Time To Protect Our Mountain Streams

[mtbkr]

Over the winter I've been writing letters to the Alberta government advocating regulation changes pertaining to our mountain streams. Specifically, in my first letter I suggested that all the headwaters of the Castle River System be designated Catch and Release to help maintain and encourage a world class fishery.

 

I received a response from Mel Knight, Minister of Sustainable resources. He indicated to me that there is now joint colaboration between the Federal government and Alberta provincial government on developing an Alberta recovery plan and a national recovery strategy for the West Slope Cutthroat Trout. He went on to say that the recovery plan is expected to be completed this fall and one of the things it will address is angling and angling regulations.

 

Now is the time to write letters and to start lobbying the government for more catch and release protection on our mountain streams. We've got world class fly fishing across the foothills but we have a lot of streams that could become even better fisheries if they were designated catch and release.

 

I hope there is some strong support out there for more C&R!

 

 

Cheers

 

Mat

 

 

[ÜberFly]

Nice work Mat. I too have written letters and received feedback on the on gong discussions (though I have not heard from Knight, at this point in time, but I'll hold my breath) at the legislature...

 

Keep up the good work!

 

P

 

 

 

[Taco]

Most won't like it but C&R will only work for the protection the westslopes if there's a very liberal retention limit on all non-native trout in the foothill and mountain zones. Otherwise it just lip service.

[troutlover]

You might be shooting yourself in the foot they might close a lot of streams to NO FISHING but so be it if it saves the population. It's an easy cost effective solution. I think that eventualy Alberta streams are going to have to follow suit with a lot of popular american world class streams and adopt stocking programs to keep populations up. Im not in favor with these methods i prefer regulation and enforcement but that is not the alberta way. Love your cutties now because they are going to be stockies in the near future. I will write a letter this weekend to support your effort this might be one of thoes rare occasions that Alberta gets it right if there are enough voices coming forth.

[monger]

I just spoke with a fish geneticist that I work with who sits on the advisory board looking into the Westslope Cutt situation. He said there is some pure fish in the Upper Bow tributaries that he wants to investigate. He was wondering if he could hire my fly rod for some collecting. Sounds like I might be taking care of some special fish this summer.

[ÜberFly]

You are welcome to invite me along!!

 

P

 

I just spoke with a fish geneticist that I work with who sits on the advisory board looking into the Westslope Cutt situation. He said there is some pure fish in the Upper Bow tributaries that he wants to investigate. He was wondering if he could hire my fly rod for some collecting. Sounds like I might be taking care of some special fish this summer.

 

[troutsteaks]

Most won't like it but C&R will only work for the protection the westslopes if there's a very liberal retention limit on all non-native trout in the foothill and mountain zones. Otherwise it just lip service.

 

Does that include rainbows and browns as well as the brook trout I think you're referring to? Aren't all trout except for cutthroat and bull "non-native"?

[Taco]

Yeah that's exactly what I'm sayin' but cutthroat are just another introduced species north of the Bow drainage, Alberta has arctic grayling and athabaskan rainbows surviving in just a fraction of their historical ranges too.

 

 

[ruffsranger]

If it is a trout in a stream or river, release it!!

If it is caught in a lake or stocked pond, eat if if you want, but don't waste it.

[mtbkr]

Thank you all for the replies and the support

 

 

 

You might be shooting yourself in the foot they might close a lot of streams to NO FISHING but so be it if it saves the population. It's an easy cost effective solution. I think that eventualy Alberta streams are going to have to follow suit with a lot of popular american world class streams and adopt stocking programs to keep populations up. Im not in favor with these methods i prefer regulation and enforcement but that is not the alberta way. Love your cutties now because they are going to be stockies in the near future. I will write a letter this weekend to support your effort this might be one of thoes rare occasions that Alberta gets it right if there are enough voices coming forth.

 

 

Thank you for the support Troutlover! To quote Mel Knight in a letter he sent me:

 

"The department is not aware of any locations where angling is adversely affecting native westslope cutthroat trout. Many of the existing pure westslope cutthroat trout populations are already under a catch-and-release regulation. In areas where we are monitoring angling and harvest, we are finding low hooking mortality and no negaive impacts to populations."

