Dangus

It's not across the river. As far as I can tell, It's east of the red roofed house.

What? You don't love 12" cutty hero shots? I love when people post 15 shots of dry, cookie cutter fish and big grins and rod on their shoulders. Actually, although it's lame, kinda gotta remember when that stuff was new to you and it was exciting. Now what tickles your fancy is a little more refined. Just set a good example with what you post. If the cool people do it, eventually so will the minions.

Not to derail this, but How is that any less ethical than steelhead fishing? Bull trout in July? I get the active spawning time closure, as it's kinda shady to target fish actively sitting on a redd. But fish on a migration run?

FT: I think 10 percent is on the real high side of things. Most of what I've seen is sub 5%. Fish may be stressed durning the spawn, but they also fight like wet socks and are in sub 10 degree water. I'd also argue browns would make up maybe .5-1 fish out of that 5 for the average bow angler. But I get your point.

FT: what I was trying to Get at is, I think it would be overkill to extend the closure down to 22. In my experience this year, the number of redds spotted south of carburn does become sparser the further south you go (besides the mp side channel). My impression is that you could add the weir to carburn and the mp side channel to the closure, and for the most anglers wouldn't be too inconvenienced. That being said, how much of an affect are anglers having on the browns here? Who knows. In the grand scheme, Maybe angling is has essentially next to no impact. That being said, a gear chucker was fishing above me a week or so ago, 20 minutes later a 14" brown drifted past me belly up, just out of reach. Perhaps an idiot ban is better?

No he didn't contradict himself. One statement was about increasing population while the other was about a healthy sustaining population. Second, I'm just saying there is a potential way to limit the length of river closed while helping protect vulnerable areas. Sections are busy enough as it is. Pushing everyone down to police would be excessive and an angling clusterfck.

Teck, perhaps with the new launch locations, different closures could be implemented? Difficult to close below glenmore because the next launch is ~10km downstream. the closure of water around glenmore essentially closes a bunch of moderate spawning habitat in order to protect the higher density stuff. As noted in the survey, most of the brown trout activity is above sue Higgins, and the MP side channel. If they put a launch at carburn across from SH, I don't see why The weir to carburn couldn't have a 2 month closure yet have minimal impact on drifters/guides.

Sorry, my thinking was sort of muddled. Was thinking mac (and police, looks like it might be trumped by a new launch). I'd like the city to have a more flexible schedule weather/launch condition dependent.

Also having a good platform to disseminate information regarding what launch is open/closed. I think you have to google a few different places to find all that info now.

Probably another good thing to bring up with the bow access strategy. Set dates are kinda cheesy. Should have a guideline dates, but be weather/launch condition-dependent.

Wasn't trying to knock the work BC. Just noted the old map and how it affected how spawning areas were recorded. Sending you a pm

Do you have to pay google to use it for those purposes?

Fair enough, don. I thought about that too. The way those big runs between police and mac come alive with 6-8" fish on an evening hatch gives me hope that things are different.

Can't help but notice the outdated image of the river. Serves its purpose, I guess. Results/hot spots are consistent with what I've seen so far this year on floats.

To be honest, I hope it has been here for years. Maybe the great fishing on the Bow over the last few years is just it returning to form? Although, I don't have decades of experience on that river to compare. Bothers me more that it is in hatcheries. It shows a total lack of safe guard. For all they knew, Canada was WD-Free.

Nice

Articulated or what are they tied on?

I don't know if it's more important to keep testing places or to get to the bottom of who dropped the ball so hard.

I tie that as a balanced leech. 98 percent of the time, it's the first fly to get wet. Love that colour.

If I'm not mistaken, whitetail stocks blackwaters as well. They would more likely be the ones going after minnows, as they are a more piscivorous strain. I'm trying to think back at where I've found most of my fish in triploid lakes in the EK. Other that one I know that has a diploid remnant population and has a lot of shore activity in spring, I think I've seen fish anywhere from 3 feet to 60. Take larchwood as an example, while a lot of the fish in there seem anemic for whatever reason, I have seen a lot cruising the shoreline in 4-8 feet of water, and it's shore fishable. If I had to make a generalization, I would say I find the majority of my time is spent in water 10 feet and over, despite being able to spot cruisers easily on that lovely light marl. That being said, pennasks are more active in the evening/morning. So maybe by the time I'm there, they've buggered offf.

Eagle, I'm not shtting on jets, I'm just saying that environmental damage is one reason they should be going after the guy jetting in a closed stretch. No doubt all those other things you listed cause damage. But to say "if you can't limit all the sources of damage, then there's no point to trying at all" is flawed logic. Like I said about your car, "welp, can't prevent the paint swirls, may as well just key the thing." I believe I earned my troll status running into that brand of bulletproof logic on the flood mitigation thread.

Why is this kind of poor logic so common? (No offence) Paints gonna get scratched on my car anyways, so why not key it?Fish are gonna die anyway, may as well keep them! I may not be able to control cows but I can control boat traffic. It falls Along the same lines as guys driving on the bar at glenmore. The fact is the wake erodes the shoreline and stirs up sediment. Part of the reason why the regulations state that a jet has to stay a certain distance from the shoreline.

Ok Clive, I'll bite. What about the lakes being "cooler" makes trips unfit? Using summit as an example, it's gotta be pretty close to the temps at pol, no? In cooler water, intuition tells me that fish would be more likely to be in shallow feeding. Unless you're talking about diploids tendency to cruise the shallows in spring in an effort to shore spawn.

I agree with cube. I do notice that browns like spots near disturbances like that one has.

The dumbass has it on public on his fb page "elbow river last night..." posted oct 7 ha. Took a screen shot if you want it. Looks like he bonked a borderline/questionable (over 35?) rainbow on the bow in April too. What a gem.