Swan Lake west of Caroline is a fairly large lake that is also quite deep compared to most lakes in central Alberta its waters contain one of the richest aquatic food bases our group has sampled anywhere. The potential for this lake to provide a diversified and improved angling opportunity as well as disperse angling pressure in Central Alberta and Alberta as a whole is tremendous. However, the present angling situation at the Lake really underutilizes this excellent opportunity. Our group sympathizes with the fishery managers if the Lake Trout in this lake are native and a special rare strain. Realizing the situation our group friends of the Red Deer River set off trying to do as much research into both the lake and the native or non-native naturalized fish species that inhabit Swan Lake as we could. Alberta physical stocking records only go back so far facilitating tracking the history of what fish species were stocked where and what fish species are actually native species is not a complete record. 

Many fish species are not listed in the My Wild Alberta site or even published, so it is extremely hard for associations, groups and the angling public to locate and research this much needed vital information. If the Fish & Wildlife Division is ever to become transparent the complete historical path of stocking involving every fish species ever stocked within the jurisdiction of Alberta as far back as records go should be online for organizations, groups and anglers to clarify this is public information. Stocking of fish was first recorded in 1901 and took place on Lake Minnewanka in Banff national Park. The Raven Brood station located west of Sundre first opened in 1937 as a trout hatchery. The Banff fish hatchery was erected in 1913 by the Department of Marine and fisheries. The Allison Creek Brood station was built back in the 1980’s and is located west of Coleman Alberta. The native fish populations of the lakes and rivers located in Alberta have been substantially modified by past fisheries management practices, especially fish stocking. 

These days it is problematic when determining whether fish populations are native, recently introduced, or a combination of native and introduced species. Even before the recorded 1901 date of stocking on Lake Minnewanka park rangers and fish & Wildlife staff were packing fish back into lakes and rivers in freezer packs on their own packs or via horse packs. Much of this stocking practise was before any stocking records ever existed. Swan Lake and the Lake Trout that inhabit it are a prime example of just how hard it can be to locate this information for management and fishery decisions. Our group has heard that the provinces own stocking reports confirm that Swan Lake was stocked with Brook Trout in 1950 and Rainbow Trout in 1953. The information stocking records our group located (apparently) also show Swan was stocked again later in 1975 and 1976 but this time with Lake trout from Minnewanka Lake located in Banff National Park. Another conversation that took place between a biologist from Rocky mountain House and an angler was that the Lake Trout in Swan Lake migrated to Swan Lake from a lake in the east slopes connected to The North Saskatchewan Rivers head waters. Evidently, they swam down the North Saskatchewan River into the Clearwater River, up Prairie Creek into Swan Creek and on up into Swan Lake which realistically would be almost impossible to prove and highly improbable. 

Other information our group gathered from Parks Canada specifically the Banff National Park website clearly shows that Lake Minnewanka was stocked with eggs and fry of Lake trout in tremendous numbers between 1901 to 1972. This would indicate the genetic integrity of Lake Trout in Minnewanka Lake was most likely altered to a small degree or a large degree from this stocking. If Lake Trout were stocked in Swan Lake from Minnewanka Lake in 1975 and again in 1976 the genetic segregation of this species if native prior to this stalking could have been breached anyway. On page 32 of a publication “The Fishes of the Central Canadian Rockies Ecosystem” by David W. Mayhood published in April/1995 it explains non-native Lake Trout strains have been introduced into waters with native Lake Trout stocks in Lake Minnewanka and the reference is (BNP – Banff National Parks stocking records. On page 32 Mr. Maynard also explains that possibly non-native Lake Trout stocks were stocked in Swan Lake west of Caroline and the reference is (Steve Herman, Alberta Fish and Wildlife) personal communication. 

