Bow River Brown Trout Redd Survey

[Dangus]

Teck, perhaps with the new launch locations, different closures could be implemented? Difficult to close below glenmore because the next launch is ~10km downstream. the closure of water around glenmore essentially closes a bunch of moderate spawning habitat in order to protect the higher density stuff.

As noted in the survey, most of the brown trout activity is above sue Higgins, and the MP side channel.

If they put a launch at carburn across from SH, I don't see why The weir to carburn couldn't have a 2 month closure yet have minimal impact on drifters/guides.

[BurningChrome]

Even if an increase in redds is seen from year to year, it may not necessarily correspond to and increase in trout populations.

 

But as I have stated previously, the surprisingly high numbers of redds observed in the 2015 surveys, especially the Bow River would support my statement that the Bow River has a sustainable population of healthy Brown Trout.

You realize you contradicted yourself in those two sentences right? Plus there's only a single year of data for the Bow, so you can't infer anything from it as there aren't other years to compare to as part of a trend.

 

If they put a launch at carburn across from SH, I don't see why The weir to carburn couldn't have a 2 month closure yet have minimal impact on drifters/guides.

Many guides are finished in October or doing a lot fewer trips. There's no reason they couldn't just continue to float Police to Mac during a fall closure anyhow.

[Dangus]

No he didn't contradict himself. One statement was about increasing population while the other was about a healthy sustaining population.

 

Second, I'm just saying there is a potential way to limit the length of river closed while helping protect vulnerable areas. Sections are busy enough as it is. Pushing everyone down to police would be excessive and an angling clusterfck.

[fishteck]

BurningChrome: I tried to be careful with my words. A sustainable population of brown trout implies that fish spawn every year or two in sufficient numbers for the species to survive, not that there is an increase in the population. If the 2015 Bow River survey had reported only a half or quarter of the number of redds, the same statement would apply.

 

Bron: The Bow River has a spring and fall closure above Harvie Passage. Should the same regulations apply down as far as 22X? There have been closures on the entire Bow River in the past. Seasonal closures would probably protect the fishery,

 

A question for all: Should the Bow River have special status whereby outfitters have "rod days" and can only float specified stretches of the river on a limited number of days each week? Where these type of restrictions are in place a very large amount of the river traffic is by outfitters. The Bow is different in so far as there is a larger percentage of recreational users. Therefore seasonal closures would be more equatable. Any closure of the Bow for what ever reason would get an immediate response from those who make a living on the river. But ironically, fishery closure would probably increase the fishing experience and therefore generate more customers.

[Dangus]

FT: what I was trying to Get at is, I think it would be overkill to extend the closure down to 22.

In my experience this year, the number of redds spotted south of carburn does become sparser the further south you go (besides the mp side channel).

My impression is that you could add the weir to carburn and the mp side channel to the closure, and for the most anglers wouldn't be too inconvenienced.

That being said, how much of an affect are anglers having on the browns here? Who knows. In the grand scheme,

Maybe angling is has essentially next to no impact.

That being said, a gear chucker was fishing above me a week or so ago, 20 minutes later a 14" brown drifted past me belly up, just out of reach.

Perhaps an idiot ban is better?

[bcubed]

Still room on the two days..be good to see some FFC folks get involved

[fishteck]

Bron:

 

There is data that would suggest that if good catch-and-release techniques are used (no net, limited handling and no photos) that mortality can still be as high as 10% if fish are stressed.If all precautionary measure are not taken mortality will increase.

 

If we assume that on average 50 anglers are fishing within the city, each catching 5 fish per day with 10% mortality, 25 trout die each day. Multiply that by 200 days gives a seasonal mortality within the city of 5,000 trout. Keep in mind that big fish get photographed, therefore those large colorful spawning brown trout photographed each fall are subject to more mortality than smaller classes of fish.

 

Although there are large concentration of brown trout redds in relative few locations, we need to recognize that there appears to be a sizable population of brown trout that do move up the Bow River and into the city reach to spawn. Therefore there is justification to close a wider area of the fishery to protect the movement of brown trout to where they wish to spawn.

[TroutPanther]

Re: closures - I personally would rather see all the central ab brown trout streams get closed in brown spawning season than see Harvie passage - 22x or highway 2 closed. These es2 fish are quite often exposed in skinny water and vulnerable to having redds trampled. At least our bow river browns get spawning protection above the weir and in the elbow.

 

Selfishly, I'd like to see the regs on the bow remain the same. I like the shorter fall floats close to home. If someone could convince me with data (like redd counts) that the spawning density is higher below the weir, and specifically below glenmore, than it is above the weir and the elbow that already have closures, I could be persuaded otherwise. Electro shocking survey results would be nice to see too, to inform if we need additional closures or if populations are just fine with the current regs.

