Thoughts And Opinions For The Bow Reg Changes

[Vitalshok]

this is not my area of expertise but I thought I would throw it out there just to maybe get a topic going.In my personal opinion I think the bow river regulations should change a lot also the castle,crowsnest etc the good more popular rivers that are self sustained.I think they should all be catch and release,no barbed hooks,No treble hooks singles meaning one on a common shaft not three on one shaft closed for the spawning of brown trout (bow river) and a couple more just wondering what others thoughts were and I'm not singling out spinner fisherman or the poachers out I'm just giving them a single hook.Just my Friday thought opinions please and no attacks.

[ÜberFly]

They should make it classified 22 to Mac and south of carsland as well as license the guides.

[BurningChrome]

No point in adding new regs until they have the manpower to enforce the existing ones.

[murray]

No point in adding new regs until they have the manpower to enforce the existing ones.

 

I totally agree. One thing I don't quite understand is the popular choice of licenceing guides.

 

 

[ÜberFly]

Murray,

 

What do you mean? That you don't understand why they don't license guides or why some are in favour of licensing guides?

 

I totally agree. One thing I don't quite understand is the popular choice of licenceing guides.

[murray]

Peter, about the licenceing of the guides. Part of me thinks that it's in response to BC's protectionism. I get the whole safety, qualified to keep your passengers safe thing but I have a sense that this is more about restricting the number of guides on the river. That River and the superior fishing draws in large numbers of tourists from all over the world. Do you really want to risk reducing the tourism dollars that come in to the local economy by reducing or restricting the number of guides?

Not too sure if that was where the licenceing thing was going but that's where my head is at.

 

[Vitalshok]

Just a thought if the laws are and place along with the rap phone number and the possibility to collect video info on phones as evidence and proper warning signs of the laws at key locations and anglers all police other anglers and be vigil about it we can pick up the slack from the missing officers as best as possible I agree that there should be some sort of law or something protecting people who do take a guided trip so that both the angler and the guide are protected.The Main reason for this post was that we have such a amazing fisherie right out our back doors and after the epic hog wrestling the bow provided us in 2015 I think we should start being better protectors of what we have.I Just cringe every time I see a monster trout with six prongs stuck in his face from a rapala or a monster being bounced all over the rocks or just seeing a fish tied to a stringer.The bow is the most amazing river and I just feel it needs some protection from bad angling habits and agriculture etc.

[ÜberFly]

Murray,

 

As you probably know right now anyone and their dog can call themselves a fishing guide in Alberta as there is NO licensing (minimum standards) or "industry" requirements (other then a business licence and even with that, a lot of guides don't even get those, let alone, proper permits - where required or liability insurance, first aid, swift water rescue, etc). The other aspect is that there are guides from out of province (from Montana and BC) that fish our waters and DO NOT contribute to the tax base (pay taxes in AB). If an out of province hunting outfitter/guide came into AB to guide clients you would see the *hit fly - Hunting guides have an "association" (not commenting on any recent issues within) and would not tolerate anything like that...

 

 

Peter, about the licenceing of the guides. Part of me thinks that it's in response to BC's protectionism. I get the whole safety, qualified to keep your passengers safe thing but I have a sense that this is more about restricting the number of guides on the river. That River and the superior fishing draws in large numbers of tourists from all over the world. Do you really want to risk reducing the tourism dollars that come in to the local economy by reducing or restricting the number of guides? Not too sure if that was where the licenceing thing was going but that's where my head is at.

[albertatrout]

Murray,

 

As you probably know right now anyone and their dog can call themselves a fishing guide in Alberta as there is NO licensing (minimum standards) or "industry" requirements (other then a business licence and even with that, a lot of guides don't even get those, let alone, proper permits - where required or liability insurance). The other aspect is that there are guides from out of province (from Montana and BC) that fish our waters and DO NOT contribute to the tax base (pay taxes in AB). If an out of province hunting outfitter/guide came into guide clients in AB you would see the *hit fly - Hunting guides have an "association" (not commenting on any recent issues within) and would not tolerate anything like that...

 

 

I'd like to see a classified fee for out of province anglers and guides similar to what BC charges other Canadian anglers. Alberta needs a fishing APOS like we need a hole in our head but it's crazy we don't reciprocate BCs treatment of our anglers. Have to be careful with guiding allotments so it doesn't end up costing $50,000 just for some angler days like in BC (imo this punishes future generations of potential fishing guides). I'd be careful what you wish for in other ways as well, I have heard arguments calling for guiding allocations to be offered only to first nations (some in government hold this opinion) as they get first dibs on the resource after conservation considerations . Dangerous place to go.

[jpinkster]

Catch and release and a fall closure to protect spawning Brown Trout. That's what I'm looking for.

[Vitalshok]

 

Catch and release and a fall closure to protect spawning Brown Trout. That's what I'm looking for.

im with you on that but I just hate those stupid rapalas Its a amazing fisherie and I don't want it destroyed.We need to figure that glenmore problem out as well is there anyway to help work on these problems?

[jpinkster]

I'm totally on board with what BC does re: single barbless across the board as well. I'm doing my best to not use trebles, even when I'm pike fishing. Since I'm exclusively catch and release, it doesn't make any sense for me to ever use more than a single hook.

[albertatrout]

I'm totally on board with what BC does re: single barbless across the board as well. I'm doing my best to not use trebles, even when I'm pike fishing. Since I'm exclusively catch and release, it doesn't make any sense for me to ever use more than a single hook.

