I am just throwing this out there, somewhat for my own education. What would you think of DWR managing a handful of the 600 fishable Uinta lakes as Trophy Designation.
The Devil is always in the details.
There are probably only a handful of lakes that are productive enough, enough feed and right environment that could actually produce a two pound or better trout.
Possibly reduce stocking, unless those are feeders, stock larger fish, but fewer. Preferably sterile. Maybe Brookies, possibly Tigers. Cutthroats don't seem to get as heavy in these lakes, maybe as long.
Regs, Single hook, barbless, C&R only, no keepers.
As there are almost always other lakes nearby, to get a dinner, or bring an extra meal. Well fed fish at times can be a challenge to coax into a hit.
I love to catch a fish on every other cast, but it is hard to beat the head shake and the fight of 2 lb plus brookie, and the beauty of a large colorful brook.
On the flip side, it would uncover the lakes that hold larger fish, that has taken me decades to figure out. But it would help those that that don't have decades, I am not selfish, if you are willing to put the miles in, get rewarded.
[signature]
Are there really 600 fishable lakes in the Uinta's?
[signature]
There are 1000 lakes and ponds, 600 are managed a fishable. Kind of a neat area the Glacial age left us. Tidbit, many of the lakes and peaks are named after geologists and some of the scientists that traveled with them. And some are named after early surveyors of the 19th century.
[signature]
Great idea. I wonder how the DWR could enforce the rules.
[signature]
I'm not sure a "trophy" two pounder is enough of a draw to make a difference. I usually fish the Uintas as part of a backpacking trip for a nice fish dinner.
Having 5 lakes designated as "trophy" wouldn't hurt my experience, but I wouldn't go out of my way to target 2lb fish either.
How would you communicate which lakes have the special rules? Signs around the bank?
I would hate to have to keep track of which of the 600 lakes have special rules
[signature]
OK, I'll bite.
1. Possibly reduce stocking, unless those are feeders, stock larger fish, but fewer. Preferably sterile. Maybe Brookies, possibly Tigers. Cutthroats don't seem to get as heavy in these lakes, maybe as long.
Many of these sound like good ideas. Stocking fewer, sterile fish is a good way to prevent against stunting, which is the biggest problem in most Uintas lakes. It is my understanding that the DWR is already starting to do this in some lakes. FWIW, the biggest trout I've ever caught in the Uintas was a cutt.
2. Regs, single hook, barbless, C&R only, no keepers.
As there are almost always other lakes nearby, to get a dinner, or bring an extra meal. Well fed fish at times can be a challenge to coax into a hit.
Oh heck no. Since the biggest fish quality problem in the Uintas is stunting, why on earth would you want to limit harvest? Harvest is the friend of trophy fish in the high country. (or partial winterkill) Have any Uintas lakes besides maybe a roadside lake ever really been fished out? I doubt it. IMO, harvest and tackle restrictions is about the most counterproductive thing you could do to accomplish your goal. An exception to this would be if the DWR was trying to establish a brood stock of a fish like golden trout and harvest would inhibit the brood potential of the introduction. As it is now, the current "golden ponds" have been very heavily stocked and it isn't an issue.
3. On the flip side, it would uncover the lakes that hold larger fish, that has taken me decades to figure out. But it would help those that that don't have decades, I am not selfish, if you are willing to put the miles in, get rewarded.
Why not just encourage the DWR to continue to do what you suggested in "A" and then enjoy the fruits? If the fish get really special, those that are able to get to a good destination will find out soon enough.
[signature]
as doggonefishin implied, special regs are only necessary when the problem you are trying to fix requires special regulations.
implementing barbless hooks won't increase the average size of fish when over-production is the problem.
If harvest is a problem, the tools like "artificial only" and harvest restrictions can help. But they don't help if they aren't addressing the problem.
so, in order to create a "trophy" fishery anywhere, including the Uintah mountain lakes, you have to first identify why the current fishery does not produce trophies.
Give us your thoughts on why specific lakes don't currently grow bigger trout, and maybe we can figure out what changes need to be made in order to fix that.
You can't push the rope and expect the cart to move.
[signature]
[quote PBH]
Give us your thoughts on why specific lakes don't currently grow bigger trout, and maybe we can figure out what changes need to be made in order to fix that.
[/quote]
A common problem with a lot of alpine lakes is a combination of infertility and short growing seasons. Many of these lakes do not support trout naturally and would be completely void of fish without stocking. You can stock all the fish you want, but without a solid, self-sustaining forage base you'll just end up with a lake full of 8 inch snakes that eat themselves out of house and home, and then they crash.
Rich Osthoff wrote a fantastic book titled Fly-Fishing the Rocky Mountain Backcountry. In addition to all of the general info on backpacking, fishing, and different regions… it goes into quite a bit about how he researches areas to try and determine which lakes have the potential for trophy fish. It's a great read and probably a fairly cheap purchase if interested. He does talk about life cycles of alpine lakes and catching them after the crash when there's just enough forage to support the few remaining fish and grow to trophy proportions. One of his "keys" is limited spawning habitat… too much room to spawn, too much spawning going on… not enough large fish to cull the herd.
Of course another common problem is winterkill. It is tough enough to maintain a long-lasting fishery with all mentioned above, and then on top of it a particularly harsh winter will kill off some lakes entirely and you start all over again.
