Haven't been on here in a while but seen "walleye" and started reading..: sounds like the same arguements here in Colorado..things don't belong..this and that aren't native..show me a trout that is "native" to any of these bodies of water the DNR is planting...walleyes eating 10 inch trout....there most be some big walleyes...and this mussels thing....come on guys...buy all that Government BS all day long if you want..the mussels will be transported more (and are) by waterfowl than any boat or fleet of boats. They have actually helped Lake Michigan by cleaning it up and the fisheries are ten fold now. Just another boogyman for the government to justify their existance and waste more money...
Sorry.........................off topic and sore subject
[signature]
well it is a little off topic but the mussels are the big boogy man here in utah.. but then as you say waterfowl can and will transport them faster then anything but it's the boats and fishermen thats going to get blamed for it so we can pay hire fee's.. when it's the water users that are going to take the damage to there equipment but we are going to be made to pay too fix it???? that is not going to go over very well with me!!
[signature]
DUKMAN wrote:[/quote]
Haven't been on here in a while but seen "walleye" and started reading..: sounds like the same arguements here in Colorado..things don't belong..this and that aren't native..[#ff4040][/#ff4040][#ff4040]show me a trout that is "native" to any of these bodies of water the DNR is planting...[/#ff4040]walleyes eating 10 inch trout....there most be some big walleyes...and this mussels thing....come on guys[#000000][/#000000]...buy all that Government BS all day long if you want..[#ff0000][/#ff0000][#ff0000]the mussels will be transported more (and are) by waterfowl than any boat or fleet of boats. They have actually helped Lake Michigan by cleaning it up and the fisheries are ten fold now.[/#ff0000] Just another boogyman for the government to justify their existance and waste more money...
Sorry.........................off topic and sore subject[/quote]
I don't know what you've been smoking, but don't expect me to believe your BS any more than the governments. Your wrong and I challange you to cite your sources.
Cutthroat trout are native to the American West. True that they were not in the reservoirs, because the reservoirs were not in existence, but they did occupy the natural waters.
[url "http://www.westerntrout.org/trout/profiles/bonneville.htm"][/url]http://www.westerntrout.org/trout/profiles/bonneville.htm[/url]
The notion that birds can and do transport Quagga mussels is not proven and by logic does not appear to be a major contributor to the dispersal of the mussels. Fact, birds fly from one body of water to others on a daily basis, if it were true that birds are more likely to transport mussels than the entire west would already be home to them. Adult Quagga mussels do not attach themselves to waterfowl, any that do are cleaned by the fowl before flight as extra weight is not conducive to flight.
Larvae do not have the protective shell cover to maintain the moisture needed to survive and therefore cannot survive a flight from one body of water to another if the flight were to take more time than it takes for the waterfowl to dry. Most waterfowl dry almost instantly during flight due to the oils distributed on their feathers to do exactly that. Water is heavy and interferes with efficient flight of waterfowl. Ever see a Commorant "drying" it's body before flight?
So until water fowl start to carry water in sufficient quantities to maintain the moisture needed for mussel survival, they are not and will not be a factor in mussel distribution between bodies of water.
Boats, trailers and other human items that contain water, being transported between bodies of water, will continue to be the predominate method of infestation to uninfested bodies of water.
[url "http://sgnis.org/publicat/papers/crit.pdf"]http://sgnis.org/...icat/papers/crit.pdf[/url] (read page 3 to 5)
Lake Michigans prey fish numbers have been in a steady decline as the numbers of Quagga mussels has increased. Other factors may contribute, but the charts show a direct prey decline as the quagga mussels increase.
[url "http://www.jsonline.com/features/food/29465749.html"][/url]http://www.jsonline.com/features/food/29465749.html[/url]
These are not Zebra mussels, these Quaggas are able to populate much deeper water than Zebra's can, depths up to 450' are carpeted with Quaggas as shown by recent studies involving trawling and underwater camera observation.
[signature]
[cool][#0000ff]Just in case you have not done your homework on this forum...it is a site for the discussion of Utah fishing...not for misguided and opinionated political rant. [/#0000ff]
[#0000ff][/#0000ff]
[#0000ff]Suggest you do some research on your subject and see what REAL experts have found on the issue.[/#0000ff]
[signature]
Wait.... Is this a serious post? I thought you were joking.
Although I do not think it is unreasonable to think that a few muscle larvae could be tranported to one body of water to another, I do think it is unlikely to have any sort of noticeable effect. The real problem is areas like the bilge and livewell of a boat that can hold thousands of larvae. Even the carpet bunks on your trailer stay wet for quite some time between your boat and bunks and can hold thousands of larvae.
