trailhead Posted April 19, 2017 Posted April 19, 2017 From what I was able to gather at the presentation that Lesley gave it appears that there are factors influencing the effect on fish. She mentioned things like water temperature, streambed strata and water chemistry, and was honest in saying that the biologists are learning as they go. One interesting fact was that in Colorado it was spread by the biologists as they were trying to typify and identify infected systems. I agree with Silver Doc that it has been around here for awhile, probably was introduced in the 1990s when all the infection was happening in the US. Lots of anglers came to fish the Bow and the Crow from there at that time, and still do. Quote
jpinkster Posted April 19, 2017 Posted April 19, 2017 From what I was able to gather at the presentation that Lesley gave it appears that there are factors influencing the effect on fish. She mentioned things like water temperature, streambed strata and water chemistry, and was honest in saying that the biologists are learning as they go. One interesting fact was that in Colorado it was spread by the biologists as they were trying to typify and identify infected systems. I agree with Silver Doc that it has been around here for awhile, probably was introduced in the 1990s when all the infection was happening in the US. Lots of anglers came to fish the Bow and the Crow from there at that time, and still do. All speculation of course, but most signs point to it coming to our systems between 2000-present. The government was still testing for WD up until about 2001. Quote
trailhead Posted April 19, 2017 Posted April 19, 2017 I caught an infected whitefish across from Edworthy Park in 1994, it's my journal so I have the date down. Of course at the time I didn't know what it was. Just a fish with a hump behind the head and a shrivelled tail twisted off to the side. I put it down to the U of C sewage outlet that comes out there. Maybe that's how it was introduced, as from what I have seen and heard it is all speculation. In fact last fall I had a high ranking TU official tell me to use bleach to disinfect my boots and waders, now its a ammonia solution. I get the feeling that the more it gets researched the more questions will be raised and the more confusing it will get. I haven't used my Bow River gear in any of the other rivers that I fish. Primarily did that for didymo, but the soapy Bow is full of all kinds of "things". 1 Quote
bcubed Posted April 19, 2017 Posted April 19, 2017 Bleach does work, as does the quaternary ammonium, but it's far friendlier on your gear 2 Quote
DonAndersen Posted April 20, 2017 Posted April 20, 2017 The criminally negligent people responsible for bring WD to Alberta should be jailed. The only way to stop a plague is to isolate yourself. The Brits figured this out 700 years ago with the Black Plague. New Zealand banned a lot of fishermen equipment to prevent WD arrival. What Alberta did was not only foolish but damn stupid. Montana, from the looks of their web sites threw up thier hands and gave up. They now have 135 infected watersheds. Until and unless all Angler's isolate equipment to specific watersheds, the spread of WD is inevitable. And we know that few Angler's will take the time. So, lay back and enjoy the grief caused by past management. We deserve what we voted for. Don 4 Quote
bcubed Posted May 1, 2017 Posted May 1, 2017 Oldman watershed declared infected: http://calgaryherald.com/news/local-news/whirling-disease-found-in-oldman-river Quote
Sage Posted May 1, 2017 Posted May 1, 2017 Unfortunate but expected once the Bow River was confirmed. Lots of anglers who go between those two fisheries. Quote
angler Posted May 2, 2017 Posted May 2, 2017 Any wagers on SE BC also being infected? Me thinks it's there! Quote
BurningChrome Posted May 2, 2017 Posted May 2, 2017 Any wagers on SE BC also being infected? Me thinks it's there! I don't disagree with you, but I think the proper approach to take is act like everything is clean until it's been confirmed infected by CFIA. 2 Quote
dryfly Posted May 22, 2017 Posted May 22, 2017 The wide area where it has been confirmed proves that it has been here for years and years. And THAT is good news because it means the incidence and severity are limited. (This does not mean all of the posted precautions etc etc should not be taken. i.e. we can't be flippant.) For those who think it is "new," it takes little logic to know that it did not get from the upper Bow system to the OM system in a few months. As many others have noted, I saw the first (highly probable) case between 1995 and 2000...,was unable to net it although I "reported" it. As for jailing the perps. Good luck with that. These are as likely as anglers. By 2006, the disease was <100 km from the Crowsnest. About a 90-minute flight by geese. Hypothetical scenario: goose waddles about the muddy banks/waters of a MT stream. Is sick of Bush or especially Obama and decides to cross the border. It lands on the stream bank in Canadia one or two hours later with the mud still on its feet. Probability? Pretty low, but with time..... Bet that has happened given the widespread distribution of geese. Wait there is more. Canada geese were not common along the Eastern Slopes 40 years ago. Their population and range have spread far and wide in the past few decades. 2 Quote
