs on existing lakes. Who's in?

Great.... What in the world are they waiting for? Anecdotal evidence has said it for a while and now with the test netting, they should have some solid facts on what's going on with the fish at Beaver. It's no where near the quality lake that they wanted it to be. So why are they waiting until 2013 to make any changes? Seriously, grow a pair and make some hard decisions already!!! They know what decision needs to be made; postponing it only stalls the process. Nothing is going to change between now and 2013 and I've got this feeling that when it is time to make a decision, that it will be to keep the regs (and fishing quality) the same as it currently is. Seriously!?!?! :derby racer:

I'm not missing the point. I get the point and have done the math and there are over 300 put and take lakes in Alberta and only a handful of "quality lakes." I get it. I'm all for more quality lakes whether they be strictly C&R or limit harvest to one. In fact, I think every lake that is aerated in Alberta should have more strict regulations in place. But we do have some C&R lakes with rainbows; Fiesta, as I mentioned, is a C&R lake and is literally just down the road. Not sure how the local rednecks will like 2 C&R's so close to each other. That's all I'm saying. I couldn't agree with you more Terry and believe the same thing. However, I was also part of a very long, convoluted, and quite charged discussion on the AO forum a while ago when I posted a poll on the topic of quality fisheries in Alberta. It went on for more than 15 pages. I was on the side of more quality fisheries, especially C&R. However, there was a small but very vocal group that really did not want to see any lakes turned into C&R. I'm sure some of them were a part of the headaches SRD has had to deal with out Police Outpost as well? One of their main arguments were that C&R is not family friendly. I disagreed. However, that is one of the arguments that people against more quality lakes will use. They will also use the snobby, rich flyfishermen who want to make it easier to catch bigger fish argument as well. Did I mention how vocal they are? If SRD changes Beaver to strictly C&R, you can bet there will be a small but very vocal group of locals that will not be happy about it. All I'm saying is a regulation of 1 under 45cm might go a long way towards appeasing this group, while still creating a quality fishery. Please don't read the above and think I'm against Quality fisheries or C&R. I'm all for it. I think it's great and could list 10 lakes right now that I would love to see stricter regs on, Beaver included. Nevertheless, we should not be so naive as to believe that everyone out there shares the same thoughts... even though those thoughts make a hell of a lot of sense. Cheers.