Mel Knight, Minister of Sustainable Resource Developement

 

I find this response by Mr. Knight a bit bizarre and frustrating, but from what I gather, department staff don't seem to think angling is one of the major contributing factors that threaten cutties.

I'm trying to get them to understand what a world class fishery means to us and that C&R regs are highly effective in maintaining such fisheries.

 

I could be wrong but from all that I've heard from Mr. Knight I don't think we have to worry about them closing any streams to fishing, I think our bigger worry is that the government doesn't really understand that more streams should be protected under C&R; which is what we need to be lobbying for.

 

Like Troutlover said, this could be something the Alberta government gets right if they hear enough of our voices

[lethfisher]

I totally support full C&R in the mountains, I practice it now when I fish the streams anyways. I think it may be an easy concept to understand for some people but I know other people also will look at it along the lines of "I'm paying $28 a year for a fishing license I should be able to take however many fish I want, do you see how expensive it is in the grocery store, etc etc" So I think it will be a tough argument for some but definitely worth it in the end. If they have to shut down the streams for a season then so be it, if it can help the fish population for current and future generations. I really hope they get some more regulations in though, we need an premiere that is a fly fisherman haha then more would get done about it for sure!! Anyways good work Mat and keep it up!!

[troutsteaks]

Didn't Jim McLennan write an article about C&R a couple of years ago about it being a double edged sword of sorts?

[Taco]

Yeah he did, in the Canadian Flyfisher about 5 yrs ago I believe. "Further Thoughts on Catch and Release - Do some of us take it a bit too seriously?" I can't seem to find a copy online.

[Conor]

The main threat to cutthroat is hybridization with rainbows. Any protection revieved through the recovery plan will not extend to the cutts most people angle for. Unless you are fishing extreme headwaters for tiny cutts, your mostly catching hybrids. That is why the Minister is under the impression that angling is not a significant factor.

 

If you are pushing for stronger regs on our fishing streams, make sure you are specific. Don't let some politician give you a vague answer that doen't really relate to your problems with the current situation.

 

It will be interesting to see what the recovery plan will be. I bet it is focused mainly on Forestry/O&G leaving bigger buffers to watercourses and possibly heavier access restrictions in headwater areas. I'd like to see it restrict ATV use in those areas, as well. I'd be dissapointed to see angling moratoriums on these streams, as the people interested in that sort of fishing are not the problem, but stewards of our headwaters.

 

 

 

[Taco]

If it is a trout in a stream or river, release it!!

If it is caught in a lake or stocked pond, eat if if you want, but don't waste it.

 

All native trout anywhere will always be at risk if all wild/native trout are treated and revered as equals

[mtbkr]

The main threat to cutthroat is hybridization with rainbows. Any protection revieved through the recovery plan will not extend to the cutts most people angle for. Unless you are fishing extreme headwaters for tiny cutts, your mostly catching hybrids. That is why the Minister is under the impression that angling is not a significant factor.

 

If you are pushing for stronger regs on our fishing streams, make sure you are specific. Don't let some politician give you a vague answer that doen't really relate to your problems with the current situation.

 

It will be interesting to see what the recovery plan will be. I bet it is focused mainly on Forestry/O&G leaving bigger buffers to watercourses and possibly heavier access restrictions in headwater areas. I'd like to see it restrict ATV use in those areas, as well. I'd be dissapointed to see angling moratoriums on these streams, as the people interested in that sort of fishing are not the problem, but stewards of our headwaters.

 

 

Conor I agree with you completely. Corresponding with Mel Knight leads me to believe the government is concerned with exactly what you just mentioned. What I would like to impress upon them the value of "World Class Fishing" which means protecting Cutts, Rainbows, Browns, and Cutt-Bow hybrids in their respective waters. As I'm sure most everyone here has experienced, there are tons of areas where you catch fish that have varying amounts of Cutthroat and Rainbow in them. I'd hate to see the government focus exclusively on only the small populations of "pure" Westslope Cutts and fail to see the importance of the "Cuttbows" that so many of us love to fish for. I'm editing a letter to Mr. Knight right now, I'm certainly going to talk about this.

