Alberta Fisheries..where Are We Going ?

[McLeod]

I read this on a website

"

The Alberta Fisheries Branch has lost eight positions over the 2009/2010 fiscal year due to government cutbacks. All of these positions were abolished when they were vacated and will not be replaced. This attrition wipes out modest gains made under former Minister Mike Cardinal’s fisheries revitalization program which took almost a decade to orchestrate and implement. The impact of all this downsizing is speculative at this time but there are rumors that one of the provincial fish hatcheries may close because four of the eight positions abolished were in the Fish Culture Section. On another sad note, the Fisheries Round Table was axed in 2009 due to budget cuts by the Department of Sustainable Resources Development. It was not know at press time if this forum will be re-activated in 2010 but don’t hold your breath. Other cost-cutting news from Ken Crutchfield, Fisheries Branch Director is: “At the April 2009 Alberta Fisheries Management Round Table meeting it was announced that Sustainable Resource Development was preparing regulations for a two-year period starting in April 2010 "

 

 

So why does this happen if we the anglers are spnding thousand of dollars on licenses and much of that goes to the ACA ?

Should these positions not be a priority ?

Something needs to change ....

[Heimdallr]

Fisheries is just one example of how the entire political structure of this province is ****ed.

[Ricinus]

Welcome to the Alberta Advantage. I think Sustainable Resources took a 12% hit, so more bad news is probably on the way.

 

Regards Mike

[PGK]

.

[Heimdallr]

But you keep voting for the same party...it's like this everywhere now.

 

I've never once voted Conservative.

[ÜberFly]

Ditto!

 

I've never once voted Conservative.

 

[Taco]

Alberta's been voting for the same basic style of centre right government since August 22, 1935, don't expect too many changes for the foreseeable future, maybe a different name. Why do we keep voting the same way? Because us Albertans are independent contrary bastards and we don't like anything that smacks of big brother top down Government. Just ask the 600,000 ex-Saskatchewanites what style of government they prefer.

[Heimdallr]

I really hope a legitimate party and a valid alternative come out of the renewed Alberta Party. I understand why everyone's sceptical and cynical about it, I myself remain reserved, but something has got to change.

[McLeod]

 

Some good points by PGK on the license fees.

There should however already be enough money.

Some Biologists, and I will use Jim Stelfox for example ,are really in tune with there region and have made some good changes to enhance fishing opportunites within their region.

However as a Province government and the ACA have come up very short in increasing recreational fishing opportunites and the quality of angling in the Province. Can I again suggest a model like BC's

Freshwater fisheries Society. Secondly have we done enough to protect and enhance native fisheries ?

The money to do that is already there but is misdirected..I am being kind..

We need hatcheries and should not be closing them down.

[Ricinus]

It's no longer the PROGRESSIVE Conservatives, just Conservatives and guess what; Fishers, Hunters and Naturalists don't count for much.

 

Regards Mike

[trailhead]

You are right that the money is already there, but the money that comes in from licenses goes into general revenue. It is not specifically designated towards F&W, so a surcharge that would be directed that way is a great idea. However in the e-mails I have exchanged with various government departments and individuals it is clear that they feel a surcharge would potentially damage the tourist fishery. Also they did not want to dedicate the funds from this to F&W as it would be a loss of control, this tends to be counter intuitive to what politicos are all about. So we are basically undervaluing our fishery, understaffing it, underfunding it and overutilizing it, which ultimately will result in some type of disaster. The problem is the elected officials don't want to hear what we are saying. But then, we the folks on this board are a minority within the population of this province, unfotunately for most people this just isn't that important of an issue and the government looks upon us as a vocal, radical group with no teeth.

[dekkard2019]

I think this is big news. Something should be done. What can we do McLeod? Or what can I do? Is there someone in our provincial gov't we should be writing to? Who and what is their address? Maybe someone will listen. There are certain things in our control here. Convincing people to vote Liberal is not one of them.

On another note, if you want to help out your fisheries, join Trout Unlimited and get active. There are many ways to help out.

[PGK]

.