So far, the only real proof the Lake Trout are native to Swan Lake and a separate subspecies of lake trout is a lot of conversational input. Even in provincial records, books and stocking records there seems to be some substantiation to clarify that at some point there may have been Lake Trout stocked/transplanted into Swan Lake. One way to find out for sure may be to get hold of the Faculty of Science at the University of Alberta and talk with the professor there (Mr. Rolf Vinebrooke) to see if it is possible to assess the situation on Swan Lake. In order to once and for all put the issue to bed finally of whether the strain of Lake Trout in Swan Lake is native to the Lake or not. The University of Alberta faculty of Science have discovered a new technique where they study fish species DNA that can be found in lake sediment to assess if they are native to the waterbody or not.

Swan Lakes food base is so diverse and dense it would provide an excellent trophy trout fishery for Rainbow and Brown Trout for the anglers of Alberta. This lake is large enough for once it wouldn’t require aeration and the productivity to provide a good number of trout is certainly present and its overall surface area would easily handle significant angling pressure. It will really go a long way towards providing increased angling opportunities and a quality consistent angling experience for Alberta anglers. It will also seriously alleviate and disperse tremendous angling pressure on Birch, Beaver and Fiesta lakes located in the same angling zone. 

Our group would hate to think we would decimate a native species in order to allow a non-native species to encroach on the native fish species without first researching and considering the impacts versus the benefits. No one either seems sure or can scientifically prove these Lake Trout are a separate special strain of Lake Trout that should be kept intact in a separate location for the future. What are the implications, losses and what are the rewards involved with the decision of changing the fishery management plan on Swan Lake?

What are the facts versus the negative impacts/losses and what are the benefits that can result from this change in management direction if it was to happen? The facts are we may have a native Lake Trout species present that could be negatively impacted forever. The question must be asked is Swan Lake Large enough, deep enough or cold enough and is the lack of large forage food base the reasons that these Lake Trout in Swan Lake don’t age and grow in the same manner as in Minnewanka Lake or Waterton Lake. The spawning habitat seems to be marginal for the Lake Trout in Swan Lake and any retention at all seems to be stalling and if anything, collapsing the population. 

The overall physical size of the Lake Trout in Swan Lake is relatively small and population numbers of fish are quite low and even seem to be steadily declining. Although lately anglers have been catching larger size Lake Trout off Swan Lake that seem to take on the color pattern of the Red Fin Lake Trout. The size range years ago seemed to range from five through eight pounds for the most part. Lately Lake Trout well above ten pounds have been caught also leaving anglers to believe another strain of lake Trout has been introduced into the lake. The low numbers of Lake Trout and pike in the lake diminishes angler satisfaction rates (to almost dismal) so a considerable effort of angling hours is required to catch any fish at all. There are opportunities to catch much larger Lake Trout in Lake Minnewanka and Waterton Lake and even on Abraham Lake. The Lake Trout in Spray Lakes, Lake Minnewanka, Abraham Lake, Cold Lake and Waterton Lake are a bit larger than on Swan Lake as well. These other lakes also provide a much higher catch rate than Swan Lake does at the present time. The current fishing opportunities and prospects on Swan Lake are being seriously diluted in the current situation. The only time anglers’ fish and camp at Swan Lake are brief in duration and poorly staggered mostly involving (fishing allowed June 16 – Sept. 15) the first two days the season opens and the last few days before the lake closes. 

The rest of the late spring, summer and fall season the lake and campsite are pretty much barren of anglers and campers which is unfortunate. There area a few die hards that also ice fish the lake in the winter time (open for ice fishing Nov 1 – Jan 15) but even these anglers are few in number. Would anglers prefer the chance of catching good numbers of large Brown Trout and Rainbow Trout to the very odd Lake Trout or Pike. With the low numbers of Lake Trout, Brown Trout and Pike now present in Swan Lake both the fishery as well as the very nice campsite are being seriously underutilized. If the strain of Lake Trout is special and they are native to Swan Lake why is the province allowing anglers to retain any Lake Trout at all out of Swan Lake. This regulation seems a little strange and out of place if this is the case. 

