I know this is a link to a site that many of us non flyfishing type don't care about but this is not flyfishing specific and very informative.
[url "http://www.utahonthefly.com/forums/showthread.php?s=36f6af732df1ae0109cc3ec3cd76a983&postid=57152#post57152"]http://www.utahonthefly.com/forums/showthread.php?s=36f6af732df1ae0109cc3ec3cd76a983&postid=57152#post57152[/url]
I still wish they would increase the slot to 24" instead of 22"!
The link did not work out so here is the copied info.
Strawberry Update...FYI
[font "verdana, arial, helvetica"][size 2]Less than a year after the implementation of the new regulations,
Strawberry and its anglers are seeing the benefits. Cutthroat numbers and average size have increased since the fall of 2002, including a 152 percent increase in the proportion of cutthroats over 20 inches.
Preliminary analyses indicate that the new regulation has met or
exceeded expectations of increasing the adult population of cutthroats by 45 percent from 2002.
In conjunction with the increases in cutthroat size and numbers, the overall incidence of predation on nongame fish by cutthroats has also increased, from 17 percent in 2002, to just over 20 percent in 2003. This increase in predation by a larger population of cutthroats led to a 34 percent decrease in the catch of chubs in the fall gillnetting from 2002 to 2003, and a 10 percent reduction in the adjusted biomass of chubs over the same period. These declines included a 158 percent decrease in the catch of one-year-old chubs that the cutthroats primarily prey upon.
A 272 percent reduction in the catch of redside shiners was also
noticed from the fall of 2002 to the fall of 2003.
The cutthroats in Strawberry will never eliminate a nongame fish like the Utah chub, and fairly large fluctuations in chub numbers are expected to continue. However, if given the chance, it appears cutthroats can have a dramatic impact on chub abundance. Increased numbers and size of cutthroats, as well as decreases in the chub population in 2003, indicate that the future still looks bright for Strawberry. Anglers should feel proud that they have done their part to help maintain the viability of this important fishery.[/size][/font]
[signature]
That's terrific news. Very encouraging. Should be pulling some nice fish through the ice this year, but by next fall, there should be a TON of fish in the 3lb and over club I would think.
Do you know if that was posted at onthefly by somebody from the UDWR or just some guesswork etc.?
[signature]
That is really great news, most of us have noticed a big difference in the size of the fish being caught at the Berry this year but I think the reason is for two reasons. The main reason is the slot limit but because of the slot limit a lot of people did not fish the Berry this year. If you talk to the people that run the marina you will find that the number of people fishing the lake were down in 2003. A lot of people just did not fish the lake because of the new slot limit and as far as I'm concerned that was a good thing. I just hope it stays that way this coming year because if people hear about the fish being bigger they might return and then I would doubt the numbers would be as good in 2004. I guess time will tell and no matter what the people do, the new slot limit will be the best thing they could have done to improve the fishing at one of our favorite lakes. WH2
[signature]
Great report and great news, but they failed to mention the impact of us up there throwing our casting nets. I have gotten several converts into helping control those chubs. For whatever reason, the cutthroats also seem to be heavier than they have been in recent years.
[signature]
That is definetly good news. I would like to address one of your comments though. Increasing the size limit to 24" would be a step in the wrong direction for the state and anglers alike. Last year the DWR implimented a state wide standard of 22" for all trophy regulations. If they did change the slot to 24" they would have to increase every lake to 24" and that would cause more headaches for everybody. I wouldn't mind seeing a 24" slot but I don't think it would have a good impact on most lakes including Strawberry. I say this for because of a couple reasons. If you noticed "[size 1]158 percent decrease in the catch of one-year-old chubs and 272 percent reduction in the catch of redside shiners" is a huge increase in predation of yearling ruff fish. We'll never see all the chubs dissapear but after a few years the cycle would be more like what's at Starvation. It would be a great short term boom for Strawberry but the bust will be even worse.[/size]
[size 1]I just hope the DWR keeps a close eye on this lakes ecology and doesn't let the situation get to bad, but like everything else they'll wait until it's the worst it could be before they do anything.
[/size]
[signature]
I wonder how many of those red shiners and chubs actually ended up in Kent's freezer and flowerbeds rather than in the stomach of a cutt? [
]
I am SO grateful for the advice that Kent gave be to get turned on to using the casting net. Not only is the collection of the bait fun, but it equals great fishing too!
[signature]
Yeah, I think next year after ice off, I'm gonna have to ask some of you experts about cast netting and how to do it etc. Can you do that from a tube? 'Cause I don't have a boat yet.
[signature]
The best place to catch minnows with a casting net at Strawberry is from the boat docks. They sometimes chase you off -- I guess they are afraid you will damage something (could hit an expensive boar) or something.
[signature]
That is an excellent article...thanks for sharing. I'm glad to see the numbers of the chubs/shiners go down, and the number of larger cutts go up.
