Tigers Soon In Alberta Waters !

[denniss3131]

For the bonking side of this ERSD is putting up signs for a self imposed catch release on Tigers where there stocked. Will it work???? your guess is as good as mine.

 

Tight Lines Always

Dennis S

[bcubed]

Not sure why they wouldn't just do a c&r regulation based on species until they're a little more established.

[albertatrout]

Not sure why they wouldn't just do a c&r regulation based on species until they're a little more established.

It's mostly due to some politics which delayed stocking until after the new regs were published. I know some area managers were hoping to go catch and release with the tigers, the invasive species council or whatever it is called just took forever in giving the ok for them to be stocked. There was hope they would be stocked in a lake that is strictly catch and release but it wasn't confirmed whether or not enough fish would be available this summer (hopefully it works out). One problem with tigers is they are apparently not very good at competing with other trout (that is according to biologists out of Saskatchewan and Manitoba) so there were hopes some could be stocked in lakes with limited competition from other trout. Will be interesting to see what the final stocking plans look like come summer.

[bcubed]

Alberta should have the ability to do In-Season changes like Bc. Bit silly that a reg can't be changed just due to a publication date

[McLeod]

The delay was due to the Feds. No fish are going into Blood as Tigers are NOT being used to control carp. As the Tigers won't be in the regs they will be put and take this year but yes signs are going up to encourage anglers to release them however that may not be possible if they are caught with bait.

[Villageidiot]

Sure hope they aren't put in any 5 fish limit lakes. Sounding like this could potentially be a big waste of money if they're put in where the wack and stack crowd goes.

[Fred]

Hey fellas, please excuse my ignorant question, but are Tiger trout once transplanted self sustaining, or are they sterile so that they are unable to reproduce? If they were illegally transported to other waters, would this create issues down the road?

Cheers.

Fred

[Ricinus]

 

Hey fellas, please excuse my ignorant question, but are Tiger trout once transplanted self sustaining, or are they sterile so that they are unable to reproduce? If they were illegally transported to other waters, would this create issues down the road?

Cheers.

Fred

Not an ignorant question at all, Fred. I believe they are sterile, but I'm not sure if this is an absolute guarantee..

 

Mike

[jpinkster]

It is my understanding that these kinds of hybrid are typically sterile.

 

It still blows my mind that they can cross a brookie with a brown seeing as they come from two different families. Next science experiment, cross a brown with a rainbow.

[BBBrownie]

Tiger trout are considered sterile, although I believe there have been extremely rare documentations of fertile tigers.

[albertatrout]

It is my understanding that these kinds of hybrid are typically sterile.

 

It still blows my mind that they can cross a brookie with a brown seeing as they come from two different families. Next science experiment, cross a brown with a rainbow.

Funny you say that as it has been done. I remember reading about this experiment in an old fish hatchery book. From what i remember they didn't survive very well and survival rates were astronomically low. Weird looking trout going by the photo's. As for discussion of Tiger Trout reproduction, extremely unlikely. Consider in the wild brooks and browns occupy many of the same habitats yet only a few naturally produced tiger trout are ever captured. Not much of a concern if you look at the numbers.

[bigbowtrout]

Another introduced non native fish. No thanks

[Fred]

Funny you say that as it has been done. I remember reading about this experiment in an old fish hatchery book. From what i remember they didn't survive very well and survival rates were astronomically low. Weird looking trout going by the photo's. As for discussion of Tiger Trout reproduction, extremely unlikely. Consider in the wild brooks and browns occupy many of the same habitats yet only a few naturally produced tiger trout are ever captured. Not much of a concern if you look at the numbers.

 

Cool, I'm super excited about getting these in Alberta. But wasn't sure if it will create issues for other water sheds if someone illegally transported them. Sounds like the issue has been considered, and the risk is relatively low of them becoming an ongoing competive species (against cuts, bows, and Browns) in rivers and lakes that they weren't intentionally stocked in.

 

Just my 0.02$ though.

 

Cheers

 

Fred

[Smitty]

Couple of comments;

 

1. In regards to non-native exotic species not being welcome, I would hope those anti-tiger guys don't like brookies or browns either. Cause what's the difference? Both are exotic; just because browns have been here about 100 years doesn't make them less exotic.

 

2. From what I understand, tigers are one of the few (only?!) species of trout that will predate on perch. Could be a chance here to help mitigate the problem of perch infested trout lakes.

 

3. I thought SRD could enact in-season changes?! I thought they had the ability to close eastern slope streams if water levels got too low and temps too high. Isn't that true? Or is it they just post non-enforceable bulletins encouraging anglers to "not fish"? Because obviously if they could do in-season reg changes, they have plenty of time to post signs on lakes mandating catch and release only on tigers. You guys are right; why should an arbitrary publication date dictate what regs should be implemented during a given angling season?

 

Smitty

[Ricinus]

Another introduced non native fish. No thanks

Yeah, look how those non natives have screwed up the Bow..

