How Many "keepers" Did You Catch At Bullshead?

[swagman]

It seems to me that the 50cm fish were not as common as last year. I doubt they were all fished out in the first few weeks! Could it be there are too many fish in the lake now? My waders used to be covered in shrimp as I left the water. Not any more. Any thoughts ???

[maxwell]

make it a 2 under reg instead and i think there will be more room for more big fish... but that is just me.....

[jksnijders]

 

I think there are alot of guys that don't think twice to keep fish out of there. I can't imagine they taste great, but f it's there, people are gonna be taking 'em home, I guess, just because they can..

[swagman]

make it a 2 under reg instead and i think there will be more room for more big fish... but that is just me.....

The fish in Golden Pond were smaller as well. They will probably winter kill as last year. The biggest fish I pulled out of Bullshead was before they emptied the lake and before current regs. I like the new regs. but think we have gone way past the balance point. It is still the best lake in Alberta.

[rusty]

I've fished BH a lot every year since 2005. The fishing now is the worst I've seen it for fish size. I don't think a fish has been posted that is definitely over 20" on here at all this year. Still good numbers though.

 

I think the big fish are heavily predated by pelicans and catch and release mortality is higher than people think. I also think that triploids will solve both of these problems.

 

The triploids we catch in BC often prefer to feed in deeper water - I wonder if we'll see similar behaviour in BH.

[PGK]

.

[maxwell]

is there another one down in the hat coming up ?

[Hawgstoppah]

No need to change the regs, just change the ridiculous overstocking....

[DonAndersen]

Guys,

 

Triploids may help - kinda. If they are AF3N, they are all female and will not hover along the shore line trying to find somewhere to spawn. Therefore the spring killing time will be reduced. The fish that were stocked in 2008 may have been of this genotype.

3N [but not AF3N] with have 1/2 of them as males and they will exhibit spawning colors and habits. I'd expect that they will hover along the shore lines and the killing will remain.

But AF3N's tend to last longer - some upwards of 8>10 years. With the reduced spring kill, utilization of deeper water [below the cormorant/osprey/pelican attacks] + the longer live span, the amount of fish in the lake will actually increase thereby decreasing the growth rates as the food resources are spread over more fish.

 

Like Rusty, I find the AF3N triploids normally used by BC do tend to use deeper water.

 

catch ya'

 

 

Don

[lozzamozza]

I have fished it for the last three years and agree the number of 20"+ fish is declining but they are still there just few and far between. What do you expect when word of the number and size of the fish gets out, lots of peeps bonking one. If it is truly to be a trophy lake and you want to get the mid and upper 20" fish back there should be a zero limit but that would have a lot of opposition now. I don't think there is any lack of food in the lake as the fish are very healthy, footballs.

 

I have said this before but the triploids are going to be insane as time goes by. I fish a lake with 3 year old trips and they are 23-24" and fight like crazy, your landing percentage is not very good.

[dryfly]

Thanks Don. The trips we've been catching over in BC are a LOT prettier than the false-spawn-stressed diploids.

 

Hawgstoppah said, "No need to change the regs, just change the ridiculous overstocking."

 

I disagree. There MAY be some overstocking, but that is not exhibited in general condition of the fish which are large bodied and fat. There are no signs of lack of food or oxygen or lack of anything affecting growth rates except fish whackers. The lack of "keepers" is without doubt the result if many people killing them. Fish there long enough and you will be asked, "Get any keepers today?"

 

RE: Overstocking and lack of food. Consider that if the fish numbers were the same and a whopping 10 percent of those fish were indeed 21 to 24 inches, this would increase the fish mass by maybe 20 percent. What difference would that have on the depletion of food in that lake? Absolutely none. If the present fish were showing signs of food deprivation that would be different. But they are fat and healthy. Reducing the stock rates MIGHT help, but they were cut in half already from the "standard" rates. Remember also that no one knows what the ideal rates should be. Every lake is different. There is no magic formula here. It may well be that with time, a suitable stocking rate for BH will be established.

 

As for scuds, they come and go with the years and go through cycles--they may never return to BH. Who knows? Over 20 years ago, the Aqueduct Pond in Brooks was LOADED with scuds and they disappeared in one year. WTF? I asked the area bio about this and he attributed the disappearance to the bazillion "shiners" in the lake. There are a lot of small fish in BH and they are not trout. Between the "minnows" and bugs, IMHO there is oodles of food in that lake. We've seen trout chasing "minnows" in 6 inches of water right ON the concrete boat launch pad. Rather funny.

