Just a few notes from last evenings meeting that may be of interest to some of you.
1. Some studies were presented on June sucker spawning. We now have spawning runs established with juvenile June suckers being produced in both Hobble Creek and the Spanish Fork river. Considering that when the program started a few years ago, there was ZERO spawning in these two streams, this represents an enormous breakthrough. The Hobble creek project is especially successful, with more Junie juveniles being produced than the SF river. We also have seen game fish utilize the improved Hobble creek more as well. Overall, it shows that the program is working and the habitiat around UL is improving with it.
2. They have removed the first 5 million pounds of carp and are satisfied with progress so far. There were discussions about allowing the Loys to harvest some bullheads and channel cats to help offset the costs of the carp operations. It was tentatively agreed by the forum members that this was acceptable. If you have objections to it, I guess you'd better get off your butt and show up to some meetings.
3. There is an enormous population spike of 16-20 inch channel cats at UL right now. Channel catfishing at UL is incredible right now and will continue to be that way for a while. (IMO, these are the size that are by far the best for eating)
4. There is also a spike in crappie population out there. If you can find them, crappie action should be excellent for quite a while too. UL is becoming quite the crappie fishery.
5. Access was discussed. There were a few setbacks in establishing public access improvements, especially at Lincoln point. Some ideas were discussed that may be pursued.
6. Overall, the June sucker recovery and especially the sportfishing at UL look quite favorable for the next few years. Channel cat and crappie action especially should be incredible in the next few seasons.
[signature]
Thanks for the notes. Utah Lake regulars can attest to the multitude of channel cats in that size range as well as plenty of crappie. Did anyone mention anything about the size of the crappie in Utah Lake? There are some decent (10-12 inch) size crappie in the lake but for me they are few and far between. I have seen an abundance of 8-9 inch crappie which are still good to eat but you need a bunch to make a meal. Utah Lake crappie are skinny and not the nice shad-fed variety you'll find in Willard and other parts of the country. Black crappie have been known to overpopulate and stunt but typically it occurs in smaller bodies of waters with fewer predators than Utah Lake. Honestly I blame the lack of a solid shad forage base. I'm sure the crappie slurp up as many fry of other species as they can but they still don't reach "slab" status in Utah Lake. Still fun to catch...
[signature]
RE" Did anyone mention anything about the size of the crappie in Utah Lake? There are some decent (10-12 inch) size crappie in the lake but for me they are few and far between. I have seen an abundance of 8-9 inch crappie which are still good to eat but you need a bunch to make a meal."
It wasn't discussed, just that there is a sizable population spike. Being someone that likes to chase them myself down there in the spring and through the ice, I agree with your assessment. Reading the presented data between the lines, there appear to be two possible scenarios.
1. The crappie are being like the white bass and having superb reproductive success but reaching a bottleneck at about 10 inches where they can't break through and may die off due to inadequate food for that size fish.
2. The spike is a wave of good population that will result in more big crappie in the next few years as they get older.
My opinion (FWIW and only my opinion) is that it may be a combination of both. When I first started targeting crappies down there a few years ago, I used to catch fewer fish, but I often got much bigger ones up to 14 1/2 inches. The past 2 years have been very good for numbers but the size has been far smaller. Maybe there are now too many of them?
[signature]
Quote:My opinion (FWIW and only my opinion) is that it may be a combination of both. When I first started targeting crappies down there a few years ago, I used to catch fewer fish, but I often got much bigger ones up to 14 1/2 inches. The past 2 years have been very good for numbers but the size has been far smaller. Maybe there are now too many of them?
I am of the same opinion. Black crappie are prolific and in my opinion, not a major target of UL anglers. I target them in the spring, summer, fall, and winter but I rarely get many crappie over 10 inches. If I catch one that is a 14 incher out of UL, I may die of heart failure and fall out of my float tube.
I would imagine they would benefit from some harvest so i'll do my part and take home some. The smaller ones are good if you fry them whole so those of you who are reading this thread and wondering if you should keep an 8-9 inch fish, the answer is yes. You'll get more meat from the same size bluegill but crappie is just as delicious.
[signature]
RE"You'll get more meat from the same size bluegill but crappie is just as delicious."
I should also mention that the studies show that the UL bluegill population is also very strong right now. (as panfish anglers there can attest)
We should have great panfishing for years to come at UL.
[signature]
Nice Report. I have been able to see the changes first hand, but it is nice that data is being found to confirm what I have seen. I look forward to many many great years of UL mixed bag, good sized fishes.
[signature]
I just wish this was good for the Walleye. To bad there are no Walleye in Utah lake....
[signature]
[quote doggonefishin]
There were discussions about allowing the Loys to harvest some bullheads and channel cats to help offset the costs of the carp operations. It was tentatively agreed by the forum members that this was acceptable. If you have objections to it, I guess you'd better get off your butt and show up to some meetings.
[/quote]
Seems reasonable to me. Is that forum authorized to give final approval or must some other body do so? Would there be an established quota or would they be able to keep all that they catch? If there is not a quota I could see the temptation to net in areas where the catfish population is a little higher.
[signature]
Thanks for being there and passing the info on this site.
I think every species of fish, including the carp, will benefit from the continued removal of carp.
let the loys keep every mudcat they net. I see no reason they shouldn't be able to harvest some channels either.
Thanks again!
[signature]
RE" Is that forum authorized to give final approval or must some other body do so?"
Glad you brought that up. No, it isn't. Most UL decisions actually involve multiple agencies, including the DWR, JSRIP, the Utah County water users, and the USFWS. However, (and this was discussed at great length) all of the principal government personnel there are frustrated beyond belief by the LACK of public input regarding any of the proposals they present. They discussed that they saw the UL fishery forum as a conduit of public input to them. However, attendance has been abysmal with the same few people showing up. As a result, several DWR and government people were saying on Thursday that they are just going forward with stuff like the Loy harvest change to his COR and the people that did show up will be the input they will go with. So I suppose if you want me and the other "regulars" being your voice on this then fine. If not, then show up.
RE"Would there be an established quota or would they be able to keep all that they catch? "
Yes, quotas were discussed and would most likely be in place. Mr. Loy also said that the most marketable sizes were channel cats between 15-20 inches. Surprisingly enough, he said he has trouble selling bigger ones.
RE"I just wish this was good for the Walleye. To bad there are no Walleye in Utah lake.... "
Yeah, right. No walleye in UL. [shocked]
[signature]
How do I find out ahead of time where and when the forum meets...?
[signature]
RE" How do I find out ahead of time where and when the forum meets...?"
It was posted here and on other fishing forums multiple times. It will be posted again in advance of the meeting. Watch for the postings, they tend to sink off the page quickly as they don't generate a ton of comments. They said they may try to have another one in the fall.
One more item on the input topic. Particularly last Thursday, the public members there were involved in rather "individual" discussions with the government staff. There was one idea in particular presented by the public that I hope is tried regarding improving access and use at a certain spot. If you have legitimate ideas regarding UL, be it access, habitat, regs, cleanup and others, you will get a fair hearing.
[signature]
I received an email from Chris Crockett at the DWR today regarding the recent meeting. He requested that I post this.
"Feel free to post my email address on BF tackle if people would like their name added to the email list for the Forum and any other Utah Lake items of interest. Thanks
Chris Crockett
Native Aquatics Project Leader
Utah Division of Wildlife Resources
[url "mailto:chriscrockett@utah.gov"]chriscrockett@utah.gov[/url]
"
[signature]