 

Mike

[Hawgstoppah]

95% of all of Alberta's trout are probably non natives. I'd rather enjoy a unique fishing opportunity than fret about things that cannot be changed. Save the pure strains where you can, but put some variety where it would be safe to do so. I'm all for it

[denniss3131]

Actually there are only 3 strains of trout native to Alberta East Slope Cutt's and the Athabasca Rainbow Then you have the bull trout but that is actually a char.

 

So yes most of the trout in Alberta are non native.

 

Tight lines Always

Dennis S

[Taco]

95% of all of Alberta's trout are probably non natives. I'd rather enjoy a unique fishing opportunity than fret about things that cannot be changed. Save the pure strains where you can, but put some variety where it would be safe to do so. I'm all for it

At what point can things not be changed ??? If you change things the american way, means anything up to poisoning streams.

[WinstonConfluentus]

The only thing that seems impossible to change is the narcissistic nature of user groups including us fly fishers. Some folks sound a little like quadders complaining they can't drive through the creeks and the harvest types complaining about catch and release. Bottom line, the fishery worked perfectly for 10,000 - 12,000 years +/- before European settlement and we have effectively destroyed it in just over a hundred years. Simple no? Must have been something we did eh?

 

Kevin Turner, the guy with the thumbs who types for Winston.

 

 

In nature, there are neither punishments nor rewards, there are consequences.

 

- Robert G. Ingersoll

[Smitty]

Man has been screwing around with ecosystems a lot longer than 100 years. No such thing ever in the history of nature as "worked perfectly". Nature is in constant flux. And that, by the way, goes for the entirety if humankind, not just Europeans.

 

Your comment about consequences is bang on. It just needs to be applied broadly.

 

I for one don't believe in either/or false choices. We can continue good work to preserve native fisheries like the historically native cutt-bull-whitefish watersheds while at the same time expanding choices and opportunities in other appropriate habitats like relatively closed lake systems with sterile fish. It is not contradictory at all to bonk brookies in a stream and then spend an evening fishing for tigers at a lake.

 

Indeed, they might be even somewhat complimentary. Increasing stillwater fisheries quality through regs and different species might shift (slightly) angling pressure from more fragile systems like many flowing waters to stillwater, which generally can withstand more angling pressure (assume proper regs and enforcement) due to better productivity.

 

What's the over/under line for someone complaining about how crowded the Oldman gap is before Aug 1st?

[albertatrout]

The only thing that seems impossible to change is the narcissistic nature of user groups including us fly fishers. Some folks sound a little like quadders complaining they can't drive through the creeks and the harvest types complaining about catch and release. Bottom line, the fishery worked perfectly for 10,000 - 12,000 years +/- before European settlement and we have effectively destroyed it in just over a hundred years. Simple no? Must have been something we did eh?

 

Kevin Turner, the guy with the thumbs who types for Winston.

 

 

In nature, there are neither punishments nor rewards, there are consequences.

 

- Robert G. Ingersoll

 

Ya, if Alberta's population was to drop by about 90% so we no longer need much for water storage and the province still had billions of dollars available to remove rainbows, brookies, and browns then maybe things could change. I would call this a foolish vision, some rivers will never again be suitable for the native inhabitants (Bow, Red Deer, most of the Oldman, Crowsnest, most of the Castle). Removal of invasive's may work in small isolated systems but it's extremely expensive and unless barriers are present its going to fail shortly anyhow. I have been involved in many many projects of this nature, it's nearly impossible but on the smallest most isolated scale. Accept what we have and fight for the few populations that remain, its a much wiser use of resources. As for the tigers, they will draw attention from other fisheries and will be a net benefit to the fishery in Alberta. Win Win situation. Unique fisheries are like fishing effort sinks, look at the parking lot at Beaver or Bullshead on any given Saturday.

[WinstonConfluentus]

From Mr. Webster: Perfect - complete in all respects. I'm not here to debate semantics nor have I provided a personal opinion beyond the one I included myself in above. The statement that European settlement decimated the fishery is fact, not opinion, and this fact cannot be soothed by referencing the work of others.

 

I have not provided a person vision, foolish or otherwise. I spend well over three hundred days a year on the water in some fashion and report much of what I see to a number of individuals, NGOs and various levels of government. What I chase is the truth, without label and hopefully, without editorial.

 

I will likely C&R a Tiger Trout at some point myself, it's also likely I'll bonk one and fry it up. What I won't do is support science for science sake or anything the facts suggest could be harmful to the fishery, our water supply and all that depend upon it for survival - including us. You see, I'm not smart enough to know what's best for the land so I try to use the original design as the template of understanding. There's been some great work lately in understanding how Beavers benefit the land and the profound amounts of water they can capture in a system. Remember, the vast (90% or more) majority of water in the system cannot be seen because it is underground. Awesome stuff!