Personally I haven't found any large fish in the Unitas in my short time living in Utah. It seems as though the biggest lakes capable of withstanding some of the issues mentioned above are also easily accessible and stuffed to the edges with hatchery adults for the taking. I don't see it happening, but it would be interesting to set aside one of these larger lakes (Mirror Lake for example), stock fry only, and go to trophy reg's or a slot limit just to see what shakes out.
[signature]
[quote Joe_Dizzy]
A common problem with a lot of alpine lakes is a combination of infertility and short growing seasons...
...One of his "keys" is limited spawning habitat… too much room to spawn, too much spawning going on… not enough large fish to cull the herd.
Of course another common problem is winterkill. [/quote]
Let's look at those comments.
If infertility is a problem, then too much spawning won't be a problem.
If too much spawning is a problem, then lake fertility may not be a problem.
If winterkill is a problem, then too much spawning isn't a problem.
You CANNOT place special regs (ie: artificial only, restricted harvest) in place without identifying those issues first! If you place those restrictions on a lake with too much spawning, then you are compounding the issue.
If you restrict harvest on a lake with winterkill issues, then you are saving fish only to have them die in the winter.
If you restrict harvest with special regs on a lake that is "infertile" and has poor growing season -- then you will end up with a bunch of skinny malnourished fish.
the problem most people have is that they don't understand why artificial only regulations combined with harvest restrictions are used. They are used when HARVEST is the problem. Harvest could be by anglers or birds.
If harvest isn't the problem, then leave the restricted regulations out of the equation. Adjust the other tools for management: stocking, species, habitat, education.
[signature]
I've fish over 100 lakes / ponds on the Kamas side and most of them don't have any size on fish. The biggest size range would be 18" - to around low 20's for me so far. For cutthroat I've never caught one bigger than 16".
For sure someday this year I will put the extra miles to check out boulder.
[signature]
[quote PBH]
If infertility is a problem, then too much spawning won't be a problem.
If too much spawning is a problem, then lake fertility may not be a problem.
If winterkill is a problem, then too much spawning isn't a problem.
[/quote]
Question is, how many spawn cycles is too many? It could be one spawn, and now this artificially created trout fishery is tremendously over-stocked for the available forage.
Say we've got a freshly winter-killed lake. DWR starts from scratch and stocks fry. If there's enough forage to sustain those fish they will come into sexual maturity at the same time... if enough spawning territory exists, the spawn will be huge and now the downward spiral begins before the fishery begins to be desirable.
The adults (depending on species) will still be small enough where they won't begin to prey on their own young to keep themselves in check... until its too late.
[signature]
[quote Joe_Dizzy]
Question is, how many spawn cycles is too many? It could be one spawn, and now this artificially created trout fishery is tremendously over-stocked for the available forage.
Say we've got a freshly winter-killed lake. DWR starts from scratch and stocks fry. If there's enough forage to sustain those fish they will come into sexual maturity at the same time... if enough spawning territory exists, the spawn will be huge and now the downward spiral begins before the fishery begins to be desirable.
[/quote]
As I see it, for your scenario, (decent food, some winterkill, stunting potential with natural recruitment) the solution would be to stock sterile fish. The recruitment variable is eliminated. There is adequate food for the existing fish to grow well, and if there is an intermittent winterkill, then you simply restock or restock as needed to maintain population. From what I've seen in the Uintas, the most difficult management challenges come from lakes that already have some or a lot of natural recruitment from the brookies. Harvest can help some, but the only way to really markedly get the "genie back in the bottle " may be to rotenone these lakes and start over with sterile fish, or accept these lakes for what they are currently.
[signature]
I do like the concept of a trophy fishery, however my personal experience has been that when I go to one I have high hopes and they are more often than not left unfulfilled. [frown] I do however find it very fun to think I am only going to catch a 12 incher up in the Uinta's and then pull out one at 16. It is all about managing expectations. [
] With all that said, setting 5 out of 600 lakes aside isn't going to impact much, so why not, it could be fun if I have that itch again.
[signature]
I learned some things from you folks. It may not be the regulations need to be changed, not sure. But big healthy well fed trout can be hard to catch, so maybe that would self regulate. On the same note, when there are larger fish, almost always a whole lot fewer. The reverse is more often true, when I find massive amounts of fish, they always seem smaller. Maybe a slot?
So more to the stocking side, and the DWR seems headed that way, but on what seems more like a hit and miss approach. Or hit for a different reason, not trophy, but to get non stunted fish. I wonder if they overstock, or stock to infrequently?
Lakes that winterkill have been identified, usually or don't produce large fish. Deep lakes with good water flow seem to not winter kill. Nothing scientific here, just a personal observation.
I think it is really a forage issue, but a few lakes seem to have the forage, for whatever reason. Hence produce nice fish.
Just an idea. A little outside the box.
[signature]
That's a good approach. If we just lower our expectations, the fishing looks a lot better! [laugh]
It's like that old proverb, "There must be something in the water up there." The lakes of the Wind River Range seem to produce much better quality fish on average (just judging by reports, articles, etc.)... even the grayling seem much bigger.
Of course, with my limited knowledge of the Uintas, there could be 5-lb Cutthroats swimming around in half the lakes up there and I wouldn't know it.
[signature]