Im only a little informed of the situation in the great lakes and have heard how much they have cleaned the water. But here in Utah, we need the water out of these lakes. This is about the only water supply we have in this desert state. These thing clog up pipes so bad in the resiviors that who knows what would happen if they infested one of our drinking water lakes. So as much as I like fishing and recreating on the lakes, I like running water at my house even more.
[signature]
True the presence of quagga and zebra mussels has cleaned the water in the sense that they filter everything out. However the damage that they have done to the eco system of the Great Lakes is beyond any good. By filtering out the basic nutrient in the water, zooplankton populations are down, hence forage fish populations suffer. Native mussels are being displaced and destroyed by them as they are more prolific and crowd them out. They take up space in the system and put nothing back, nothing utilizes them as food.
Regarding impacts on humans, they clog water intakes to the point that extreme measures that cost millions of dollars have to be implemented. They coat every hard surface with hundreds of individuals per square inch, crowding out other native organisms. Their waste product form huge mats over the bottom, smothering plant life and other natural organisms.
They are an economic and environmental disaster where ever they are found and all the talk is NOT BS. You can have them in Colorado, just keep them out of Utah !!!
[quote Troll]The notion that birds can and do transport Quagga mussels is not proven and by logic does not appear to be a major contributor to the dispersal of the mussels.[/quote][font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 4]Troll,[/size][/#800000][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 4][/size][/#800000][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 4]Here is an excerpt from the 2010 Utah Aquatic Invasive Species Management Plan which can be found at this [/size][/#800000][/font][url "http://wildlife.utah.gov/mussels/plan.php"][font "Comic Sans MS"][#000000][size 4]link[/size][/#000000][/font][/url][font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 4]. Please note the bolded text. While this is not the most productive method of transporting mussels, it is possible that waterfowl and shore birds can and most likely do transport them.[/size][/#800000][/font]
[font "Times New Roman"]
Quote:[font "Times New Roman"]Pathways of Introduction: The rapid invasion of North America and recent expansion of Dreissenids into the west has been exponential due to their ability to disperse at all different stages of life. Dreissenid mussels disperse in many different ways. The first way they move is naturally, being carried passively as planktonic larvae (veligers) in flowing or wind-driven (wave) water currents and by attaching themselves to other organisms such as crayfish or turtles. They may also attach to legs, feet, and feathers of waterfowl and shore birds, but transport on animals is only a low-level vector (Carlton and Johnson 1993). Dreissenid mussels are most typically transported by humans within vehicles or vessels capable of storing and moving water. Recreational boating and the ability to move boats and other equipment long distances in short periods of time is the primary vector and has increased the potential spread of these mussels. All life forms of Dreissenid mussels can be transported in many ways including the following: ballast systems, live wells, bait wells, bilge tanks, ski storage areas, cooling systems, and basically anywhere water can be stored on a boat. Adult Dreissenid mussels are more likely to attach themselves to boats and equipment and can survive several days out of the water. Some adults have been known to survive up to 27 days in the right conditions of cool temperatures and high humidity. Their veligers are more susceptible to dying in hot, dry Appendix A- 38 conditions (McMahon and Ussery 1995). All human forms of introduction can be prevented if the proper precautions and decontamination procedures are followed.[/font]
[/font]
[signature]
While possible for mussels to be transported by water fowl, the report seems to indicate that it is not likely. I would also think that most of that kind of infestation would be North and South as the migratory routes of these birds are in those directions, not East and West, which is what is happening now. Some one more informed on migratory routes can clarify this, but we are seeing them go East and West faster than North and South !!!!
[quote Therapist]While possible for mussels to be transported by water fowl, the report seems to indicate that it is not likely.[/quote]
[size 4][font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000]Here is another quote taken from the actual Carlton and Johnson report of 1993:[/#800000][/font][/size]
Quote: However, the transport by aquatic birds or other aquatic animals (e.g., turtles, muskrats) is the only likely natural mechanism for colonizing upstream areas, maintaining populations in fast-moving lotic systems lacking upstream source populations, or dispersing overland.