 

I think your findings to date are super helpful though for anglers to try to avoid high density areas, and will be great for trending over time. For example, I don't fish the mallard point side channel in the fall, which is enforced by your findings. I hope I can make it out this year.

[bowbonehead]

One would think with the highest #s of redds above 22x particularly reach #3 that it might be prudent to have a closure all the way to 22x if we really want to protect and improve the fishery. I do not think you would get much of a protest from the Guides its more likely to come from your average angler. There is still a lot of fishable water all the way to Carseland. Sometimes posting this type of information while very educational tends to put more less caring anglers on sections of water like the Mallard point channel at the most critical time ie fall spawning. The same problem has been going on for years at the Highwood confluence in the spring as the Rainbows stack up waiting for increased flows to begin their journeys up the Highwood and the #s of caring fisherman fishing this area just seems to increase. Sorry for the Rant...... hope I haven't offended any groups or individuals

[Dangus]

FT: I think 10 percent is on the real high side of things. Most of what I've seen is sub 5%. Fish may be stressed durning the spawn, but they also fight like wet socks and are in sub 10 degree water. I'd also argue browns would make up maybe .5-1 fish out of that 5 for the average bow angler. But I get your point.

[jpinkster]

Sometimes posting this type of information while very educational tends to put more less caring anglers on sections of water like the Mallard point channel at the most critical time ie fall spawning. The same problem has been going on for years at the Highwood confluence in the spring as the Rainbows stack up waiting for increased flows to begin their journeys up the Highwood and the #s of caring fisherman fishing this area just seems to increase. Sorry for the Rant...... hope I haven't offended any groups or individuals

 

I actually raised this question when we first got the report. Do we potentially do harm by sharing the information? Will be attract poachers or hero-shotters who want to drag big browns off redds? Ultimate we thought the pros greatly outweighed the cons and that having the data in the public was important. But do rest assured that we are considering those kinds of things.

[fishteck]

The logic for withholding data would suggest that academics and investigators have a better understanding social-economic implications of their work than do the pubic. To some degree this may be true, but is no justification for withholding the information. In the case of the TU-BRC redd count project, it was funded by BRC with money generously donated by the public for the betterment of the local fishery. Therefore the investigators had a responsibility to release the information to the public.

 

I believe the data presented in the BRC report was well documented, but also cautioned the reader with forming conclusions until further investigations take place. What the release of the report has done is generated considerable debate on the subject of a sustainable fish population. This is good for the Bow River fishery.

[bcubed]

And really, we could float the mallard side channel and find zero redds this year. Way too many variables every year to be able to pinpoint where fish will be going. The Highwood confluence is a little more obvious, as all fish headed up to the Highwood drainage have to pass through that point.

[Dangus]

Not to derail this, but How is that any less ethical than steelhead fishing? Bull trout in July?

I get the active spawning time closure, as it's kinda shady to target fish actively sitting on a redd. But fish on a migration run?

[BurningChrome]

Sometimes posting this type of information while very educational tends to put more less caring anglers on sections of water like the Mallard point channel at the most critical time ie fall spawning. The same problem has been going on for years at the Highwood confluence in the spring as the Rainbows stack up waiting for increased flows to begin their journeys up the Highwood and the #s of caring fisherman fishing this area just seems to increase. Sorry for the Rant...... hope I haven't offended any groups or individuals

I think that guys who actively seek to pull fish off redds are going to find them either way. You just need to know what kind of conditions they need and the redds are pretty easy to find. Before we did the count last year I think a few of us already knew where to look and where we'd find the highest concentrations just with that knowledge. Hopefully if anything responsible anglers can use the information to avoid certain areas during spawning times.

 

Not to derail this, but How is that any less ethical than steelhead fishing? Bull trout in July?

I get the active spawning time closure, as it's kinda shady to target fish actively sitting on a redd. But fish on a migration run?

Man, that's a major philosophical debate. I think one of the things about it that gets people worked up is years where there Highwood is frozen at the confluence. Those years the fish don't simply pass through, they stack up waiting for the ice to drop out so they can migrate. It creates a bit of a "fish in a barrel" situation where you can pretty much just chuck a triple worm rig and catch lots over and over and add to that the number of people lining the banks on both sides. That's what probably raises peoples' hackles the most.

[jpinkster]

We have added an extra day to our redd survey to explore some channels down by Legacy Island.

 

Only a few more days left to sign up, we hope to see you there!

 

http://bowriver.org/2016/10/29/bow-river-brown-trout-redd-survey-november-13-2016/