[canadagrey]

ALBERTA FISHERIES ROUND TABLE is in Edmonton April 17 is a note that all participants were send by Ken Crutchfield last week. Agenda to be announced shortly.

On another note Ken Crutchfield is retiring next month.

Who attended one of the 10 meetings held in Southern Alberta last November and December requesting PUBLIC INPUT on the South Saskatchewan Watershed?

[adams]

Convincing people to vote Liberal is not one of them.

 

Yes, and voting Liberal will bring you many, many more problems. The Conservatives may not be perfect, but they are far better than any other choice out there (IMHO).

 

Adams

[McLeod]

I would suggest, having worked in most regions of AB, that the vast majority of ASRD fisheries managers know exactly what they're doing. They just don't have the resources...usually the ACA crews are the feet on the ground for ASRD. Nowhere else have I seen such a good cooperative effort between research and management, although they have their differences on occasion, usually brought about by old timey guys who worry about union issues and office space.

 

Where is money misdirected? Please expound...

 

Hatcheries are great for meat fishermen, and they help focus harvest where it should be - away from wild fish. Managing fisheries in AB is a lot more complex than most other places. AB has significant issues around non native species and angling priority. Do you put money where anglers want you to? (Which is usually a stocked fishery) Or do you put money to where the ecosystem tells you it's needed? (Usually lower priority angling opportunity like bulltrout). The FFSBC is great....buuuuut they're solely focused on increasing the number of anglers out there through stocked fisheries. Great, but there's some fallout around that I personally don't like.

 

In the end, I think AB is doing very well, but more funding is needed in light of lacking gov't support. Increase your license fees! I would gladly pay $50 a year and $10/day to fish stauffer, the bow, castle...etc. That's fast cash in the ACA coffers.....you'll just have to get it past the AFGA...good luck!

 

Lots on the go....could be lots more.

http://www.ab-conservation.com/go/default/...rams/fisheries/

 

You make some valid points...but you need to look at the BIG picture and be inclusive of all anglers in the province not exclusive because they are meat fisherman. At the end of the day they pay for licenses just like you and I do. I see it as 2 parts...

 

1. Promote Sport fishing..Increase the number anglers and fishing opportunites ..More anglers more money for other priorites..in part 2... This does include stocking fish , looking at other species such as Tiger Trout ect..No reason for concern over stocking exotics anymore as they should all be triploids or as in the case of Tigers non reporducing. Make more quality lakes , place good regulations ,

promote angling and make Alberta a world destination for freshwater fishing..More money

to use for part 2.

 

2. Protect Native Species and Fish habitat.

 

We are not doing a very good job on part 1.

As for part 2 ..You tell me.. Are the ACA projects addressing this area ?

 

Don't agree that AB has significant issues around non native species and angling priority.

althought there may be a few specifics that could be addressed under the above categores that I have outlined.

[PGK]

.

[ÜberFly]

I for one don't mind when if my taxes/fees go up! But (and I'll take a page from Ray's book here - there is always a but...), as long as there is noticible improvement (justification for the increase!)! The problem I (and many others) have, is that the increased revenue gets pissed away!! How can we ensure that the levied increases go to something useful (get used appropriately)?!

 

P

 

Raise license fees!

[flyfishfairwx]

I have already posted lots on this subject on FFC. It is only going to help if the money added to licenses goes directly to the Resource, not general coffers, not IBM not even ACA... as I pointed out before use the example of NB, the money is administered, those administrating the money do not get paid from that money, it all goes back to the resource, to ACA and TU, and other groups with projects that benefit, not only fishing but hunting as well..

 

Guides are another area that should be changed but and there is always a but, that is another fight....

[Heimdallr]

Like others I have the same reservations about fee increases without the direct obligation that the increased revenue leads to noticeable improvement of our fisheries. One of the big things I would like to see, in terms of stocking, is just more variety--not exotics. I would like to see more lakes stocked with browns and cutthroats specifically. But again, this probably isn't going to solve any of the province's real problems. There's is a huge deficiency in enforcement funding that I think we all have noticed. F&W is greatly aided by the report a poacher line and citizen involvement because of the massive area each office is forced to enforce. There are tons of issues facing this province and I fear that, as usual, costs will go up and service to the industry and the people involved will go down.