[size 4][font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000]Again, it is likely and it is happening; but it is happening at a vastly smaller rate than dispersion from watercraft. But to suggest or flatly state that waterfowl play no part is false.[/#800000][/font][/size]
[quote Therapist]I would also think that most of that kind of infestation would be North and South as the migratory routes of these birds are in those directions, not East and West, which is what is happening now. Some one more informed on migratory routes can clarify this, but we are seeing them go East and West faster than North and South !!!![/quote]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 4]The dispersion from waterfowl does not occur as a result of long flight migration. It occurs as a result of very short flights between adjacent watersheds. If you care to read a little further, here is a link to the Carlton and Johnson analysis from 1993:[/size][/#800000][/font]
[url "http://www.sgnis.org/publicat/papers/lade.pdf"][#800080][font "Times New Roman"]POST-ESTABLISHMENT SPREAD IN LARGE-SCALE INVASIONS:[/font][/#800080][/url]
[url "http://www.sgnis.org/publicat/papers/lade.pdf"][#800080][font "Times New Roman"]DISPERSAL MECHANISMS OF THE ZEBRA MUSSEL[/font][/#800080][/url]
[url "http://www.sgnis.org/publicat/papers/lade.pdf"][font "Times New Roman"][#800080]DREISSENA POLYMORPHA’[/#800080][/font][/url]
[size 4][font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000]There is scientific data available to anybody who cares to research it and read it that waterfowl dispersion does occur and is therefore a factor not to be disregarded. Is it a minor factor in the overall picture? Absolutely yes. But it is a factor and those that do not believe this are not doing their homework.
[/#800000][/font][/size]
[signature]
Hey Dubob,
where did I say it wasn't happening?
"The notion that birds can and do transport Quagga mussels is not proven and by logic [#ff0000]does not appear to be a major contributor[/#ff0000] to the dispersal of the mussels."
Those are my words, not anything like "[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 4]But to suggest or flatly state that waterfowl play no part is false.[/size][/#800000][/font] "
You should also note that Carlton and Johnson's research is on Zebra Mussels, Dreissena "polymorpha", not "Dreissena rostriformis bugensis"
So I say to you, "[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 4]Is it a minor factor in the overall picture? Absolutely yes. But it is a factor and those that do not believe this are not doing their homework." [/size][/#800000][/font]
[signature]
Wow...touchy subject for a few like I thought it would be like it is in this state.
All I know is Mussels are mostly transported by birds like a few have pointed out as well as flooding, irrigation ditches etc..etc...Some one go tell my relatives in Michigan and Minnesota, and Wisconsin that the mussels didn't improve the habitat in every place they have been. They peaked-filtered-cleaned up the water and-died and the ecosystem flourished like no other again. They compare it to the burning of Yellowstone. It was down right
and ugly when it hit but start another 100 year cycle of regeneration and healthy growth. They don't check for them up there because they don't care. They cycle like everything else in nature. Every once in a while something needs to be cleaned.
As far as equipment being damaged I'm sure everyone has been looking at the same shopping cart/pipe/ and lower unit as the rest of the world has been for the past 5 years. Leave it in one place long enough that's what happens.
Reminds me the CWD (chronic wasting disease) boogyman we spent billions on. Someone show me one person in the world that has gotten sick or died from CWD. That stuff has been here before Columbus. We just had the technology to even know what it was and/or detect it 20 years ago. Until then I'll keep sprinkling it on my cornflakes.
Sorry I got the trout guys undies in a bunch thou...every state seems to have their one or two "natives" then they all become native when you say it long enough I guess.
Just hope your State doesn't try to make the same one's this one does and try to keep trout thriving in warm water reservoirs for them to die of heat in the summer. Let's keep the cold water fish in cold water and warm water fish in warm water and move on and keep trying to pull one over natures eyes and play God [cool].
[signature]
[quote Troll]Those are my words, not anything like "But to suggest or flatly state that waterfowl play no part is false."[/quote][size 4][font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000]Hey Troll,[/#800000][/font][/size]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 4] [/size][/#800000][/font]
[size 4][font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000]Au contraire monsuier, you most certainly DID suggest it when you stated “The notion that birds can and do transport Quagga mussels is not proven. . . “ when in fact it HAS been proven. I even provided you a couple of links that show the data and analysis. [/#800000][/font][/size]
[quote Troll]You should also note that Carlton and Johnson's research is on Zebra Mussels, Dreissena "polymorpha", not "Dreissena rostriformis bugensis"[/quote][size 4][font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000]The report “Invasive Mussels, Threats and prevention efforts in Utah” prepared by the Utah Aquatic Invasive Species Task Force applies to all three potential threats - Quagga Mussel (Dreissena bugensis), Zebra Mussel (Dreissena. Polymorpha), and False Darkmussel (Mytilopsis leucophaeata). There are 22 cited references at the end of the report. Feel free to read them at your convenience. There are another 25 references cited at the end of the Carlton and Johnson report.[/#800000][/font][/size]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 4] [/size][/#800000][/font]
