BurningChrome

They probably upgraded the forum software then realized the old templates weren't compatible with the new software. The UX is pretty terrible, but hey, I'm not paying for it so I'm not complaining.

You mean they shrink when dry but they're fine again once you get your feet in them and start wading? That happens with my G3s all the time so if they're dry I soak them with water before I leave the house and they're good to go once I get to the river.

While the ultimate onus is on the individual angler, it's in the best interest of everyone who benefits from the resource - anglers, guides, outfitters, fly shops, etc. - to convey the message to other anglers to clean their gear. Personally, I don't get a lot of people from out of town, out of province, or out of country calling me up for info when they come here. I'll bet fly shops, outfitters, and guides get those calls though. That's why a lot of the fly shops have signs up about cleaning your gear, reg changes, and emergency closures.

I went from felt to the rubber Simms used to have (Aquastealth maybe?) to Vibram. The first Vibrams were not great and I ended up studding them but I've worn the newer G3s and Vapors all over - Bow, Crow, Oldman, Elk, Skeena, Kanektok - without any problems. Maybe it's been so long since I've worn felt that I adjusted my wading style or something.

If the guide wants to protect the fisheries they use to make their living then it's their responsibility just like it's their responsibility to make sure the angler follows the regulations for each water body.

http://www.patagonia.ca/product/mens-minimalist-wading-jacket/81831.html Patagonia warranty and quality at a good price. It's also light enough to pack down and carry easily. I roll mine up into the hood and carry it in the loops on my Vedavoo sling.

Yeah, without data it doesn't mean much. What's "steady" and how big is the decline year over year? It shouldn't be a surprise to anyone that there was a larger decline after the floods but can the rest be attributed to anything specific?

Closing those streams to angling without keeping the OHVs out or limiting logging in the headwaters isn't going to do a lot of good. It's really unfortunate that the OHV ban in the southern forestry area was lifted during bull trout spawning.

Unfortunately the OHV ban is also lifted. Was so nice and quiet while it lasted.

Just out of curiosity, does anyone know how well ACA manages their other sites? Want to know before I consider donating.

Hope you get your equipment back, and more importantly I hope all their buildings and houses are still standing once it's all over.

No I haven't. Just make those rivers dry fly only and watch the AO guys lose their $#!+

Could very easily go the same as the rivers in Montana where you aren't allowed to target them. Not familiar enough with their regs to know if that means you can't fish streamers or what.

Oh man, someone asked the DFO biologist about that and he had a good explanation about it, but it was a couple years ago and I don't remember exactly what it was. IIRC part of it was that it's pretty much impossible to identify the "pureness" of a fish before you catch it and that having anglers on the water where these fish live are likely to report other SARA violations that are far more damaging to habitat and the species as a whole.

Unfortunately >99% pure cutthroat are all that's covered by the SARA critical habitat order. If you're really interested in WSCT conservation issues you should try attending the workshop put on by Cows and Fish every spring. It's attended by a lot of stakeholders including GWAS, ERWP, BRBC, OWC, TU Oldman, TU Bow River, AEP and DFO biologists, ranchers and other landowners, and even Crowsnest Pass Quad Squad. From a DFO presentation given at the WSCT workshop a couple years ago: All currently known areas occupied by non‐stocked pure‐strain populations (≥ 99% purity) within the original Westslope Cutthroat Trout distribution are considered critical habitat. Redds created and used by Westslope Cutthroat Trout, are considered the Residence for this fish. Residence for WSCT is restricted to areas identified as critical habitat.

I agree with a lot of what you say here. Most of those small streams in the report don't get heavily fished because of access and they aren't the big name streams, but I can tell you that the fish in Silvester Creek are >99% pure strain according to surveys so their loss would be tragic. I did a reclamation project on Silvester with Elbow River Watershed Partnership and it was apparent that a lot of the stream braiding and other issues were caused by OHVs. That's the sort of problem the report raises and the amount of angling pressure isn't going to make a lick of difference if the fish have no water. I'm also all for closing streams to angling when the situation warrants. My problem is the knee-jerk reactions from some without being clear on the facts.

I'm guessing you did not read the AWA report from the link I posted. You probably didn't even read the excerpt from it that I posted.

I'd really encourage people to read the actual report from AWA rather than the CBC headline in the article posted. The report is about foothills streams - Silvester, Evan-Thomas, Girardi, Mockingbird, and some others. An excerpt about Silvester Creek, which happens to run through the McLean Creek PLUZ: Issues: Critical habitat is in imminent danger of drying up, isolating parts of the cutthroat population, potentially destroying overwintering habitat, and making other overwintering habitat inaccessible. There is ongoing heavy erosion of a very dense road network in Silvester Creek watershed, leading to high sediment loading to critical habitat. Continued logging of an already heavily-logged watershed with accompanying new road-building promises to simply add to critical habitat destruction. Link to the report: https://albertawilderness.ca/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/20170801_rp_fwr_emergency_report_wsct_populations_risk.pdf Nowhere in the AWA report does it suggest that angling or angling pressure or the length of the angling season is a contributing factor. Folks who are truly concerned or want to learn more and not simply being reactivists should watch for the next WSCT workshop put on by Cows and Fish in the spring.

Great pics!

Do you think a 24 hour per day closure will stop poaching, land abuses, and logging? I have no issues with closures when the science supports it but you seem to want to close the mountain streams 11 months of the year based on your other posts. Show me the science that supports that. Maybe we should build a wall around the rivers. It'll be great, really really great. And yuge. And then make the fishermen pay for it. Also, do you have any empirical evidence to show that the Bow went from being a world class fishery to not solely because of the change in seasonal closures?

So to paraphrase for our cutty and bull trout streams - 1) human expansion into animal habitat (resource extraction - logging, mining, O&G) 2) illegal poaching (same same) 3) land use generally (OHVs) 4) hunting by licensed non-resident hunters (legal C&R angling by residents and non-residents) Sound about right Don?

Yeah, agree about the Simms ones. They're big and pricey, but I haven't had one break yet.

Bah, anyone who can tell where you were by the background already knows the spot(s) well enough. Nobody is going to drive down the FTR looking for that particular spot - if it can even be seen from the road.

That's correct. You need a special permit to enter the area. If you go to albertafirebans.ca it shows the exact closure area.

Be careful what you wish for. If you're going to go the "angling increases fish mortality more than anything else" argument then you're opening up a Pandora's box that will extend to angling everywhere including the Bow. Maybe you can table it for discussion at the next WSCT workshop with the DFO and AEP biologists who attend.