adc Posted May 22, 2017 Posted May 22, 2017 Clive, by "jailing the perps" I think Mr. Anderson was referring to all past Conservative governments......Your goose explanation makes sense, but I'm sure that if Shannon Phillips had been around 20 years ago she'd not have allowed them to play in the mud..... Quote
Swede Posted May 22, 2017 Posted May 22, 2017 Seriously they stop testing for whirling disease in 2001 and ignore the fact thats its just across the border. Don't say a word or try to make the average Alberta fisherman aware of whirling disease and than mysteriously start testing in 2016 and lo and behold its everywhere in Alberta. Ya i was born yesterday they know it was in Alberta in 2001. You guys actually buy that crap that one of there bio's just happened to notice one fish in in a lake and hey maybe we should start testing for whirling disease again. They dropped the ball again and choose to ignore it for 15 years for whatever reason. only they know there motives for doing that. Put them in jail just string the pos up from the nearest pole. Thieving pricks cant even do there job just pawn it off to the next generation. Quote
DonAndersen Posted May 23, 2017 Posted May 23, 2017 Don't you find it more that surprising that WD was detected in a National Park administered by Federal Employees in a lake that few had heard of. Yup - just another example of the previous govt thinking . Allan - I'd lock them up with you. That would cure 'em. Don Quote
bcubed Posted June 22, 2017 Posted June 22, 2017 Now in the Red Deer Drainage... http://www.inspection.gc.ca/animals/aquatic-animals/diseases/reportable/whirling-disease/alberta-2017/eng/1492020203162/1492020203648 Government is taking some strides http://globalnews.ca/news/3548003/alberta-opening-first-new-whirling-disease-laboratory/ Quote
fishjunkie Posted June 23, 2017 Author Posted June 23, 2017 I think whirling disease in the North Raven goes a long way in explaining why the trout population is smaller than it was in the early 90's 1 Quote
jpinkster Posted June 26, 2017 Posted June 26, 2017 I think whirling disease in the North Raven goes a long way in explaining why the trout population is smaller than it was in the early 90's Brown trout are one of the most resilient species to whirling disease. I'd suggest water quality and habitat issues are playing a bigger role. Quote
DonAndersen Posted June 27, 2017 Posted June 27, 2017 Brown trout are one of the most resilient species to whirling disease. I'd suggest water quality and habitat issues are playing a bigger role. Jordan, the habitat has had well over a million $'s spent on it over the past 30 years. Plus in the $4,000 of water tests I did, there was no evidence of any foreign chemicals. Nope, ain't habitat or chemistry. Don 2 Quote
fishteck Posted June 28, 2017 Posted June 28, 2017 There are some interesting comments in this discussion that indicate from casual observations that fish populations are on the decline across all southern Alberta's river basins. I for one am convinced we have seen a steady decline in the Bow River trout population dynamics for almost 15 to 20 years. I have not fished the North Raven for 10 years but the same scenario still applies. The Crowsnest and Oldman in particular will probably face challenges that will result in population declines over the next decade. What are the trout populations in each for the river basins and what is causing the declines? The last reported population survey for the Bow River was conducted by ACA in 2004-5. I am not aware of any such studies being conducted and reported to the public for other major Alberta rivers. How can this lack of historical data be accepted by the fishing community. AEP must step forward and address this issue. If the observations of trout population declines are real, then what is causing it. Although Whirling Disease has probably been a contributing factor. Fish habitat loss from floods has made an impact. Environmental changes from weather and water flow management will have contributed somewhat. But the water quality in the Bow River has improved over the past 15 years. Catch and Release techniques should have improved fish survival. So what is left, over fishing? Should we see fishing restriction, for example, "rod days", draws to fish protected fisheries. daily fishing permits. Lets hope the fishing community gets some answers to these questions before the southern Alberta fishery reaches a point of no return. 4 Quote