The province must also recognize in the early nineties the provincial record for Brown Trout (17 pounds) was caught in Swan Lake. The opportunity to fish for Brown Trout is limited in Alberta especially on large lakes that provide the real chance to catch a huge Brown Trout. The Brown Trout is a very attractive fish that anglers world wide consider a very special opportunity and rare in Alberta. How many anglers favour the Special Strain of Lake Trout and the distinctive opportunity it provides. Versus how many anglers would prefer the Brown Trout and Rainbow Trout fishery. Or is there an opportunity to add the Brown Trout and the Rainbow Trout into the mix and still protect and ensure there will still be the Lake Trout opportunity as well on Swan Lake. Maybe the province should pursue the option of conducting an angling survey to see what most anglers prefer. Our group awaits an individual reply on this document from Mr. Nixon and public reply from the Fish & Wildlife Division. 

SUGGESTIONS FOR SWAN LAKE FISHERY WEST OF CAROLINE

1. Enhance the Lake Trout population with wild genetics (from the Lake Trout in the lake) and increase the number of Lake Trout to improve the angling experience for the angler in a natural manner. Manage the lake solely for a quality Lake Trout fishing experience through the enhancement program.
2. Along with improving the overall population of Lake Trout already situated in the lake, enhance the lake with a minimal number of (Brown Trout – Triploid Low Number), (Rainbow Trout – Triploid Low Number) and (Tiger Trout – Triploid Low Number) annually in order to provide diversity, angling success and elevate angling enjoyment levels. These numbers may have to be played with in order to keep a semblance of balance and biodiversity within the lake.
3. Or change the fishery management program to embrace a full-on Rainbow, Brown and Tiger Trout trophy trout fishery and not worry about the Lake Trout fishery. This would most likely be the biologist’s least favorite option and if the Lake Trout are native to this lake may not be advisable. 
4. Or stick with the present program in place which of course would limit angling success/enjoyment and under utilize the campsite area as well. The province has stayed the distance with this program and probably have their reasons for this but at present they have not made them clear to the public.
5. The idea of keeping overall numbers of fish to moderate levels all species combined will not impact or deplete the productivity of the aquatic food base. By bumping up fish populations slightly and maintaining moderate fish populations along with implementing a total catch and release regulation a quality angling experience may be achieved.
6. Our group mentions a quality angling experience may be obtained because there is contributing factors that must be considered in order to understand and provide the balance discussed in this document.
7. Limiting factors like will the Lake Trout switch to a forage base if the opportunity presents itself and diminish the Rainbow Trout, Brown Trout and Tiger Trout populations to a level where angling opportunities are limited for these other fish species.
8. How will the popularity of such a fishery affect (increase) how much illegal consumptive activity may take place by poorly behaved anglers these are issues that need to be understood and managed effectively to provide positive results.     

Our group realizes we can only make suggestions, provide alternatives and present proposals we are not accredited biologists we are only laymen that are avid anglers that would like to see improvements in our fisheries if possible. The fish culture specialists/public servants (prepares) generate and supplies the biologists with the strains, diploid or triploid blends and overall numbers of each species of fish required by the biologists for their programs annually in the province. The biologist assesses the opportunities available within their specific region and scope of work and assembles a regional fisheries management agenda. The fisheries managers and resource managers also have their part to play within the overall network of fisheries programs the province establishes.Through this network of symbiotic interaction our fishery programs roll out into either an annual or long-term product and fishery opportunity for every persuasion of angler. If this process is developed and applied with balance, consideration and foresight the results can be amazing and angler compliance can be achieved through this venue just as well as the enforcement route. These are the types of considerations and managerial foresight that ensures the angler is happy, complies and is supportive and the fishery staff can be proud of the product and service they provide. We all just have to be more open and communicate more effectively in a symbiotic congenial manner where dialogue between workplace colleagues and the well-behaved knowledgeable anglers is productive and intuitive. Anyway, hopefully this document is of some help to our regional biologists and our fishery management people.