Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Fully Satisfied

0 (0%)

Relatively Satisified but there could be improvements

14 (63.6%)

Not satisified - FFSBC should be doing more in Region 2

8 (36.4%)

Prefer not to answer (ie don't fish in Region 2)

0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 22

Voting closed: October 16, 2023, 01:05:00 PM

[RalphH]

that is a good response though some of the lakes they stock do have native species in them and they stock them with non-natives. Large lakes like the Stave, Alouette would be have in some cases been stocked before , often with native species like cutthroat but it could be those stockings didn't return sufficient catch or angler interest.

[Chum Slayer]

They can't just dump fish, they need to develop a fishery that makes anglers interested. Throwing in a few triploid tiger trout or splake a few lakes in Mission or Harrison would be a good idea. Or going the native species route toss a few cutthroat trout with the genetic potential to become trophies in cultus.

[clarki]

Got a response from the FFSBC. Pretty good response and some good nuggets of info there. I don't agree with everything in there but at least there seem to be decent reasons for the concerns brought up.

Well done, CA. Asking the curious question is a lost art. All too often the default is to be critical and question the intelligence or integrity of fisheries managers.  But lo, when you ask the curious question you learn the reasoning behind the decisions. 

Now you just have to determine if you agree with the reasoning and the decision!

[RalphH]

Well done, CA. Asking the curious question is a lost art. All too often the default is to be critical and question the intelligence or integrity of fisheries managers.  But lo, when you ask the curious question you learn the reasoning behind the decisions. 

Now you just have to determine if you agree with the reasoning and the decision!

well on that note:

As of the last check of numbers (see post #5) so far I have collected 65 voted which beak out as follows:

7 Full satisfied
28 Basically satisfied ( but looking for improvements)
30 unsatisfied.

Overall people who responded overwhelmingly don't think the current situation is good enough, close to half think it isn't acceptable. Once I sit down and confirm it all i will a circulate this information to some of the people who matter.

It's not a matter of the "intelligence or integrity of fisheries managers". I don't think that's in doubt. It's more about do they know how their efforts are perceived?

To me the bigger issue is not is there some response as to why the region with the most licensed anglers and close to half the populations gets less than 10% of total expenditures and around 7% of the enhancement effort. It's really gone downhill in many respects. It's not just about stocking more tiddlers in a small handful of lakes.  As an example nothing is being done to protect our wild trout trout populations.