Beaver Lake Update

[Guest tallieho]

As released at the Rnd.Table Mtg.The criteria for fish sizes,to be maintained has failed.So i believe that we as an interested group have an oppurtunity to help right the situation.That being contacting Ken Bodden@gov.ab.ca.What we should propose to correct the situation .Being that the report stated 0% of fish in the over 40cm size,are no longer present.That they institute an immediate reg. change,to mirror other Quality Lake Regulations allowing for the retention of 1 fish only over the size of 50cm.There are time constraints in this request,as stated at yesterdays meeting of october 30th,2011 being the cut-off.So it would be in our best interests to do this a.s.a.p. Ken Bodden @gov.ab.ca cc:Matt Besko@gov.ab.ca thanks for your help....

[Ricinus]

Tallieho, i'm confused as to what criteria for size has failed. Could you please clarify.

 

Mike

[Guest tallieho]

the perirameters of the quality fishery statement,there is to be a percentage of over 50cm maintained after a period of time.That time is up,a test netting results were submitted revealling the lack of fish at over 50cm at 0% .in the lake.these percentages were in the report from dave christiansen rocky [f&w]

[Bigtoad]

I'm not surprised. I'm all for the regs to change on Beaver and have written Ken before with my concerns on the overall size of fish on Beaver and how they seem to be far short of where they wanted them to be. First let me say, that any regulation change on Beaver whether it be one over 50cm or one under 50cm or total C & R would be a step in the right direction.

 

That being said, I'm not convinced that allowing one over 50cm is the solution. I think we would get an overall increase in fish size, but you would also find similar results in test netting that you do now; which is no fish over 50cm because they would get bonked as soon as they reached that size. Isn't that what is already happening there with keeping one over and one under?

 

Personally, I'd like to see an approach that has actually been proven to work, like what the Manitoba Parkland is doing, with allowing one fish under a certain size. One fish under 50cm (or 40cm) would still allow a more "family friendly" fishing experience, while still allowing fish to reach a large size. I think it would be a good compromise instead of just making it a total C&R which I imagine would piss off a few of the locals and starts to stink a bit like elitist fly fishermen with their bobbers.... I mean strike indicators, wanting to grow big fish. One under 18" seems to have worked really well in Manitoba, and think it is worth considering for Beaver, if we are discussing changing the regs anyway.

 

My $0.02, and the email I send to Ken will suggest the same, unless of course someone can convince me otherwise?

 

Cheers.

[Guest Jeremie]

Or maybe a slot size? Its tough,

 

i didnt bother fishing it this year, its usually crowded and fishing quality has degraded.

[DonAndersen]

Folks,

 

The backgrounder:

 

Quality Stocked Fishery [QSF] according to the draft Position Paper published in January 2008 which said:

Desired Characteristics of Prospective Quality Fisheries:

1. Water bodies preferred for quality fisheries will have the capability to produce 50

cm plus trout within a minimum of 4 years of stocking.

2. Management of the fishery can achieve maintaining 10 to15% of the stock in the

50 cm + size range

 

This position paper was reiterated by SRD in a QSF in a release on September 2011 which said:

 

Desired characteristics: 50+cm Trout 4 years after stocking, maintain 10-15% of stock in 50+cm class.

 

Draft Position Paper found here: http://www.srd.alberta.ca/FishWildlife/Fis...ries-Jan-08.pdf

 

Update on QSF found here: http://www.srd.alberta.ca/FishWildlife/Fis...-Sep28-2011.pdf

 

 

Where are we now:

 

Beaver Lake is now @ "0" fish in the 50 cm. range. If I recall correctly, it was 15% 2 years ago, 3% last year and now is @ "0".

 

A four year old fish from Beaver maybe 45 cms [1.5>2 lb] or so TODAY which is in contrast to the fish from 2004>08 which would have weighed 6>12 lbs. & been 65 cms. or 25"+

 

Clearly there are not enough groceries to sustain the growth required by the QSF Policy.

 

 

How do you get more groceries. Tis kinda simple - you reduce stocking numbers - - A LOT - a small step change will not do it. A reduction to <1,000 fish as I asked for 4+ years ago may not cut it.

