mtbkr

Having owned both framed and frameless boats I agree wholeheartedly with what sldrose just said. Further to his comments above I can tell you that I find frameless boats much, much easier to kick and control with fins. Sitting lower in the water puts more of your legs in the water and lets you kick and control with fins much more efficiently. Now that I've gone frameless I would not go back. I gave up floating the bow out of a framed pontoon as I found it way too hard to effectively control while trying to fish. I find the smaller, more maneuverable frameless boat makes controlling the drift much more manageable.

Interesting Topic. I used to spend time fishing on the West Coast out of a Sea Kayak when I was growing up. Since then there has been a huge rise in the popularity of Kayak fishing, . I've only fished out of one kayak with a peddle drive so I can't comment on the specific models mentioned above. However, I think I can offer a bit of advice on the whole goal of "hands-free, while still being able to control your boat". At one time I had a great big framed pontoon which was terrible for floats. It was too hard to kick fast enough to slow down the drift or pull over when fighting a fish. It was super difficult to maneuver and would easily get caught by the wind. It worked better on lakes but was still cumbersome. Since then I bought a small frameless pontoon and it has been absolutely awesome. I bought the Fish Cat Scout and have now traded up for the Outcast Stealth Pro which offers just a bit more room for my very long legs. A good buddy has an older frameless Scadden which he really likes as well. In all these boats you sit closer to the water which allows you to kick way more efficiently. The oars fold down against the pontoons and remain out of the way. With these boats you can control your drift quite easily with your fins while you fish, or ferry across the river if needed while fighting a fish. The guys that fish from Watermasters or some of the other Scadden products probably find similar advantages. To me, the peddle-drive kayak might work but I think you'd have to constantly be reaching down for the rudder handle to make steering adjustments. With an ultra-maneuverable frameless pontoon, you can kick pretty fast, spin on a dime and be truly hands-free. If you want something a little more sleek looking, the OSG Commander looks pretty interesting. Just my two cents...

Yep, all the ones mentioned here. Also, parts of the Crowsnest and parts of the Castle

A bunch of my friends have watermasters. The quality is great as is the customer service. General consensus is that the kodiak is better for a taller person (6 feet +) than the grizzly. I'm in the market for an inflatable. Love the watermasters, except that it's hard to stand up safely on them.

Thanks so much PGK, I'll stick with what you mentioned.

Obviously the presence of non-native species (namely brook trout) in many streams is a big issue. There are a lot of guys on here with very respectable yet differing opions about this matter. I admit didn't appreciate just how big an issue this was until I started doing some more research on it. We all want to see our fisheries protected and improved and as such we should be working together to fight for changes we do agree upon. We can argue all we want on this forum but at the end of the day it's not getting us very far. I don't mean to discredit the brook trout issue but it would be great if we could set this particular arguement aside for now and push for the other changes that could significantly help our fisheries. Brook trout aside, here are the things I'd like to push for: 1. Increase licencing costs, with revenue to go directly towards better enforcement of regulations, stream reabilitation, research, conservation etc 2. A conservation (C&R) licence at a reduced price 3. Catch and Release regs on Cutts and cutt hybrids in ES1 and ES2 moving water 4. A conservation stamp say ~$20 annually required for fishing foothills and mountain streams. Revenues to go towards more regulations enforcement, and for other necessary conservations efforts where needed 5. More officers enforcing regs 6. Much stiffer penalties for poachers 7. Tighter restrictions on ATVs in and around streams 8. Tighter restrictions on clearcut logging and developement near rivers and creeks. Specifically noting the clearcutting that will go on in the castle area this summer. 9. A few fly fish only streams. BC has them, Montana has them, probably other states do to. Why not a few in Alberta? I don't know a great deal about effective lobbying, letter writing, and otherwise getting my voice heard and ultimately regulation changes to happen so I really appreciate the suggestions a couple of you have made about how to go about doing this. I understand from what some have said that we have to do more than just write letters to MPs. I've also heard that contacting regional biologists with our concerns and asking them the best way to further push for changes is a good idea. This certainly seems logical to me, Mel Knight was kind enough to forward my letters I wrote regarding the Castle headwaters to the biologist in that area. How about contacting Jim Stelfox? I understand he sits at the roundtables How about writing letters to the AFGA, or to the specific members who sit at the roundtables? What does it take to be able to join a roundtable? Cheers Mat

Good Point PGK. I think this is a good idea in addition to sending letters. I want to start working on this as soon as I'm done Uni final exams. As far as a recommeded plan goes, here are some of the things I would like to see: An increase in licencing costs say ~$40/year, with the additional revenue going towards badly needed regulation enforcement, fish stocking in areas where required and additional conservation means... A conservation licence (catch and release only, except for maybe brook trout) at a reduced price. The idea of allowing liberal limits on brook trout is a sensitive issue. So maybe allow everyone to take brook trout but only if they first pass some kind of fish identification test so they aren't bonking bulls by mistake? Catch and release of Cutthroats and Cutthroat-Rainbow hybrids in all moving water in ES1 and ES2. It sounds bad but I'm not particularily well-versed in the current laws regarding logging and developement in close proximity to flowing waters. From the sounds of the proposed logging in the Castle drainage this summer, it certainly sounds like this needs to be addressed... Tighter restrictions on off-highway vehicles. Though I'm not opposed to having a few areas like Mclean creek and Waiparous where guys can drive though creeks and mudholes and whatnot-- I know it's not environmentally friendly, but they do need somewhere to roar around and having a few designated areas I think helps keeps them happy and away from other sensitive areas. A conservation stamp at say ~$20/season for moving water in ES1 and ES2. The revenue from which should go towards conservation and enforcement. Along with this stamp, I think there should be a short fishing ethics test which includes proper fish handling techniques I agree. And if there is to be a liberal retention or no retention limit on brook trout, I think anglers must first pass a fish identification test otherwise there will be some collateral damage on the bulls.