 

 

All native trout anywhere will always be at risk if all wild/native trout are treated and revered as equals

 

I think you make a good point Taco. I think brook trout are the biggest issue. Perhaps C&R on all cutts and cutt-bow hybrids and large retention limit on brookies would be a good solution. You just have to hope everyone can tell the difference between a brookie and a bull I guess.

 

In any case I certainly don't agree with the typical "2 over 30cm or over 35cm". This targets the big fish which are the spawners and the ones you want to pass their genes along. I just think it's a real shame when you hear about some guy killing a 20 inch cutt.

[BBBrownie]

Conor I agree with you completely. Corresponding with Mel Knight leads me to believe the government is concerned with exactly what you just mentioned. What I would like to impress upon them the value of "World Class Fishing" which means protecting Cutts, Rainbows, Browns, and Cutt-Bow hybrids in their respective waters. As I'm sure most everyone here has experienced, there are tons of areas where you catch fish that have varying amounts of Cutthroat and Rainbow in them. I'd hate to see the government focus exclusively on only the small populations of "pure" Westslope Cutts and fail to see the importance of the "Cuttbows" that so many of us love to fish for. I'm editing a letter to Mr. Knight right now, I'm certainly going to talk about this.

 

 

 

 

I think you make a good point Taco. I think brook trout are the biggest issue. Perhaps C&R on all cutts and cutt-bow hybrids and large retention limit on brookies would be a good solution. You just have to hope everyone can tell the difference between a brookie and a bull I guess.

 

In any case I certainly don't agree with the typical "2 over 30cm or over 35cm". This targets the big fish which are the spawners and the ones you want to pass their genes along. I just think it's a real shame when you hear about some guy killing a 20 inch cutt.

 

The other side of the arguement is that some would ask why we are playing with food. I don't agree with the sentiment, but I've heard it many times. I also think that if it is sustainable, I have no issue with harvest of non-native, abundant populations. In many cases they are hybrids living in what was once westslope habitat, occupying a niche in between the colder headwaters of the cutty and the warmer foothills sections that the rainbows exploit. Angler harvest of a fish is in my opinion the wrong focus as they pale in comparison to the habitat degredation that is ongoing currently. If you really want to help, rally against the clear cut logging that is slated to occur throughout the Castle drainage this summer. That will have much more influence on fish numbers than bonking one. Think warming of water, siltation of spawning habitat, decrease in functional cover/LWD, decreased cahnnel complexity...

[McLeod]

I would have to check the regs again but ares there any flowing waters where you can keep cutties other than part of the Ram were they are not native ? If there are streams with the regs that allow harvest of Cutties then that needs to end.

 

As for a liberal harvest of non natives that has to be handled carefully and best done only those who are qualifed with a special license. If you opened it up to everyone I could see alot of bulls getting bonked on the head.

 

And yes you can bet in the next 2 years a number of the creeks that still have pure natives Cutties will be closed to angling.

[troutsteaks]

The other side of the arguement is that some would ask why we are playing with food. I don't agree with the sentiment, but I've heard it many times. I also think that if it is sustainable, I have no issue with harvest of non-native, abundant populations. In many cases they are hybrids living in what was once westslope habitat, occupying a niche in between the colder headwaters of the cutty and the warmer foothills sections that the rainbows exploit. Angler harvest of a fish is in my opinion the wrong focus as they pale in comparison to the habitat degredation that is ongoing currently. If you really want to help, rally against the clear cut logging that is slated to occur throughout the Castle drainage this summer. That will have much more influence on fish numbers than bonking one. Think warming of water, siltation of spawning habitat, decrease in functional cover/LWD, decreased cahnnel complexity...

 

That's what I call hitting the nail on the head in regards to protecting our mountain streams and harvesting fish. I completely agree with you Riley.