 

What can you do:

 

Express your concern. Time is of the essence. If no changes are proposed by October 30, 2011, the regulations for Beaver will stay till 2013 or later.

 

What do I think should happen:

 

1] reduce stocking numbers till growth rate returns

2] increase maximum size limit to 50 cms. to match other QSF lakes in the area

3] reduce limit to one over 50 cm.

4] Align the closing/opening dates November 1>April 15 with the other QSF Lakes in the area.

 

regards,

 

 

Don

 

 

[Guest tallieho]

thanks Don ,for clarifying this topic...I can't emphsise it enough,we have an oppurtunity...please send your concerns to Ken Bodden @gov.ab.ca....time is of the essence,the reg's are being drafted for 2012 now...thanks brian

[Bigtoad]

thanks Don ,for clarifying this topic...I can't emphsise it enough,we have an oppurtunity...please send your concerns to Ken Bodden @gov.ab.ca....time is of the essence,the reg's are being drafted for 2012 now...thanks brian

 

 

Email sent to Ken.

 

Cheers.

[SilverDoctor]

My concerns are sent

[DaveJensen]

This is wonderful. Great to hear.

 

Don, if you recall, in a similar thread a year ago, I'd mentioned that the techs and bios were very much monitoring these lakes and treating them as a 'work in progress' and were more than willing to respond to the data collected and provide opportunity for anglers to remain involved. While you were more than willing to jump all over me for not knowing anything, that they weren't doing anything to better the fishery, that the dept is inept, and wanted to argue this point 10 ways to Sunday, it appears that these guys are doing exactly as they said. And that is wonderful.

 

The bigger picture remains - fisheries is an ongoing people management experiment and we have to remain involved and try to foster positive change.

[McLeod]

 

I am not opposed to keeping fish to eat but in this situation..

 

Based on it's location and the amount of use the only way you are going to get and continue with a quality lake is..

 

1. Reduce the stocking and adjust accordingly.

2.Catch and Release.

 

These can be said for several of the so called quality lakes that have been established.

It aint Rocket science.

[Bigtoad]

I am not opposed to keeping fish to eat but in this situation..

 

Based on it's location and the amount of use the only way you are going to get and continue with a quality lake is..

 

1. Reduce the stocking and adjust accordingly.

2.Catch and Release.

 

These can be said for several of the so called quality lakes that have been established.

It aint Rocket science.

 

I fully agree and would be fine if they went totally C&R, but I'm not convinced they will with Fiesta just down the road and possibly local pressure to keep some fish. However, I believe that a retention of 1 under 45cm (or 40 or 50cm) would also meet the goals of a quality fishery and be a good compromise as well. Manitoba Parkland is doing this model with exceptional success and I think we should too. It's proven to work. The balancing act that would have to occur is making sure you stock enough small fish that would survive to be 45cm without saturating the lake with so many fish that there is too much competition to get fish bigger than 45cm. Get it right and it would be golden.

 

I would still support, but do not entirely agree with the idea of keeping 1 over 50cm (or 40, or 45cm). With the pressure that Beaver gets, I can't see a fish making it very long after it reaches the "magical" mark. You'd end up with a lot of fish right under the length, but very few over it. I'm guessing if they go this route, we will still have similar results to what we have now, except possibly with a larger average size, but with less than 5% of fish over 50cm.

 

Cheers.

[McLeod]

I fully agree and would be fine if they went totally C&R, but I'm not convinced they will with Fiesta just down the road and possibly local pressure to keep some fish. However, I believe that a retention of 1 under 45cm (or 40 or 50cm) would also meet the goals of a quality fishery and be a good compromise as well. Manitoba Parkland is doing this model with exceptional success and I think we should too. It's proven to work. The balancing act that would have to occur is making sure you stock enough small fish that would survive to be 45cm without saturating the lake with so many fish that there is too much competition to get fish bigger than 45cm. Get it right and it would be golden.

