National Parks Fishing

[Smitty]

I know if I did a search, this topic has been visited before. But I am starting a new one, at risk of offending the mods. Copy and pasted below ais my last response from the nutrient-in-streams debate:

 

 

Sorry to continue hijack. If we'd like to continue, I suggest starting another thread. In fact, I should do it, since I am responsible for the original hijack.

 

What you are pointing out is the apparent hypocrisy in the Parks policy; that, C&R fishing is, de-facto, harassing wildlife.

 

And, in fact, you'd be 100% correct. Fishing does fly in the face of that particular policy.

 

Know what? I don't care. Yep, I am selfish enough to live comfortably within that hypocrisy. I am honoring a centuries old tradition of harassing the wildlife, and I am ok with it. At some point, a choice must be made, and I choose fishing. I choose to have tradition trump an individual policy point. Fishing is THE activity I primarily enjoy in the parks. I can go elsewhere for my skiing and golfing, but in the summertime, if I am in Park, its to fish. Perhaps that's one-dimensional of me, so be it. Fishing is my way of appreciating nature, and I try to be mindful and respectful of that as I slam a barbed wire into the fish's mouth. All of my other outdoor activities, hiking, camping, boating, and photography stem from my passion to fish. Some of my best and earliest memories come from fishing the parks, and this past summer, I introduced my nephews to flyfishing in a National park. Fishing motivates me to care about the Parks in general as a whole, without that activity, I would care less about the Parks, and turn my attention and passions to other causes. What can I say? - I am a flawed human being. No point in trying to defend my position without acknowledging the contradictions abound in it.

 

Fishing is THE exceptional, hypocritical activity allowed right now that does allow direct interaction with wildlife. And that's the way it should be, and left alone for future generations, IMHO.

 

Smitty

[CTownTBoyz]

And my last response.....

 

The thing I can't understand about fishing in the national parks is it seems to contradict every 'comparable' activity that is illegal i.e. hunting, removing fauna, rocks etc. And it seems to go against established park rules.

 

Park Rules

*It is unlawful to collect or remove any natural objects or historical artifacts (this includes berries, wildflowers, mushrooms, antlers, wood, interesting rocks along the river, etc.).

 

*It is unlawful to feed, entice or harass wildlife (this includes feeding them ‘natural’ food; it also includes what may look like tame wildlife such as birds or squirrels).

 

*Pets must be leashed at all times. For their protection, never leave your pet unattended. Bears, coyotes, and even elk and deer may present a danger to your pet.

 

*All food (even food in coolers) must be stored inside vehicle trunks or in tear-proof containers.

You may camp only in designated areas

 

The parks were "meant to be enjoyed", but they were also established for conservation, animal and environmental protection and intended to be restricted from most development. Certainly this is the direction Banff NP is going with the current caps on building throughout the park, increased wildlife fencing throughout, etc.

 

The Golf Course at Banff Springs, the Hot Springs and the Chateau were really the products of CP Rail, and key factors in the development of the areas national park status, but do you think it would be possible to build another Golf Course, or Ski hill in the park?

 

In regards to fixing streams via nutrient replacement, the Banff Park section of the Bow is great example of human influence, and the potential to repair a fishery by 'closing it' - where is should be closed.

 

IMHO.

 

[Smitty]

CTown:

 

Its incredibly difficult to debate your position, because your position inherently more 'noble' than mine. So my only point in this reply is to say that I am very confident that my fishing activities in the Park have minimal impact and disturb less than many of the folks who choose not to "harass" wildlife.

 

I think I could pose a successful argument that fishing for fish, may, in some circumstances, may actually be less harmful than the idiots feeding the wildlife, or stopping at every bear and elk sighting to rubberneck and/or stress the animals out - particularly those with young - by their photographing activities.

 

But I recognize the "red-herringness" of my argument in stating that at the end of the day, no matter what anyone else does, I still am stressing the fish out by catching them. I just wanted someone to recognize that at least many of us do our harassing with far more respect than some people who conduct themselves in a rather ignorant manner.

 

Smitty

[Nick0Danger]

sorry ctown have to disagree the reason for the establishment of the parks, is for our enjoyment, had nothing to do with animals.

[Timo]

What is the economic impact in revenue loss for our National Parks if fishing was not allowed?

 

I believe the revenue gained from it is a large part of the economic dynamic of sustaining its viability.

 

What gain would there be if fishing was not allowed in our national parks?

 

Revenue from fishing and tourism generated from this activity helps to feed enforcement of

all the other rules. The parks cannot exist within a vacuum.