Thank you very much for the letter outline Harps, As of Today there is one more letter edited and sent on my behalf. I also will be forwarding this latest letter To Rob Renner and Ed Stelmach. Mr. Rob Renner Minister of Environment Legislature Office #425 Legislature Building 10800 - 97 Avenue Edmonton, AB Canada T5K 2B6 Phone: (780) 427-2391 Fax: (780) 422-6259 Mr. Ed Stelmach Premier Office of the Premier Room 307, Legislature Building 10800 - 97th Avenue Edmonton, Alberta T5K 2B7 Phone: (780) 427 2251 Fax: (780) 427 1349

Thanks for the replies everyone! PGK, I absolutely agree with everything you just said. It all comes down to the fact that like you said, the fishery is immensely undervalued. I fully agree with all the changes you just outlined. At the end of the day most of us spend hundreds or even thousands of dollars a year on fishing. I definitely support an increase in licensing fees and an introduction of classified waters licences if it means that the extra revenues can be used for increased enforcement, stream rehabilitation, stocking of hatchery fish in lakes and ponds to keep the catch and keep anglers happy and away from the streams, etc.

Conor I agree with you completely. Corresponding with Mel Knight leads me to believe the government is concerned with exactly what you just mentioned. What I would like to impress upon them the value of "World Class Fishing" which means protecting Cutts, Rainbows, Browns, and Cutt-Bow hybrids in their respective waters. As I'm sure most everyone here has experienced, there are tons of areas where you catch fish that have varying amounts of Cutthroat and Rainbow in them. I'd hate to see the government focus exclusively on only the small populations of "pure" Westslope Cutts and fail to see the importance of the "Cuttbows" that so many of us love to fish for. I'm editing a letter to Mr. Knight right now, I'm certainly going to talk about this. I think you make a good point Taco. I think brook trout are the biggest issue. Perhaps C&R on all cutts and cutt-bow hybrids and large retention limit on brookies would be a good solution. You just have to hope everyone can tell the difference between a brookie and a bull I guess. In any case I certainly don't agree with the typical "2 over 30cm or over 35cm". This targets the big fish which are the spawners and the ones you want to pass their genes along. I just think it's a real shame when you hear about some guy killing a 20 inch cutt.

Boom! That's hitting the nail right on the head

Thank you all for the replies and the support Thank you for the support Troutlover! To quote Mel Knight in a letter he sent me: "The department is not aware of any locations where angling is adversely affecting native westslope cutthroat trout. Many of the existing pure westslope cutthroat trout populations are already under a catch-and-release regulation. In areas where we are monitoring angling and harvest, we are finding low hooking mortality and no negaive impacts to populations." Mel Knight, Minister of Sustainable Resource Developement I find this response by Mr. Knight a bit bizarre and frustrating, but from what I gather, department staff don't seem to think angling is one of the major contributing factors that threaten cutties. I'm trying to get them to understand what a world class fishery means to us and that C&R regs are highly effective in maintaining such fisheries. I could be wrong but from all that I've heard from Mr. Knight I don't think we have to worry about them closing any streams to fishing, I think our bigger worry is that the government doesn't really understand that more streams should be protected under C&R; which is what we need to be lobbying for. Like Troutlover said, this could be something the Alberta government gets right if they hear enough of our voices

Over the winter I've been writing letters to the Alberta government advocating regulation changes pertaining to our mountain streams. Specifically, in my first letter I suggested that all the headwaters of the Castle River System be designated Catch and Release to help maintain and encourage a world class fishery. I received a response from Mel Knight, Minister of Sustainable resources. He indicated to me that there is now joint colaboration between the Federal government and Alberta provincial government on developing an Alberta recovery plan and a national recovery strategy for the West Slope Cutthroat Trout. He went on to say that the recovery plan is expected to be completed this fall and one of the things it will address is angling and angling regulations. Now is the time to write letters and to start lobbying the government for more catch and release protection on our mountain streams. We've got world class fly fishing across the foothills but we have a lot of streams that could become even better fisheries if they were designated catch and release. I hope there is some strong support out there for more C&R! Cheers Mat

Flyon, I've worked as a dockhand at a lodge in the charlottes. This year I'm guiding for a lodge there. Exactly what you'll do will depend on what lodge you work for but most likely you will be doing everything you mentioned and then some. Expect 12 hour work days on average. Some days will be easier and you'll get off earlier, others might be 14 hours or more. It's a lot of hard work for sure. I've only worked for one company which I am very happy with. I've heard that there are some that definitely aren't as good to work for. Send me a PM if you want some more details

Nice! I like longer rods for all the reasons mentioned, but mostly for the line control; mending etc especially when nymphing. The Loop Opti Peak 11' #3 looks like it would be unreal for czech nymphing

This is all so discouraging. It seems that the government and majority of the population take our precious resources for granted. I'm gonna continue to write letters and get my fishing buddies to write as well despite the BS replies. Has anything like a petition been formed against this logging proposal?

I definitely agree that logging certainly has the potential to harm river ecosystems for the reasons mentioned above. I'm not well-versed on this particular proposal but what I don't understand is why the regs still permits people to keep cuthroat trout in Alberta. The West Castle, South Castle, and I believe Carbondale Rivers all have a catch limit of 2 trout. Why not strict Catch and Release? I just recently wrote a letter to our Ministers and the Premier arguing for Catch and Release for the whole Castle System. In any case I'm worried about these upper Tributaries to the Castle.