[PGK]

.

[ruffsranger]

I would have to check the regs again but ares there any flowing waters where you can keep cutties other than part of the Ram were they are not native ? If there are streams with the regs that allow harvest of Cutties then that needs to end.

 

As for a liberal harvest of non natives that has to be handled carefully and best done only those who are qualifed with a special license. If you opened it up to everyone I could see alot of bulls getting bonked on the head.

 

And yes you can bet in the next 2 years a number of the creeks that still have pure natives Cutties will be closed to angling.

 

 

 

A quick check of the regs for south western Alberta shows that cutties can be harvested ( size limits in effect ) from nearly all the major rivers in the area except the Livingstone.

[PGK]

.

[ggp]

Charging more money is not the answer, all that does is too make it harder and harder for those who don't earn as much, to enjoy the magnificent sport of fishing wether it be fly fishing or spin fishing!!! When I was a child we moved to the UK for five years where everything is private and only the wealthy can enjoy the pleasures of fishing.....It wasn't until we returned home to Canada that my dad could afford to take me fishing.....Lets not have that happen here.....Which is what I was trying to share with the enhancement societies on Vancouver Island, in the classified waters thread.....What it really takes is people who actually give a damn about the fish and their habitat!! And who are willing to donate their time and effort to the enhancement of the fishery. That is definitely not to say that some moneys are not needed, but there are other ways of achieving that without putting it out of reach of the lower income group.

[mtbkr]

Thanks for the replies everyone!

 

Instead of just the one-off I posted, I'll take a stab at helping.

 

If you want this done you need angler support. You need to get organized and have meetings and show up at round tables and pound on doors and fill email inboxes. The vast majority of the angling pressure in the province isin favour of harvesting fish. One or two guys sending letters to one or two ministry folks will not get it done.

 

Problem 1: The fishery is immensely undervalued. Alberta has some of the best (if not the best) native cutthroat fishing in the world. Do you know what other world class fisheries are worth? There's no need to sell your fisheries short because they aren't steelhead or salmon or big name guiding destinations. There should be special license fees for every native cutthroat stream in the province. Example: Increase the base fishing license fee to $50/year, create a cutthroat rivers license for $20/yr. Use the ACA or TU to set up specific cutthroat management funds for that money to go to. If people don't want to pay that much, screw em! If they don't support fish management for the good of the fish, you don't want them out fishing to begin with!

 

Problem 2: Brook & rainbow trout. Opening up harvest on those species helps but like someone said, you'll bycatch a few BLTR along the way. Anglers who can properly identify their catch are the exception not the rule. Options: Find funding to host an angler education course. Make it mandatory and a complement to a special waters license. If you want to buy a cutthroat license, you have to take this test. Create a non native species management incentive....you get $5 for every brook trout head you turn in, and you pay $20 for every bull trout you misidentify.

 

Problem 3: Cutthroat CAN handle a minimal harvest without experiencing population decline. The people who want to keep the kill fishery know that. You will have to fight them.

 

Problem 4: Guiding. When you make something important you risk making it exclusive. License guides and set fixed rod days per river. If you don't do that you'll end up like the east kootenays.

 

All of it comes back to funding. You won't get anywhere without money. You can make all the regulations you want but at the end of the day they aren't worth the paper they're written on if there isn't a fund set up to carry them off the ground. Increase your license fees. Want to fish Stauffer for browns? OK, but it's gonna cost you $20 a year and half that money is going straight into cutthroat management.

 

Stop undervaluing the fisheries!

 

 

PGK, I absolutely agree with everything you just said.

It all comes down to the fact that like you said, the fishery is immensely undervalued. I fully agree with all the changes you just outlined.

 

At the end of the day most of us spend hundreds or even thousands of dollars a year on fishing. I definitely support an increase in licensing fees and an introduction of classified waters licences if it means that the extra revenues can be used for increased enforcement, stream rehabilitation, stocking of hatchery fish in lakes and ponds to keep the catch and keep anglers happy and away from the streams, etc.

 

[PGK]

.