[Nick0Danger]

I like that reply bad caster however the people running the park won't see it that way, they tend to be far to environmentalist to think about money

[CTownTBoyz]

sorry ctown have to disagree the reason for the establishment of the parks, is for our enjoyment, had nothing to do with animals.

 

Source?

 

You are incorrect, in fact, the intial development of Banff National Park was under the Rocky Mountain Parks Act in 1887 which was intended to balance development and conservation.

 

Can you see the irony in what you just said....parks have nothing to do with animals and are there for our enjoyment? Doesn't the enjoyment involved in the development of National Parks have to do with the interconnective habitat that is created for animals- and people?

[Flytyer]

By law, national parks are protected for public understanding, appreciation and enjoyment while being maintained in an unimpaired state for our children. To that end, Parks Canada is mandated first to protect the ecological integrity and secondarily to allow the public to explore, learn about and enjoy our natural spaces. The parks are for people but not at the expense of other species.

 

With that said the system is seriously flawed

[CTownTBoyz]

CTown:

 

Its incredibly difficult to debate your position, because your position inherently more 'noble' than mine. So my only point in this reply is to say that I am very confident that my fishing activities in the Park have minimal impact and disturb less than many of the folks who choose not to "harass" wildlife.

 

I think I could pose a successful argument that fishing for fish, may, in some circumstances, may actually be less harmful than the idiots feeding the wildlife, or stopping at every bear and elk sighting to rubberneck and/or stress the animals out - particularly those with young - by their photographing activities.

 

But I recognize the "red-herringness" of my argument in stating that at the end of the day, no matter what anyone else does, I still am stressing the fish out by catching them. I just wanted someone to recognize that at least many of us do our harassing with far more respect than some people who conduct themselves in a rather ignorant manner.

 

Smitty

 

I don't mean it to be noble or righteous-not at all. I'm just discussing the whole concept of the National Park. It was just a branch off the idea of reestablishing the upper-upper Bow to what it was 100 or so years ago.

[CTownTBoyz]

What is the economic impact in revenue loss for our National Parks if fishing was not allowed?

 

I believe the revenue gained from it is a large part of the economic dynamic of sustaining its viability.

 

What gain would there be if fishing was not allowed in our national parks?

 

Revenue from fishing and tourism generated from this activity helps to feed enforcement of

all the other rules. The parks cannot exist within a vacuum.

 

 

There are National Parks in some of the remotest places in Canada. Some receive less than a thousand visitors a year. How do these places sustain their viability without restaurants, hotels, golf courses, and....fishing.

 

Are you suggesting that BNP would collapse without fishing?

 

Monod's has practically closed their fishing section of the store in Banff, and save Minnewanka, most of the fishing guides in the area guide outside the park.

 

[Smitty]

CTown:

 

Probably a bad use of quotes on my part - I apologize. When I said 'noble" I actually meant it as a sincere compliment. My position on the matter is more selfish, no two ways about it.

 

Cheers,

Smitty

[Timo]

There are National Parks in some of the remotest places in Canada. Some receive less than a thousand visitors a year. How do these places sustain their viability without restaurants, hotels, golf courses, and....fishing.

 

Are you suggesting that BNP would collapse without fishing?

 

Monod's has practically closed their fishing section of the store in Banff, and save Minnewanka, most of the fishing guides in the area guide outside the park.

 

Larger infrastructure is a requirement of larger use. Are you suggesting we limit Banff to less than a thousand visitors per year?

 

Collapse no, but there would be some fallout from tourism and license revenue all which would have to be supplemented from another revenue source. In this day and age I can see the end of fishing in the park and visitors would be subject to a fancy named surcharge. Then what have we really achieved? Environmental elitism/extremism because we want to take the moral high ground or holds fast to legal definition of wildlife harassment? Where does it stop?

 

I guess we could just fence it all in and move everybody out, and let nature reclaim it all. Then have google come take pictures of it all and then enjoy it from the comfort of our laptop.

 

 

However you are not wrong, I too have pondered on the parks stance on leave everything but the fish philosophy. And looking back I can see why. Attitudes and times were different. Heck you can fish in Yellowstone too.

 

I just am a traditional person who hates to see freedoms and past privileges taken away for the wrong reasons.

 

 

Cheers

[CTownTBoyz]

CTown:

 

Probably a bad use of quotes on my part - I apologize. When I said 'noble" I actually meant it as a sincere compliment. My position on the matter is more selfish, no two ways about it.

 

Cheers,

Smitty

 

No apology necessary, and again this is just debate. In fact, I hiked Bourgeau Lake last July and kicked myself for not buying a license, and packing in a rod.