 

As for the number of keepers. I kept a log this fall during the five trips made there. I landed 100 fish in five trips (+/- 2 fish) ranging from 12 to 29 fish per trip. Two of the fish I landed were over 20 inches. One was 19½ tip to tail and would have made legal if I'd done the idiotic "pinched tail" measure. The other was a legitmate tip-to-tail 20½ inches. So that's two percent for me. I think the other guys got one or two. So keepers accounted for 1 to 2 percent of the fish we landed--closer to one percent than two.

 

Mark Twain said, Don't tell fish stories where the people know you; but particularly, don't tell them where they know the fish.

 

Someone posted a note about BH and said that most fish caught were 18 to 20 inches and there were some keepers in the day's catch. I sorta doubt that. If size is important to an angler, then fish should be measured or claims about fish length distribution should be qualified, such as "not measured." Then we can all deduct the mandatory 2 inches from the estimate to get a more accurate sense of true fish size distribution.

 

Our gang landed between 200 and 300 fish there this fall so we have a decent sense of reality. We estimate smaller fish length (maybe checking to odd one) and I "measure" the decent ones using markers on my rod. (Since becoming involved in Police Lake and having a new-found love of lakes, I like to have a sense of these "numbers" and "size." And I know that after 50 years of fishing I can't estimate fish lengths any better than anyone else. )

 

Anyway .. the fish we landed there this fall ranged between about 13 to 20½ inches. MOST were 15 to 17 inches with some 18s (maybe 10 percent) and the odd 19 incher--maybe 5 percent. Keepers accounted for 1 to 2 percent of the fish landed--as noted, probably closer to one percent.

 

Bullshead is a great fishery, full of fat healthy rainbows. Congrats too all involved, including biologist Terry Clayton and bloom for his hard work a few years ago. IMHO the ONLY way to increase the numbers of larger trout is to increase the kill size to 24 inches. And if that does not happen it will still be a good fishery. Hopefully in a few years the "correct" stocking rates can be figured out...personally I think it is close now.

 

Comment on hooking mortality and affects on fish size. Experience would dictate that it is probably not a major issue in the fall when the water is cooler. I released a trout in Police Lake that was hooked in the gills and probably died. Of the many landed in BH this a fall a few were hooked in the tongue and the rest in the lower front or side lip. I'd be surprised if any died. They all zoomed away. C&R and mortality is a reality. But killing (say) one fish per day (by C&R) instead of whacking five is the way to go.

 

Y'all have a swell week...I'm outta here for a few days. (Going to Police and BH now that the crowds are down. KIDDING! )

 

What was the question?

 

Cheers!

 

Clive

[bloom]

Guys,

 

Triploids may help - kinda. If they are AF3N, they are all female and will not hover along the shore line trying to find somewhere to spawn. Therefore the spring killing time will be reduced. The fish that were stocked in 2008 may have been of this genotype.

3N [but not AF3N] with have 1/2 of them as males and they will exhibit spawning colors and habits. I'd expect that they will hover along the shore lines and the killing will remain.

But AF3N's tend to last longer - some upwards of 8>10 years. With the reduced spring kill, utilization of deeper water [below the cormorant/osprey/pelican attacks] + the longer live span, the amount of fish in the lake will actually increase thereby decreasing the growth rates as the food resources are spread over more fish.

 

Like Rusty, I find the AF3N triploids normally used by BC do tend to use deeper water.

 

catch ya'

 

 

Don

 

 

Don, I checked into this when they first proposed the idea of stocking trips, and unfortunately they are not AF3N. The trips used to stock Ab lakes are 1/2 female and 1/2 male. So yes, we'll still have some large, coloured fish cruising the shorelines, but the females will hopefully stay away.

 

 

Good post Dryfly...we're on the same page. Yes, would I like to see more 'bigger' fish caught, you bet, but it's still my favourite lake in Ab. All these ideas that people are coming up with have been discussed with the 'powers that be', but we need to find a balance between letting one idea run it's course (ie. the triploids) between changes every year, which could result in upsetting many people.

 

I would like to see the size go up to 24'', but not sure how this would go over with the people who keep fish. ie. "It's already tough enough getting a keeper out of that lake, now they just made it tougher!". One under 16'' may be ok, but that would really mess up the stocking I feel. How could you predict how many 3 year old fish would be in the lake? Stocking numbers would need to be 'tweaked' every year and this would take 3 or 4 years to get an established number....which is worse than what we have right now in regards to stocking.

 

Stocking numbers have been dropped a lot in the last few years (~28,000 trips this year). Again, change takes time and we need to let an idea run its course.

 

The best news about all this though is that Terry Clayton is very easy to work with, and I feel that he has the best interest of this fishery in mind (although he has to put up with someone very passionate about this lake ). I'll be meeting/talking to him a few more times this winter and I'll keep bringing these ideas up.