The science in many cases does not support switching to barbless hook rules if the objective is to lower catch and release mortality rates. Bait is understood to increase mortality most of the time, trebles vs single vs barbs not so much. Lower catch rates would probably result from single barbless, but I doubt this would have a significant impact on the fishery one way or the other. I state this as I hope to see the government make more regulation changes based on the science/ research demonstrated benefits, not solely on personal bias or political maneuvering.

[TroutPanther]

I wouldn't mind single hook in Cutthroat and bull habitat, because in my own biased view I think it is sacrilegious to fish for cuties with anything but a dry, and a single streamer rig is probably all I would ever use if I was targeting Bulls. I do enough nymphing in the bow. As the bow is less forgiving I would hate to see single hook only as it would screw up my bobber rig for days when deep is pretty much the only way... And it would mean no more hopper dropper or tandem streamers - two of my favourite ways to fish. This would piss off a lot of people - guides and non guides.

Bow fully C&R - yep.

Fall bow closure for the Browns: I'm agnostic - I can certainly get the benefits of less redd stomping. At the same time, I'm not sure this has ever caused much of an issue in the past as my understanding is the Transalta silt issue, the flood, and sapro might have been bigger factors. I'd rather they hold off until they have better info. If the brown population is recovering from those events, maybe this isn't a necessary step. Has anyone actually seen the year over year data for the sport fish counts in the bow? I can't find them on Google, not since 2008 anyways. If anyone has a link that would be cool. Hard to make an informed opinion with no information.

[Dangus]

Bow river populations don't seem to be doing so bad despite all the redd stomping, triple rigs and retention. A little mortality can be good for a fishery, otherwise you end up with a bunch of 12"ers. I believe that all retention should have a "less than X length" stipulation. By using a "greater than X length" rule, you knock off all the large successful spawners and again, end up with a bunch of 12"ers. The Bow is mostly set up this way.

 

Did they do telemetry studies to find out where the prime spawning grounds are? It's closed above the city in the fall for that reason, as is the lower elbow. Once they open again, there are still eggs in the gravel, but the pressure is minimal. I'm sure the side channel in fish creek park as some wading issues, though.

 

I've come across a paper or two that suggest that trebles are actually less damaging than single hooks--possibly because it's a mouthful and less likely to get caught up in the rakes/vasculature.

 

I agree with the single barbless on bull/cutt waters. Bulls and Cutties are pretty dumb and people hammer those fish. There is no need for a barb for a fish that is endangered and is being released anyways. As posted above, it is a sin to fish for cutts with a nymph rig (for that they will take a chunk of foam pretty much whenever)

[bcubed]

Did they do telemetry studies to find out where the prime spawning grounds are? It's closed above the city in the fall for that reason, as is the lower elbow. Once they open again, there are still eggs in the gravel, but the pressure is minimal. I'm sure the side channel in fish creek park as some wading issues, though.

 

 

More redds (like 2x as many) found between glenmore and 22 then all of the lower elbow this year. Hell, more redds found within Mallard Point channel then all the lower elbow this year. You can come to your own conclusions on what should or should not be open with that info.

 

 

I think retention will be changing. the Bow is essentially a C&R for trout anyway.

[jpinkster]

More redds (like 2x as many) found between glenmore and 22 then all of the lower elbow this year. Hell, more redds found within Mallard Point channel then all the lower elbow this year. You can come to your own conclusions on what should or should not be open with that info.

 

 

I think retention will be changing. the Bow is essentially a C&R for trout anyway.

 

I've heard that they don't taste great from the river anyways...

[MattyTaylor]

Even if trout tasted like prime rib I'd still hold off from harvesting fish from the Bow after seeing some of the storm sewers downtown and the things I've found in the river. I often marvel at the resilience of the fish when I consider what's sent their way.

[Dangus]

More redds (like 2x as many) found between glenmore and 22 then all of the lower elbow this year. Hell, more redds found within Mallard Point channel then all the lower elbow this year. You can come to your own conclusions on what should or should not be open with that info.

 

 

I think retention will be changing. the Bow is essentially a C&R for trout anyway.

 

Well there is far more than 2x times the water, most of which can't be walked on or isn't walked on...are you implying there is higher density in the bow than the lower elbow?

I would argue that the regulations already imply where the most vulnerable spawning habitat is. Generally, there is a method to the madness.

That being said, there is Way too much huff and puff about the bow. It's been a remarkable fishery for decades and this year put up one of the best big fish years in memory. If a river running through the middle of a major city can do that, It'll be okay. Really. If you have to sweat anything, worry about water usage, low flows, waste and pollution.

 

There should be more threads on vulnerable wild fisheries of bulls and cutthroat that have assholes poaching, quading in and logging/mining the headwaters. Don't get me wrong, I love the bow, but Native fish are much more of a concern as they've been in decline.

[fishteck]

An interesting debate. The one thing that is being missed by many people is that closures on any major river just give the the fish a break from the pressure of any type of fishing. Before the "open season" was put in on the Bow River in the 80's it was not possible to fish the Bow until June 1st. By closing the Bow River upstream of 22X in the fall may limit damage to redds and spawning fish but the the major benefit is no fishing for the fall within the city. This give the needed break in fishing pressure.

[bcubed]

 

Well there is far more than 2x times the water, most of which can't be walked on or isn't walked on...are you implying there is higher density in the bow than the lower elbow?

.

I'm not sure of the entire stretch being higher density, but when a 3km channel, which was full of anglers during the count day (not sure why Bow River redds seem to have a perception that they're in 'non-fished' spots), had a higher density then the Elbow, I have to ask the impact.

 

Pretty simply, the fish spawn in areas where people tend to cross or wade through. Tailouts and back channels.