 

[creekside]

Things are changing in the Parks.

Last time I got involved in a debate on Parks policy I was burnt pretty badly so I'm not getting involved in this debate, but please read the attached link. May shed some light or really get things heated up. http://www.faqs.org/periodicals/201005/2143150471.html

 

[Taco]

One query/observation from the Rebellious Alliance, if the National Parks were created to protect and preserve "native" original species within their boundaries, what is to be done with the introduced species?

[reevesr1]

One query/observation from the Rebellious Alliance, if the National Parks were created to protect and preserve "native" original species within their boundaries, what is to be done with the introduced species?

 

Your sorta turning into a one issue kinda guy aren't you!

 

I don't think I've ever fished in Banff, or any National Park for that matter. Not that I wouldn't, but I always seem to be there with people who don't fish so it hasn't come up. I would though if the opportunity produced itself. But I will say that I think there is more than enough water without fishing the parks. Selfish statement on my part as I wouldn't miss it since I've never fished it.

 

 

[Smitty]

Rickr:

 

In light of your admittance to having never fished inside a Park, plus I did get the chance to use your condo, I hereby invite you for a weekend of fishing Maligne Lake in JNP.

 

If you only knew what you're missing. Yes, I recognize that's a long drive for you. Suck it up!

 

 

Smitty

[Taco]

Honest question Rick, if there's only to be non-consummative use of the Parks how will the invasives be managed?

[flyfishfairwx]

Honest reply there are no invasivies only introduced species!!!!

 

Who have taken advantage of the opportunity that was given them.

 

They will not leave the park boundaries anyway !!!!!!!

 

Honest question Rick, if there's only to be non-consummative use of the Parks how will the invasives be managed?

 

[DonAndersen]

Invasives - kill 'em I say.

Specially all them critters in GoreTex and plastic boots with long things strapped to their legs.

People have no place in Parks.

 

 

Don

[Ricinus]

Parks Canada has gone through a huge philosophy change from the 1950's when they use to run their own hatcheries and stock everything from Brookies to Atlantic Salmon. Personally I think the new approach is a big improvement.

 

Regards Mike

[dekkard2019]

No apology necessary, and again this is just debate. In fact, I hiked Bourgeau Lake last July and kicked myself for not buying a license, and packing in a rod.

That place is a blast. I originally had plans to fish Taylor Lake last summer but because of the construction of the highway(twinning the Trans Canada) I was unable to. So, I stopped by Bourgeau with my pup, and we had a great afternoon. The lake is packed with 5-10" brook trout. There was a big hatch going on and they were hammering a #16 p-adams. It is pretty good to that when you do fly fish a National Park you are only alowed one fly and no lead. Fine with me. There are a ton of great places to fish in BNP.

 

[reevesr1]

Rickr:

 

In light of your admittance to having never fished inside a Park, plus I did get the chance to use your condo, I hereby invite you for a weekend of fishing Maligne Lake in JNP.

 

If you only knew what you're missing. Yes, I recognize that's a long drive for you. Suck it up!

 

 

Smitty

 

I will accept the invitation. May be a long drive, but sure is a pretty one. Drive like going to my condo, and take a right instead of a left!

 

 

[McLeod]

Yes we have discussed and debated fishing in the Parks. But again whenever someone suggests implies that fishing should not be allowed in the parks or even questions the current allowed practice then I am going to respond.

First of it should be common knowledge to most by now that financially our parks are broke.

Revenues raised from fees such as park passes and yes fishing licenses do not cover the expenses

and deficients are covered by taxpayers. But with the global economic crisis and spending priorites

the feds are not handing over dollars to the parks as they have in the past. That is why you are seeing

Parks mandates slowly change towards bring more visitors by way of new activites which will in more

revenue from various means. In otherwords the parks need people to so as to generate revenues

so Parks Canada can maintain to the best degree the protection of natural environments that representative of Canada's natural heritage. These special places are gateways to nature, to adventure, to discovery, to solitude.

 

In terms of Fishing , its an activity that is part of the our heritage and the history of the parks..right up there with other activites such as mountain climbing. Does it need to be consumptive ?

I think parks has a pretty good handle on that being that Native Fishes are protected.

[CTownTBoyz]

I think parks has a pretty good handle on that being that Native Fishes are protected.

 

How are native fishes protected if you are allowed to fish for them (taking into account mortality from C&R)? Certainly, from a national park/conservation perspective wouldn’t it make more sense for there to be no fishing for native species in park boundaries?

 

There are lots of places in the park with introduced species.