[McLeod]

Like others I have the same reservations about fee increases without the direct obligation that the increased revenue leads to noticeable improvement of our fisheries. One of the big things I would like to see, in terms of stocking, is just more variety--not exotics. I would like to see more lakes stocked with browns and cutthroats specifically. But again, this probably isn't going to solve any of the province's real problems. There's is a huge deficiency in enforcement funding that I think we all have noticed. F&W is greatly aided by the report a poacher line and citizen involvement because of the massive area each office is forced to enforce. There are tons of issues facing this province and I fear that, as usual, costs will go up and service to the industry and the people involved will go down.

 

Browns and stocked Rainbows including those in the bow are exotics ..

[Guest Sundancefisher]

But you keep voting for the same party...it's like this everywhere now. Guys aren't retiring in fear of their positions being scrapped when they leave. BC went to two-year regulations this past year. Our regs now extend from April '09 to March '11. Yeah, you can really manage a fishery that way. Everybody shouts for adaptive management, but the money isn't there because the party is pro industry and anti environment.

 

The ACA is alive and well, lots of projects coming on and continuing this summer from the look of it. If you really want to help Alberta's fisheries, make a donation to the ACA, or lobby for conservaion surcharges, increased non resident fees, etc. I pay $26/yr as a non resident to fish in Alberta and get access to some of the best trout water on the continent. To fish here I pay $48/yr as a resident, plus $15 for CW and $25 for steelhead. The majority of that money goes back to the fish. Slapping a $10/day surcharge on non residents to fish the Bow will bring thousands of ACA operating dollars alone...bring in a conservation surcharge of $10/yr for residents to fish the Bow....you'd all pay it, happily.

 

There is no alternative.

 

I would like all revenue from F&W to at least stay in F&W. I am not so sure even that happens.

[McLeod]

Your opinion may be that AB needs more exotic species, but in the eyes of the vast majority of competent fisheries scientists, it is a poor idea and does nothing to address long term issues regarding sport fishery participation and financial management. Do you know how much it costs to produce triploid fish? They're only stocked in a handful of alberta lakes right now for a reason, they are damn expensive. I think the majority of alberta's fisheries managers are well aware of the problems (and some successes, mind you) their predecessors created by introducing so many non native trout species. I always find it a mix of frustrating and amusing when someone suggests more non native species introductions. When are we going to learn? And, if you don't like the native species, move.

 

Raise license fees!

 

Just when I think you show some reasonable ideas you come up with.. "if you don't like the native species, move. "

That's like me saying if you don't like exotics then move ..

And actually there were dozens of Alberta lakes that were stocked with triploids last year

The point behind that is that there thousands of dollars are being spent by anglers going to Saskatchewan and Manitoba even BC to fish for multiple species or exotics. Why not have those opportunites here.Licenses should reflect the cost of stocking or the operation of a quality fishery.

If we went your way then there would be no Browns or Brookies in the province and no Rainbows

except in Athabasca drainage.. Means the Bow would be empty.. lets go a step further remove natives from where they have never been such as the Ram cutties..Don't forget the effect they are having

invertebrates. I suggest your thought process is of a very very small minority.

if we did what you would like to see there would be a great loss in fishing opportunity and revenues would certainly be decreased ..but hey we could all move to another province...

I want to improve recreational fishing and enhance fish habitat and protect native species..It all works hand in hand.That is what the goal should be.

[Heimdallr]

Browns and stocked Rainbows including those in the bow are exotics ..

 

This is true, but I pretty much tend to think of them as natural here considering how currently established they are. I was thinking more extravagant species like tiger trout, goldens, aurora, etc. when I was saying that I didn't think we necessarily needed more exotics. My post also was meant to suggest less rainbow stocking and diversity in stocking. One species I mentioned happened to be cutthroats. I would love to see the increased stocking of native species.

 

This issue also wasn't the crux of my post.

[PGK]

.