BurningChrome
-
Posts
820 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
51
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by BurningChrome
-
-
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.
-
1
-
-
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.
-
4
-
-
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.
-
13 hours ago, toolman said:
Why should this be a fishing guides responsibility? It's the anglers responsibility. Not a guides, nor a fly shop owner or wading boor manufacturer or anyone else's, in my opinion.
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.
-
1
-
-
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.
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, krk said:
Would really love to see some data on this.
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?
-
1
-
-
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.
-
1
-
-
There ya go, sounds like it's lifted. No random camping fires but fires in campgrounds allowed
Unfortunately the OHV ban is also lifted. Was so nice and quiet while it lasted.
-
1
-
-
Just out of curiosity, does anyone know how well ACA manages their other sites? Want to know before I consider donating.
-
My equipment is still sitting there in the larger building on the left.
Hope you get your equipment back, and more importantly I hope all their buildings and houses are still standing once it's all over.
-
Selective fishing is a joke. You see that putz that posted about "selectively" catching bulls in a Lower mainland stream on a big pink streamer?
No I haven't. Just make those rivers dry fly only and watch the AO guys lose their $#!+
-
2
-
-
Marc, I'll be very curious what happens when bull trout are listed, cause they won't be able to play off the genetics the same way..
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.
-
Based on SARA, I still question the legality of fishing on any stream within critical habitat. Not sure why there seems to be a blind eye to that from AEP.
"The federal Species at Risk Act (SARA) contains several prohibitions to protect species listed on Schedule 1 of SARA. Under Sections 32 and 33 of SARA, it is an offence to:
kill, harm, harass, capture or take an individual of a species listed under SARA as extirpated, endangered or threatened"
Harass and capture = C&R.
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.
-
If the assumptions are that a PURE strain of Westslope Cutthroat and not a hybrid is all that is important to the conservationists, than those streams need to be identified and protected from any man made intrusion.
The next step would be to recognize that the balance of ES1 is a managed fishery resulting from introduced species. Cutthroats caught in many of these streams would needs to considered hybrids and of no significant contribution to an endangered trout population. The eastern slopes streams would be managed in the same way as the Bow River. That is, being given less priority with allocation of AEP staff commitment and financial resources.
Is the fishing community prepared for this? From what has been commented on in this post, I believe the ability to catch hybrid trout in the foothills is fundamental to recreational fishing activity. This does not change the belief that a fishery should be closed for low flows and high temperatures to ensure sufficient number of fish survive to meet fishery sustainability.
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 would generally agree that the streams in ES1 should have been closed to fishing earlier this summer due to the drought conditions we've seen this summer. The last time I was down that way was the first week in July and I decided then that I wouldn't be going back until there was a significant change in the weather. That said, I don't see the logic of wanting to further restrict the angling season in a non-drought year. Even on a stream like the Livingston that sees a ton of fishing pressure (and the fish have the scars to prove it) in an average year the fish always seem to be right around the same size and in the same numbers that they were the year before. It's not been specifically stated (or if it has I've missed it) what streams are at risk of loosing their cuttie populations, but if they are the streams listed in the report posted by Burningchrome then I would have to question how much on an impact fishing pressure is really going to have. Maybe I'm missing some hidden gems, but from the information I've seen in other reports the mean fork length for most of the fish in those streams is likely to be in the 6" - 8" range. I'm not dismissing them, I know their genetics are important and they are capable of more given the right circumstances, I'm just saying I don't really know anyone that would make a point of targeting those streams on a regular basis.
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.
-
Admittedly, logging in the watershed can impact water retention in the spring, allowing for higher flows during the summer months, but to what extent it would have help flows such as we have experienced this year is questionable. Bank stabilization, restricting OHV use, reduce logging and cattle intrusion into mountain streams are all long term benefits to the fishery, but may well have little impact on fish survival in low flow years. Therefore the only short term fix is to stop fishing in an attempt to reduce stress and aid in survival of the existing fishery.
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:
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!
-
1
-
-
Any improvement in the fishery management by way of education, land use, policing poachers, restrictions to logging are not possible without manpower. Neither AEP or Conservation Officer law enforcement have the manpower needed. In additions voluntary closures as we have in place do little to curb fishing habits. Just because we wear a floppy hat, wear waders, attempt CnR and carry a thermometer does not override the fact the we need to stop fishing in the afternoons! The only recourse is to have a mandatory fish closure. There are many questions relating to hoot-owl closures that allow fishing from midnight to 2 PM. Fish that are stressed do not suddenly revive once the stress is removed.
The only answer is a full closure - 24 hours per day for whatever time is needed.
It was not too long ago when we had a seasonal closure on the Bow River - Nov 1 to May 30 if I remember correctly. The Bow River was truly a world class fishery at that time. We cannot claim the same now.
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?
-
2
-
-
This kinda reminds me of a similar situation in Africa where the large game animals were disappearing at a fast rate. There was four causes1) human expansion into animal habitat, 2) illegal poaching, 3) land use generally, 4) hunting by licensed non-resident hunters. Rather than doing something about items #1>#3, they limited the license hunters thereby removing a large source of revenue causing further reduction in enforcement staff leading to extreme poaching. Nothing like chopping your nose off to spite your face. Don
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.
-
As far as I'm concerned if you are able to tell where I was from the trees in the background, then you have put in your time and deserve to know.
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.
-
So I assume this means all activity in the areas are closed? Not just the campgrounds.
That's correct. You need a special permit to enter the area. If you go to albertafirebans.ca it shows the exact closure area.
-
The survival of any species depends on the incidence of unplanned mortality or harvest equally as much as the environment it lives in. In this case the lack of fishery management itself is more than likely causing more gradation than can be accomplished with habitat enhancement or protection. AEP and possibly the feds have limited options given the economic time we live in. By limiting fishing opportunities by closures, less stress will be placed on the fish population, mortality will decrease and potentially an increase in reproductive success. The end result is a sustainable fishery.
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.
-
1
-
New Format, or what?
in General Chat - Not Fishing Related (NFR)
Posted
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.