monger Posted June 28, 2017 Posted June 28, 2017 The biggest fish decline in the Bow happened with the 2013 flood. Numbers of fish certainly dropped from being sent to Sask or stranded in a field somewhere. Since then, the fish in the Bow are growing to record sizes. I have never seen this many rainbows this large in 40 years. While numbers may be lower than pre-flood, there seems to be quite a few young 10" rainbows around. There also seems to be good numbers of 2 year old fat browns in the city section. A yearly inventory certainly would be beneficial for watching long term trends and provide some quality data beyond angler catch rates. I grew up fishing the Highwood around Longview in the 70's. The river was stuffed with young trout (rainbows, cutts and Bulls) and lots of whitefish. Through the 80's things started to drop off and there was some major Didymo that blanketed the river in the late 90's. After the river became catch and release, the numbers seem to have rebounded somewhat, but it is no where what it used to be. Being one of the Bow's main nurseries, the health of the Highwood certainly effects the Bow. Low oxygen with high temps below High River have been a problem as well. As the populations in towns along the rivers grows, there will be more pressure on water quantity and quality 3 Quote
toolman Posted June 28, 2017 Posted June 28, 2017 There was a fish population survey completed on the Bow in August of 2014. I spoke to the fish techs on the river a few times during that month. Personally, I would like to see annual entomological surveys completed on the Bow river. Starting with one comprehensive survey to establish a baseline, followed by annual surveys of key indicator species such as Stoneflies that are very sensitive to low levels of dissolved oxygen saturation and pollution. Aquatic invertebrates are important indicators of the health of rivers/riverine systems and this data should be included in management decisions and policies. If the aquatic food chain starts to erode at the bottom, logically, declines in populations of fish, shoreline birds, amphibians, mammals will follow. Of course I am off topic, Whirling disease. 1 Quote
BurningChrome Posted June 28, 2017 Posted June 28, 2017 Being one of the Bow's main nurseries, the health of the Highwood certainly effects the Bow. Low oxygen with high temps below High River have been a problem as well. As the populations in towns along the rivers grows, there will be more pressure on water quantity and quality Might want to make sure to check this out too: https://www.change.org/p/premier-of-alberta-the-right-honourable-rachel-notley-stop-logging-in-the-kananaskis-headwaters 1 Quote
fishteck Posted June 29, 2017 Posted June 29, 2017 Monger / Toolman / Burning Chrome: All good points have been raised. But what is clear is that we are all thrashing in the dark as to what the change in population has been. The raw data from the 2014 Bow River population survey has never been published or made available to the public. Excuse after excuse from AEP as to why the data is not available and no indications that the data collection will be repeated. This is totally irresponsible considering the importance of the Bow River to Alberta's economy. The importance of the Highwood River drainage is without question the most important contributor to a sustainable Bow River's rainbow trout population and once again has been neglected by AEP. Both these very important issues together with enhancement of the fishery management model for the Bow River needs to be elevated to a higher level of priority within AEP. Quote
DonAndersen Posted June 29, 2017 Posted June 29, 2017 Fishteck, We get what we pay for. Do recall - the people in Albert believe they are overtaxed. So - until or unless we as Angler's are willing to pay, forget any govt programs. Don 1 Quote
jpinkster Posted June 29, 2017 Posted June 29, 2017 Don makes a fascinating political statement that is true in Alberta and is currently happening in the US right now. I think most people would generally assume hunters/anglers are a bunch of rednecks that only ever vote Conservative/Republican. But what have those political entities done for the things we hold so dear? 4 Quote
fishteck Posted June 29, 2017 Posted June 29, 2017 Next week the provincial government through AEP will be releasing their version of the "Bow River Access Plan". Although the original scope of the plan was river access downstream of Calgary, it is my understanding that the province has listened to the stakeholder consultation where concerns for a sustainable fishery were echoed by a number of organizations. Lets see what is presented in the documents. If there are no references to a management plan to sustain a viable Bow River trout population then it is time to lobby elected officials. 2 Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.