 

[adc]

I agree with most of what my esteemed fishing partner has said, specifically:

1) There is no evidence that food deprivation is a factor in BH and with current stocking rates at less than half of previous levels I don't think that is the cause of reduced fish size.......By the way, Police Lake stocking rates are down almost 2/3 of previous and that should certainly allow sustainability of big fish.

2) Increasing kill rates is not likely the answer but either increasing the size limit to whatever is deemed appropriate (24"??) or removing it altogether to allow 1 fish of any size would be a possible solution. Complete C&R might be a solution although not likely to pass the controversy test and given the proximity of other kill lakes to Bullshead even I would have trouble supporting this notion.

3) Poaching is still a problem and will likely continue to be a problem. While most anglers at BH are playing nice some will continue to kill illegal fish, kill too many fish, fish with bait increasing mortality and cull.

4) Most people overestimate fish size and as Dryfly points out, unless you measure them you should likely deduct 2 inches from your estimate.

 

Bloom posted the results of the Quality Fisheries Survey a few days ago which showed overwhelming support for more QF's. Only by increasing the number of QF's in the province and thus spreading some of the angling pressure around are we likely to achieve what most of us want which is to catch reasonable numbers of decent fish per angling hour spent with a reasonable chance to catch a really big fish. Let's hope SRD takes heed of their survey and moves quickly to identify and establish some more alternatives.......

[maxwell]

how do u maintain trophy fish in a lake if they are allowed too be killer? taking 1 or 2 fish out under 20 would allows the few fish that reac h20 each year too grow bigger (trophy fish) and would allow mor efood for the smaller fish.. its not like this lake is going too get fished out...... would take quardouple the poaching ide say... upping the size too 24 will only allow fish too get a inch or two bigger maybe.. probably not.. but removing more smaller fish would allow more room(not food) too grow bigger.. any of yall ever have a fish tank? when fish get crowded tehy realease a hormone.. it tells tehr ebodies too slow down growing... but when the other fish are removed or even a smaller number of them the fish know they can continue too grow.. i just dont get having a trophy lake were any fish taht gets near a trophy size gets wacked...... let teh meat fishmen have 2 little ones instead.... leaving the trophies in teh lake...

[lozzamozza]

There are lots of scuds in there, throat samples revealed it.

[beedhead]

This Spring when the ice came off at B.H. in Golden Pond, there were many many LARGE dead fish. I never seen any other dead fish around the lake due to the fact I fish the Westish side of the lake in the spring. I never seen any smaller dead fish, They all seemed to be about the same size (large) I'm wondering if the bigger older fish were more susceptible to oxygen depletion????....last fall I was catching Lots of 20-22inch fish, thinking that this spring would bring us many 23inch+Bows, but that was not the case...Attached are some pics from this spring, a few of yas have seen them. Its hard to tell the size of the fish due to no reference in the pics, but I can tell ya they were a good size....Im not saying thats were all the big fish went, but we lost a few of the gooders....

 

 

 

 

 

[bloom]

Yup, forgot about that Beedhead. Some big ones did move back into the pond, so we'll see what happens come next spring. Can't imagine that we're going to get ice off again in mid to late April like we did this year.

[maxwell]

why not take the berm out and get rid of the pond?

[osprey]

I've fished BH a lot every year since 2005. The fishing now is the worst I've seen it for fish size. I don't think a fish has been posted that is definitely over 20" on here at all this year. Still good numbers though.

 

I think the big fish are heavily predated by pelicans and catch and release mortality is higher than people think. I also think that triploids will solve both of these problems.

 

The triploids we catch in BC often prefer to feed in deeper water - I wonder if we'll see similar behaviour in BH.

 

I taped one at 21" October 23.

[DonAndersen]

beedhead,

 

The fish SRD stocks last 4>6 years with most dying @ 5 years. This is what you saw. Normal stuff.

 

Dryfly,

 

There is a measurement system that exists that does determine fish growth rates. I purloined it from another site. It is the only way to determine is food resources are stretched. The link is: http://www.telusplanet.net/public/dmanders...on%20factor.pdf. It is what SRD uses to measure fish. I agree that most anglers really haven't a clue how large/small a fish is. Certainly when they are over 15". After all, with the current lake management system, there are very few lakes with fish over 15".

 

Bloom,

 

They did stock AF3N's up our way. Silver little buggers. From steelhead stock from Washington state.

 

All,

 

The food resources that disappear in a lake first due to over-stocking are the visible ones, scuds, they are followed by dragon>damsels>boatman>swimmers and finally chironomids. That is why in a lot of lakes in Alberta, nearly the only thing left are chironomids or very tiny life forms. Big stuff got eaten. This happens all over the place. Rainbows in some lakes in BC where stocking resulted in a sustaining population with good spawning areas, the rainbows soon overpopulated the lake and decimated the food resources. In this case, the travellers sedge was the first to go.