 

I would still support, but do not entirely agree with the idea of keeping 1 over 50cm (or 40, or 45cm). With the pressure that Beaver gets, I can't see a fish making it very long after it reaches the "magical" mark. You'd end up with a lot of fish right under the length, but very few over it. I'm guessing if they go this route, we will still have similar results to what we have now, except possibly with a larger average size, but with less than 5% of fish over 50cm.

 

Cheers.

 

Yes you could have 1 fish under 40 ..I don't get the point of it if your trying to create a trophy fishery.

If you want to eat fish get them from elsewhere.

[Bigtoad]

Yes you could have 1 fish under 40 ..I don't get the point of it if your trying to create a trophy fishery.

If you want to eat fish get them from elsewhere.

 

It's a compromise.... still family friendly and you can keep one for the pan if you'd like, but still potential for big fish. I think there is a mentality outside of the flyfishing realm that don't like C&R and feel like it's a bunch of snobby elitist old men in million dollar waders trying to make catching big fish easier. I don't agree with this but have had extensive discussions with those that do. What I am suggesting would hopefully appease some of these people, allow a family friendly place to fish, and still allow us elitist, snobby fishermen to still have an opportunity to catch a big fish.

 

Would I prefer C&R? Yup. But I also realize there are those out there that don't, and the last thing I want is for those people to start writing to Ken Bodden for Beaver to be turned back to keeping 5 and using bait because Quality Fisheries obviously didn't work there. So I'm open to compromise, if it means I still have the opportunity to catch big fish... which clearly, currently at Beaver, we don't.

 

Cheers.

[McLeod]

It's a compromise.... still family friendly and you can keep one for the pan if you'd like, but still potential for big fish. I think there is a mentality outside of the flyfishing realm that don't like C&R and feel like it's a bunch of snobby elitist old men in million dollar waders trying to make catching big fish easier. I don't agree with this but have had extensive discussions with those that do. What I am suggesting would hopefully appease some of these people, allow a family friendly place to fish, and still allow us elitist, snobby fishermen to still have an opportunity to catch a big fish.

 

Would I prefer C&R? Yup. But I also realize there are those out there that don't, and the last thing I want is for those people to start writing to Ken Bodden for Beaver to be turned back to keeping 5 and using bait because Quality Fisheries obviously didn't work there. So I'm open to compromise, if it means I still have the opportunity to catch big fish... which clearly, currently at Beaver, we don't.

 

Cheers.

 

Yes you are right but you are missing the point as many others have over the years.

We don't have ANY C and R Stillwater for RAINBOWS in Alberta. There are other places you can keep fish.

Can we not see on one lake how C and R may work and see what it produces ?

 

[TerryH]

The term "family friendly" keeps turning up. My oldest "kid" is turning 40, but I can tell you, we did a lot of family fishing from the time he was about five, and a lot of it was done with flies -- and that was long before indicator fishing was invented. I do not accept the implication that a "family" must use bait, and bonk everything that's caught. A quality fishery can mean quality fishing for everyone, regardless of age. We have far too few special regs lakes, so let's make sure we keep and improve the few we have. Terry

[Bigtoad]

Yes you are right but you are missing the point as many others have over the years.

We don't have ANY C and R Stillwater for RAINBOWS in Alberta. There are other places you can keep fish.

Can we not see on one lake how C and R may work and see what it produces ?

I'm not missing the point. I get the point and have done the math and there are over 300 put and take lakes in Alberta and only a handful of "quality lakes." I get it. I'm all for more quality lakes whether they be strictly C&R or limit harvest to one. In fact, I think every lake that is aerated in Alberta should have more strict regulations in place.

 

But we do have some C&R lakes with rainbows; Fiesta, as I mentioned, is a C&R lake and is literally just down the road. Not sure how the local rednecks will like 2 C&R's so close to each other. That's all I'm saying.

