Offline
You're clearly on the wrong forum. The people on this forum are the google employee sophistos. People post photos of their catch and are jumped on regularly here only to have the jumpers lamely apologize when the poster corrects some incorrect assumption the jumper made. My entire point was that you should give the person a chance to explain themselves through education instead of jumping straight to their throats.
If you genuinely believe algonquin needs to go barbless, half the limit etc....write your mpp. Someone who can actual effect that change. Don't come on here and spout off to people who are playing by the legal rules.
Offline
Bonne,
Hah the likes of Bo knows is a high tech Google type ? Where did he get his grad degree in computer science? Maybe you don't like my message but don't get on a lame rampage about my not belonging. The thread has over 5000 views, that says I do belong.
As far as writing my mpp,give me a break. What a waste of time. The province is broke and he's going to make a deal out of single hook fishing?? With suggestions like that you won't be paid the big bucks at a google.
Offline
D_smith - great catches! Those are fabulous specimens!
Antman, like your biology buddy, I would tell you I agree with you too if it would get you to shut your pie-hole.
The funny thing is that I support ultra-conservative laws for harvesting fish, but I would never criticize those who are following the existing laws - it's indefensible ground. Glass houses, kid.
Offline
Way to drag this down to the bottom by insulting members of the forum. You're right though, coming on here and insulting people and throwing out accusations will definitely get better results than writing to your mpp. Those guys have better things to do than listen to their constituents. I'll defer to papaddler from here out and shut my pie hole too as you're clearly a troll.
Offline
This is getting silly. If you have a form of selective harvest that you practice as a matter of conservation, good for you. And if you want to promote and discuss that practice with solid information to back it up and an open mind, start a new thread and do it. But if you want to come on here scolding and policing people for not following a made-up fisheries management system that exists only in your brain, and does not reflect any widely-held opinion of biologists or fisheries managers, that's a problem. You're not making any friends this way, Antman, and you're not selling anyone to your cause either. If you have a problem with the regulations, talk to the regulators, don't try to enforce rules that don't exist and threaten law-abiding anglers with "a dirty look or worse" whatever that means.
RobW in post 77 has dealt well with the biology and management side of this issue. I too was under the impression, though I'm no expert, that brook trout are relatively quick to mature and saying a lunker is "spawning class" is silly (yes it is able to spawn but so are almost all brookies we catch). I'm also of the impression that in most brookie lakes, there are more sexually mature fish than there is spawning ground to accommodate, so the number of spawnable adults is not the limiting factor on reproduction. All I've heard from you by way of backup info, Antman, is that a different FMZ has lower limits for 12"+ (adult) brookies... and even under that rule, which very specifically does not apply to Algonquin Park, vanslyke would have the option of keeping his fish, since it's just one.
It wouldn't bother me if the limits for brook trout were significantly reduced, especially in areas with larger-bodied (lake-based) populations; I'll never need to eat more than one of those in a day. But to boss people around about what that one should look like -- or scold them for their harvest at all, if it's following the rules and not even pushing the limit -- is ridiculous.
Offline
Wow, I was tempted to reply earlier but decided to let it go, however this one's got legs! Very pleased to see the responses from folks who understand the life cycle of brook trout. Also keep in mind that brook trout don't care if the 'genes which "produce" larger fish' are the ones that reproduce successfully. Only humans care if we catch a fish that's relatively large for its species. For the rest of the ecosystem that fish is a monster!
More than anything- if you want to preserve the fishery to the highest degree, it's hypocritical to be out there 'sport' fishing. Hooking, injuring (ever tried pulling a hook out of yourself- it's an injury), and releasing a dozen fish is no more conservational than catching and keeping one. I've seen so much poor fish handling in photos and video by folks that turn around and pat themselves on the back for being an ecological c&r fisherman, it's ridiculous. Survival rates couldn't be more than 80% imo. Trout are extremely fragile fish. If you want to help then address climate change, poaching, and environmental degradation, and consider not impaling fish as a hobby. Join your local chapter of trout unlimited, or harass your MPP or the MNR to change the regs. But suggesting that one canoe camper keeping one larger brook trout is commiting some kind of sin is, as others have already explained, not helping anything.