[size 4][font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000]I have not read all of them, but I have read enough of them that I’m convinced that your assertion that transportation of quagga mussels by birds is not proven is a false assertion. You can nit pick away at me all you want. But the fact remains you are incorrect about there being any proof about birds transporting mussels.[/#800000][/font][/size]
[signature]
[quote DUKMAN]All I know is Mussels are mostly transported by birds like a few have pointed out as well as flooding, irrigation ditches etc..etc [/quote][size 4][font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000]Nope, you got it backwords. Mussels are transported MOSTLY in and on watercraft. I have not read any scientific analysis that says otherwise. Waterfowl are a very, very small threat but are a threat none the less.[/#800000][/font][/size]
[quote DUKMAN]Some one go tell my relatives in Michigan and Minnesota, and Wisconsin that the mussels didn't improve the habitat in every place they have been.[/quote][font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 4]I have a very close friend that lives in Frankfort, MI that would be happy to debate the facts with your relatives. He has lived there all of his 40 adult years and has been a fisherman all of those years. He has over 20 years experience as a licensed charter boat captain providing fishing charters on Lake Michigan. He would tell you and your relatives that you are absolutely wrong about the impact on the fishery being positive. We talk on the phone a couple of times a month and the words he uses to describe the situation are not suitable for posting here. Do your relatives actually fish on a regular basis and can truthfully say the fishing is better now than it was 5, 10, or 20 years ago? My friend would not say that at all. He can’t remember the fishing ever being as bad is it is right now.[/size][/#800000][/font]
[signature]
Yep..that's all they do....I'm 50 ..most of them are as old or older than I give or take 10 years and my parents are in their 70's. Maybe your friend needs a new spot. Check this one out..picture proof. I'ld challenge your buddy who charters. What charter does he work for? If you look from everything to charters to commercial fishing to shore fishing it is the same story. You can actually see bottom in shallower areas now with new growth down 20 ft where you would be lucky to see a few feet on a good day. New life. New organisms..new and revived lake bottoms. The circle of life has started again with a vengence.
Here is a 20 year Charter fisherman from Michigan:
[url "http://www.coldwatercharters.com/"]http://www.coldwatercharters.com/[/url]
A buddy of mine just came back from there on his yearly walleye trip and had the best trip he had had in a decade he said as well.
[signature]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 4]I'm originally from Michigan myself, so I stay in touch with family and friends back there on a regular basis. They are telling me just the opposite of what you are saying. I'm not calling anybody a fabricator.[/size][/#800000][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 4] [/size][/#800000][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 4]However, the clearer water is a sign of no plankton. Plankton is at the very bottom of the fish food chain and where there isn't any plankton, the whole fish hieracy is thrown out of balance. The inland lakes, rivers, and streams in the Traverse City area of Michigan are becoming barren acording to my friend Jim who lives in Frankfort. He is retired now and in his 60s. He stopped chartering over 10 years ago but still fishes 2 or 3 days a week including ice fishing in the winter. I've known Jim for over 30 years and I don't doubt him for a second. If he says the fish are down in numbers in his area of the state, you can take it to the bank. He fishes for salmon, steelhead, browns, perch, and white fish. All species are down in his area.[/size][/#800000][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 4] [/size][/#800000][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 4]I truely hope I'm wrong, but I think the clearer waters your family and friends are seeing is a harbinger of bad times ahead.[/size][/#800000][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 4] [/size][/#800000][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 4]I can't explain the success shown on the link you provided. That charter service is indeed having a fortunate season. Frankfort is not.[/size][/#800000][/font]
[signature]
Could be. Just saying what I've heard. [cool]
[signature]
Mussels are a negative, there is no getting around that. Here's some pretty good articles explaining some complex issues regarding mussels in the Great Lakes. The first deals with Lake Huron. It's fisheries have changed almost overnight and what used to be a highly sought salmon fishery has now collapsed. With that loss, charter businesses went under or relocated having a huge impact on local and state economies. There is three parts to the article and you'll see the other two links at the bottom of the first.
[url "http://www.greatnorthernoutdoors.net/s-lakehuron1.htm"]http://www.greatnorthernoutdoors.net/s-lakehuron1.htm[/url]
Here's a more recent article which also discusses Lake Huron's salmon fishery collapse but with concerns about where Lake Michigan is going in the future. It's important to remember water clarity is a good indicator of primary productivity (phytoplankton or algae), step one of a fishery food web. Yes, Lake Michigan has cleared up drammatically, but it's because there has been a shift in the food web.
[url "http://www.jsonline.com/news/wisconsin/29571999.html"]http://www.jsonline.com/...consin/29571999.html[/url]
Of course there is always going to be something in the system that will benefit from these impacts, maybe it's walleye in Lake Michigan too. Unfortunately, anglers and fishery managers alike, will now just have to play the hand they were dealt.
[signature]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 4]Dukman,[/size][/#800000][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 4][/size][/#800000][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 4]Sent you a PM.[/size][/#800000][/font]
[signature]
Got it. Back at ya.[
]
[signature]