I'm not too concerned with over predation up there, as there is so much moss cover for the smaller fish to hide in. No like starvation where the bottom has limited camo.
[signature]
Yeah, strawberry has some extensive cover from all the aquatic vegetation. I think there's little chance that there would be a bust cycle at least caused by cutts. Now, if some buckethead biologist decided to stock Strawberry with walleye, maybe they'd be able to do it but even then it'd be tough. I support the 24" slot limit, even if it's also placed on other lakes as well to keep it uniform. What's wrong with wanting to be able to catch more bigger fish? If you really want to harvest a meal there are usually plenty of 12 inch fish that you can keep to eat as well. Just my 2 cents.
[signature]
[size 1]Increasing the size limit to 24" would be a step in the wrong direction for the state and anglers alike.[/size]
[size 1]There is one differece between here and starvation we are all forgettting. If strawberry ever gets too many large cutts it would not be any challenge at all to remove them. Could you imagine the first weekend they lifted the slot. You could probably walk across the boats and have things back in check after one weekend. You would never see the DWR gill netting Cutts the way they do Walleye in Starvation. The other factor is the cover and food base in the Berry is beyond compare. I think the Cutts can keep them in check and will if we allow them but they will never eliminate the chub food base. Second is the Berry has had it's own specific rules for a while. It is a unique water that deserves unique regs. I beleive the most fished water in all of the state deserves it's own regs if they better the fishery whether it conforms to the rest of the state or not.[/size]
[signature]
Here is an article straight from the DWR
[url "http://www.wildlife.utah.gov/news/03-12/strawberry.html"]http://www.wildlife.utah.gov/news/03-12/strawberry.html[/url]
I can't beleive there are some still against the slot at this fishery. Think how well it will be in two years if it has came this fare already.
tightline
[signature]
[size 3]I am 100% in favor of the slot limit at Strawberry. I don't have strong feelings either way about whether or not the slot upper limit is 22" or 24"; although, I would just as soon it be 24". I caught a 25" cutt this year up there and had no problem at all releasing it back to continue eating those chubs. I am curious if the reason why some of you are proposing 24" over 22" is based upon good science, or just a gut feeling that if 22" is good that 24" would be that much better?[/size]
[signature]
I'm all for the current slot limit. It seems to be working, and in another year or two, we'll be catching some monster Cut's!
]
[signature]
My reasoning for the 24" slot is to see some true trophys there. I don't know of any water with more potential to have monster trout. Another reason does involve data and that is the fact that many of the Cutts don't become fish eaters until they reach over 20". Why kill them right as they get to a size that helps you manage the water. Why not allow them to reach the 24" mark where they can really down some fish and then if they some how miraculously get out of balance and there is not enough feed just move the slot back down. It just seems like there is so much pontential we are just so afraid to let it reach that potential. What is the issue with too many big fish. It sounds like a good problem to me and I am sure there will never be a shortage of people willing to thin some large trout out should that need ever arise. We let our Musky and other species reach there potential where there is a bunch of fishing pressure and no one is complaining. Why not allow some of our trout "be all that they can be" for lack of a better words. For some reason it seems like any productive still water becomes almost a put and take. It would be nice to see one handled as a true trophy water.
[signature]
Heck why not get rid of the 22" slot and just let people keep the smaller fish.
[signature]
[#000080][size 2]Go ahead make Strawberry an "elitest" pond. Just keep it the way is it and there won't be a next generation anglers. The bank fishermen rarely extist now a days(they can't afford the parking). Next, pontoon boats/float tubes will be outlawed. Say good by to your favorite family fishery, someone is taking it away. It needs more bass...[/size][/#000080]
[signature]
there are several lakes in the state that for reasons of there own can produce trophy trout out of them. i would sure like to see the state manage these other lakes as well. i do get bored with the attention strawberry receives, especially in funding, as the only fishery in the state. it makes alot more sense to work on several bodies of water rather than one. all other states do this except ours.
[signature]
Elitist pond? Family fishery? I always laugh at the family fishery cries everytime the DWR changes regulations somewhere. Even as a little kid I wanted to catch big fish over quanity. It seems to me with more fish released there will be more and bigger fish for the kiddies to catch. And I have never fished the Berry were I couldnt catch my limit in one hour usually alot quicker. So what a family fisherman is saying is that he only wants to spend ten minutes to an hour with his kids. Could it be that you have to actually spend more time and teach them about fishing instead of just showing them how to put a worm or powerbait on the hook. And with the slot placed on Strawberry they didnt make bait illegal so the "family fisherman" wouldnt totally freak out. Thus allowing bait they will have a higher kill rate on released fish.
There are plenty of put and take waters in the state. It seems to me that the lake that has the potential to grow WORLD CLASS TROUT should have its potential at least approached if not reached. Dont get me wrong I will take fish home to eat but I easily release a hundred fish for everyone one I take home. And I know that most trout taken home in this state are headed for freezer burn and the trash. Just my two cents.
John
[signature]