 

The term "family friendly" keeps turning up. My oldest "kid" is turning 40, but I can tell you, we did a lot of family fishing from the time he was about five, and a lot of it was done with flies -- and that was long before indicator fishing was invented. I do not accept the implication that a "family" must use bait, and bonk everything that's caught. A quality fishery can mean quality fishing for everyone, regardless of age. We have far too few special regs lakes, so let's make sure we keep and improve the few we have. Terry

I couldn't agree with you more Terry and believe the same thing. However, I was also part of a very long, convoluted, and quite charged discussion on the AO forum a while ago when I posted a poll on the topic of quality fisheries in Alberta. It went on for more than 15 pages. I was on the side of more quality fisheries, especially C&R. However, there was a small but very vocal group that really did not want to see any lakes turned into C&R. I'm sure some of them were a part of the headaches SRD has had to deal with out Police Outpost as well? One of their main arguments were that C&R is not family friendly. I disagreed. However, that is one of the arguments that people against more quality lakes will use. They will also use the snobby, rich flyfishermen who want to make it easier to catch bigger fish argument as well. Did I mention how vocal they are?

 

If SRD changes Beaver to strictly C&R, you can bet there will be a small but very vocal group of locals that will not be happy about it. All I'm saying is a regulation of 1 under 45cm might go a long way towards appeasing this group, while still creating a quality fishery.

 

Please don't read the above and think I'm against Quality fisheries or C&R. I'm all for it. I think it's great and could list 10 lakes right now that I would love to see stricter regs on, Beaver included. Nevertheless, we should not be so naive as to believe that everyone out there shares the same thoughts... even though those thoughts make a hell of a lot of sense.

 

Cheers.

 

[ericlin0122]

... AO forum a while ago when I posted a poll...

[GaryF]

Letting ppl keep one fish of a certain size would work best IMO, it takes the elitist fly fisherman argument away from the bonkers. It would also keep most of them away from the lake because they could only keep one and they wouldn't find it worth their time to go there. Win Win, lol

[Guest Jeremie]

Maybe have a fish cop stationed there all the time. I've called rapp a few times there and never seen anyone show up. Usually its a bait chucker, or an asian guy that keeps asking for fish that everyone has caught.

 

A bigger fish isnt a stupid fish, if the regs are one over 20" its not like they're going to be pulling them out of there like they do with stockers, they would have to put effort in.

 

Should have regulations similar to muir. Muir's proven to have good fishing for all sizes with the very good chance at a real hog.

[McLeod]

I'm not missing the point. I get the point and have done the math and there are over 300 put and take lakes in Alberta and only a handful of "quality lakes." I get it. I'm all for more quality lakes whether they be strictly C&R or limit harvest to one. In fact, I think every lake that is aerated in Alberta should have more strict regulations in place.

 

But we do have some C&R lakes with rainbows; Fiesta, as I mentioned, is a C&R lake and is literally just down the road. Not sure how the local rednecks will like 2 C&R's so close to each other. That's all I'm saying.

 

 

 

My error..If that is what Fiesta then one under 45 cm would be appropriate.

 

Let's be very clear on one thing.. It's not just BAIT chuckers that eat fish. There are MANY flyfisherman who legally harvest fish as well.

 

 

[Guest tallieho]

I just was informed hat srd.is going to address the beaver lake reg change in 2013.thanks to those of you for sending in your concerns ,expressing a need to make a change prior to 2012 sport fishing's ken bodden

[Bigtoad]

I just was informed hat srd.is going to address the beaver lake reg change in 2013.thanks to those of you for sending in your concerns ,expressing a need to make a change prior to 2012 sport fishing's ken bodden

 

Great.... What in the world are they waiting for? Anecdotal evidence has said it for a while and now with the test netting, they should have some solid facts on what's going on with the fish at Beaver. It's no where near the quality lake that they wanted it to be. So why are they waiting until 2013 to make any changes?

 

Seriously, grow a pair and make some hard decisions already!!!

 

They know what decision needs to be made; postponing it only stalls the process. Nothing is going to change between now and 2013 and I've got this feeling that when it is time to make a decision, that it will be to keep the regs (and fishing quality) the same as it currently is.

 

Seriously!?!?!

 

:derby racer:

[McLeod]

 

More likely 2014..as that it when the next set of regs will come out...

[Guest bobjones]

 

Does anyone else find it humorous that the emoticon used to insult bait fisherman uses "your" instead of "you're"?