Rob,
​Once upon a time many lakes had the potential of Harry and Rence . You assume the regs of Algonquin are up to date. But we have seen limits in the park diminish over the yrs. Is this from legal and ethical catch attitudes?   Time to be proactive about limiting our catches. Even if a large trout has only one spawning season left in its life I would like to see it spawn.A lot more eggs in her than a mature panfryer. And large fish genetics. I can live without that shore lunch !

Here's a few of the bigger fish caught by myself and personal friend group within Algonquin. All released.

Jdbonney,
​You're right my comments on keeping large fish are meant to scold. These fishermen are behind the times and deserve a rap on the knuckles. I am more concerned with protecting a fragile fishery than worrying about a few thin skinned meat fishermen. They know what they are doing and don't deserve your softy defence. Time for some tough criticism where its warranted, and applause for those practising catch and release.

Last edited by Antman (6/06/2017 10:38 am)

Antman wrote:

Jdbonney,
​You're right my comments on keeping large fish are meant to scold. These fishermen are behind the times and deserve a rap on the knuckles. I am more concerned with protecting a fragile fishery than worrying about a few thin skinned meat fishermen. They know what they are doing and don't deserve your softy defence. Time for some tough criticism where its warranted, and applause for those practising catch and release.

I disagree. You need to respect individual's rights to legally fish within the regulations. Your comment that a a particular brook trout was too big to keep was contrary to the regulations and demonstrated a distinct lack of knowledge of brook trout biology. 

I understand that fisheries management generates a lot of passion. As someone with Honours B.Sc. in Wildlife Biology I also understand that effective natural resource management needs to be data driven and supported by a solid scientific knowledge of the species life cycle, habitat and reproductive capacity. 

As an individual you can constructively contribute to fisheries management in many ways, including participating in the Algonquin Trout Survey. On the other hand, trying to intimidate someone who is legally and ethically fishing within the regulations is not constructive. I would encourage you to focus your passion on contributing to the fishing community in a positive, constructive manner. 

MartinG wrote:

Wow! Nice fish D_Smith.

Thanks MartinG! Just trying to get the thread back on track to inspire more people to get out, enjoy the Park, and have some fun fishing. 

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. 

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.

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.

Oh boy!