Look at other Algonquin lakes. All the ones that I've seen special regulations for are preserving fish in the first breeding year class. Smoke lake has a lake trout slot to preserve fish which are entering spawning size. Bigger fish may be kept. A couple similar brook trout lakes have been named where you may only keep large fish which are near their death bed. Pretty sure the paid professionals do have the slightest idea what is going on, and how to manage populations (without shutting down the sport fishery).
Last edited by nvm (6/06/2017 11:00 pm)
Offline
Oh boy!
Offline
whats going on here is why I was away from the forum for almost 2 years and for sure why some have left the forum for good. As someone has pointed out if you have certain views WHATEVER they are about catching or not catching fish in APP START you own thread and let people comment on YOUR views. Tightlines out there. And Bass season opens in 17 days.
Offline
The second I saw the topic when this was first posted I knew a holy war was coming. Hoping we are at the tail end of this particular post though. Relative to Kenny's comment, I can tell you that I will think long and hard before I post anything about fishing on the trip I'm taking my family on this summer. Getting killed for posting a photo of a smallmouth bass that I don't immediately follow up with "and I released it right after the photo" is not high on my list. (I know this post is largely about trout fishing, or has become that, and there isn't much concern over the fate of a smallmouth taken in season). I buy the non-resident outdoor card and conservation license, and you better believe I follow the rules because I am a guest in Canada and I try to behave as such. My son wants desperately to experience a shore lunch of a fish he caught. If I can help him experience that, I will. And then I probably won't mention it here, which is a shame.
Offline
Let me try and explain this another way. I love fishing, and I think it's great if it gets people outside (especially if it encourages exercise- canoeing, portaging...). It's a key component of most of my camping trips. But I don't believe that these are 'our' fisheries. Though they have become our responsibility because of our impacts. If conservation is important to you, I think it's unrealistic to believe that catch and release fishing has no effect on the fisheries. It's only reasonable to look at the hobby of fishing (for sport or for food) without blinders on- like most hobbies, there are consequences.
Offline
Don't.... daddy,
A holy war ? Give me a break. Just a difference of opinion on whether its ok to catch your limit or limit your catch. Personally I gauge keeping any fish based on how heavily the lake is fished. Ie the fish I release will provide the pleasure of hooking a trout for the next guy. In one case I visited the same lake twice ,about 2 weeks apart in early May. Hooked the best looking male ,about 3 lbs, I ever saw in Algonquin , on both trips, in the same place and on the same lure. It was a small lake and I am confident was the same fish. Now on both trips I hooked a few other nice fish, but two different fishing partners, both good park fishermen, were skunked. Considering one of them got heat stroke on the mean trip in and was puking on the last portage into the lake, that's how little it takes to make a trip worthwhile. Is it a wonder when we asked Jake Pigeon about the fishing there , he said 'respect the lake' . All fish released .
Offline
Hello
Spring Lake Trout from Cedar Lake, 12.5 LBS, I ATE it.
I did not eat the 1.5 lb lake trout that it spit up while preparing fish for frying pan.
Offline
Spring, Cedar Lake, 2.5 lb lake trout and 2.5 lb brook trout. Ate them both, they were delicious.
Well obviously that was meant to stir the pot.
'New Member', Fish Eater. Hmm...?
Going to grab some popcorn as I'm sure this is about to get good.
Offline
Possibly time for a lock down.
Offline
RC,
Hah I noticed those troll posts too, but I'm not biting.
Offline
I try to practice good catch and release techniques but recently I've noticed that a dozen or so fish really struggle to revive themselves when I dump out my gill net.
Can anyone suggest a fishing method less harmful to the AP fishery?
I have tried using a rod and reel but I find it can take me 1- 2 hours (sometimes a lot more) just to land 1 fish. Does anyone else experience the same problem using this method?