 

Bloom,

 

Each lake must me managed as a single one-off system. They are not created equally. I know it's tough for anglers to read and understand the regulations but consider hunters for a moment. They have to read the regulations, and when they draw down on a beast that is running, they have to determine it's sex & whether or not it has 2 or 3 or 4 or 5 points/side or a 7/8 curls or whatever. Doesn't that suggest if hunters can do it. Maybe, just maybe fishermen might be able to do it. The reason hunters are so careful is the weight of the fines. >$1,000/error makes you careful.

 

 

regards,

 

 

Don

 

[rehsifylf]

how do u maintain trophy fish in a lake if they are allowed too be killer? taking 1 or 2 fish out under 20 would allows the few fish that reac h20 each year too grow bigger (trophy fish) and would allow mor efood for the smaller fish.. its not like this lake is going too get fished out...... would take quardouple the poaching ide say... upping the size too 24 will only allow fish too get a inch or two bigger maybe.. probably not.. but removing more smaller fish would allow more room(not food) too grow bigger.. any of yall ever have a fish tank? when fish get crowded tehy realease a hormone.. it tells tehr ebodies too slow down growing... but when the other fish are removed or even a smaller number of them the fish know they can continue too grow.. i just dont get having a trophy lake were any fish taht gets near a trophy size gets wacked...... let teh meat fishmen have 2 little ones instead.... leaving the trophies in teh lake...

 

I've fished a lake in BC lake with a group every summer formore than 10 years straight. Regs are similar, but the lake is for the most part deeper and much larger. The fish size seem to go in cycles - one year mostly 18 inches, the next most 20+, the next...back to 18-20. That said, the triploids have made a large difference in the past three years. While they do get longer (26 1/2 was the biggest 3 years ago), the more impressive part is the size and weight. A 22 in Gerrard or Penask looks puny compared to a 20 inch Triploid.

 

I'd like to see the limit size increased to 55 cm. Two reasons, one - as has been said, at 50 cm (19.7 inches) you're likley seeing many 18.5-19 inch fish harvested because people estimate the length, so this reg would at least mean that harvested fish were at least 21 inches. Second reason is that the fight that you get from a 22+ rainbow is worth 15 fish that are 18-20 inches in my experience. With the number of private ponds that are smaller than BH that carry huge rainbow, I'd think that with some tighter regs, BH could support some real trophy fish also (for me a 'Trophy"rainbow would be 28+).

[bloom]

Don, any info you have on the AF3N and how they got into Alberta would be great. Would like to see them down here.

[beedhead]

I have been wondering if the N3's will be hanging out with the remaining N2's this coming spring when the N2's are doing the SPAWN THING...

Kinda wondering if the N3's will join in the frenzy out of some kind of instinct or curiuosity????...Be interesting to see....(N2's being diploids. N3's being triploids)

 

Cheers...Jeff..

[DonAndersen]

beedhead,

 

Don't think that fish get their jolly's looking into parked cars or watching folk dancing.

 

catch ya'

 

 

Don

[Crowsnest]

how do u maintain trophy fish in a lake if they are allowed too be killer? taking 1 or 2 fish out under 20 would allows the few fish that reac h20 each year too grow bigger (trophy fish) and would allow mor efood for the smaller fish.. its not like this lake is going too get fished out...... would take quardouple the poaching ide say... upping the size too 24 will only allow fish too get a inch or two bigger maybe.. probably not.. but removing more smaller fish would allow more room(not food) too grow bigger.. any of yall ever have a fish tank? when fish get crowded tehy realease a hormone.. it tells tehr ebodies too slow down growing... but when the other fish are removed or even a smaller number of them the fish know they can continue too grow.. i just dont get having a trophy lake were any fish taht gets near a trophy size gets wacked...... let teh meat fishmen have 2 little ones instead.... leaving the trophies in teh lake...

 

Slot sizes won't work in Alberta as nothing seems to make it through the slot

About 800 lakes in Alberta support natural game fish populations, and another 250 to 300 are stocked regularly with game fish. Assuming all the lakes supporting game fish are equally accessible to the estimated 350,000 Alberta anglers, this would amount to a ratio of about 320 anglers per lake.

 

Compared to other provinces, angling use is very high on many of Alberta’s lakes. To compare, Saskatchewan’s 94,000 lakes, Manitoba’s 110,000 lakes and Ontario’s 250,000 lakes each have a ratio of only 2 or 3 anglers per lake.