Chubs at Fish Lake and a tagged perch

[PBH]

Jed -- have you eaten splake?


You might just toss that perch chowder recipe away, and start dining on a more palatable cuisine. Time to up your game!



FWIW -- have you ever compared pictures of lake trout from Fish Lake to lake trout from Bear Lake or FG? There is a very good reason why the Fish Lake fish are more colorful! This outward color is reflected in the fillets too! Splake from Fish Lake are dang near as good as a fresh sockeye from Rainbow Alley (BC).
[signature]

[doggonefishin]

[quote Fishrmn]
I like Wipers, but I really don't think they'll ever do well at Scofield. It's too damn cold for them. Wipers, Stripers and White Bass do well where people can waterski (without wetsuits) for several months a year. How many people waterski at Scofield without a wetsuit? And how many months each year? 2?
[/quote]


I don't disagree with this, however if rotenone is completely off the table at this point, it seems there is little difference between chilling a truckload of wipers and starving a bunch of trout. And maybe we will get a pleasant surprise.
[signature]

[Majja]

How well is the Weevil working on getting rid of the Millfoil the morning glory of aquatic plants. Is there anything else that can be done to get rid and keep it out of our lakes.

On a side note isn't part of the Scofield chub issue the abundance of large cubs, that takes a very large fish to eat?

Thanks for the info.
[signature]

[Fowl-Hook]

"You only have to look at Starvation to see what would happen if you use Walleyes to control the chubs."

Chubs Gone!!

You continue to make valid points but then Ignore them.
Starvation is a great example of chubs Gone due to Walleye, I thought chubs Gone was the goal for Scofield.
Like Starvation you could then rotate away from Sterile Walleye.
[signature]

[Fishrmn]

Yeah. 30 years with unlimited reproduction of Walleyes. And then there would've been a total population crash of the Walleyes except some bucket head dumped Yellow Perch in there. During that 30 years Starvation was almost as popular of a fishery as Scofield is now. And sterile Walleye will have the same difficulty as Tiger Trout do now. They'll eat all of the young of the year chubs, and they won't be able to get big enough to eat the adult chubs. The Walleye in Starvation had their own young to get over that hurdle.

Once word got out about the Starvy Steelies it was a totally different ball game. And I don't want to wait another 30 years to have a decent fishery at Scofield, especially when it could be accomplished in 2.

There's not much difference between 30 years of sterile Walleyes and Wipers or 30 years with Tiger Trout and Cutthroats. Thirty years of skinny predators and nobody bothering to fish there.




[red]⫸[/red][orange]<{[/orange][yellow]{{[/yellow][green]{{[/green][size 4][blue]⦇[/blue][/size][blue]°[/blue][#8000FF]>[/#8000FF]
[signature]

[Fishrmn]

Except the Wipers will have a tough time getting big. Even tougher than the Tigers and the Cutthroat. Because the UDWR doesn't have the capacity to stock them much bigger than 2 to 2 1/2 inches long.




[red]⫸[/red][orange]<{[/orange][yellow]{{[/yellow][green]{{[/green][size 4][blue]⦇[/blue][/size][blue]°[/blue][#8000FF]>[/#8000FF]
[signature]

[PBH]

[quote Fishrmn]
...There's not much difference between 30 years of sterile Walleyes and Wipers or 30 years with Tiger Trout and Cutthroats...


... it could be accomplished in 2.
[red]⫸[/red][orange]<{[/orange][yellow]{{[/yellow][green]{{[/green][size 4][blue]⦇[/blue][/size][blue]°[/blue][#8000ff]>[/#8000ff][/quote]

yep.
[signature]

[doggonefishin]

[quote PBH][quote Fishrmn]
...There's not much difference between 30 years of sterile Walleyes and Wipers or 30 years with Tiger Trout and Cutthroats...


... it could be accomplished in 2.
[red]⫸[/red][orange]<{[/orange][yellow]{{[/yellow][green]{{[/green][size 4][blue]⦇[/blue][/size][blue]°[/blue][#8000ff]>[/#8000ff][/quote]

yep.[/quote]


Double yep. (or +2 [] )
[signature]

[wormandbobber]

[quote Dog-lover] I thought chubs Gone was the goal for Scofield.
[/quote]

The goal for Scholfield is to have a viable fishery that is utilized by fishermen. The goal isn't just to get rid of chubs but to balance an ecosystem that is all out of whack. Having too many predators is no different than having too much prey. The result is a fishery that doesn't get fished!
[signature]

[Fishrmn]

[quote wormandbobber]The goal for Scholfield is to have a viable fishery that is utilized by fishermen. The goal isn't just to get rid of chubs but to balance an ecosystem that is all out of whack. Having too many predators is no different than having too much prey. [red]The result is a fishery that doesn't get fished![/red][/quote]

That's what Scofield is now.
[signature]

[MSM1970]

just a thought, but rather poisoning the lake why not get the loyy's to take the operation from UL to scofield for a week or two, that seems to be easier and cheaper, I bet they could get a lot of fish out of there in a hurry to try to get the balance needed like strawberry.

just a thought[:/]
[signature]

[PBH]

This ^^.


that's why nothing can get done.


the solution is simple, but people want to find an alternative because the fear of using rotenone.


Mechanical removal of fish isn't going to be cheaper or easier than rotenone. Most likely it would be harder and more expensive -- and less effective.
[signature]

[wormandbobber]

[quote Fishrmn][quote wormandbobber]The goal for Scholfield is to have a viable fishery that is utilized by fishermen. The goal isn't just to get rid of chubs but to balance an ecosystem that is all out of whack. Having too many predators is no different than having too much prey. [red]The result is a fishery that doesn't get fished![/red][/quote]

That's what Scofield is now.[/quote]

Exactly. That is what my point was. Something needs to be done to drastically change the reservoir....rotenone is a good option!
[signature]

[lumberjack031]

I thought the answer to all chub problems was to put tiger muskie in the lake/reservoir?
[signature]

[Gemcityslayer]

This website/forum has the largest group of "armchair biologists" ever assembled. So many experts on here.

Some of you really twist your way into a messy predicament. One lake has too many chubs, another not enough. At one lake it is a problem, at another a boon. I know every lake is different but come on people, having too many chubs is not a problem. "Too many chubs" produced world class Brown Trout fishing at the Gorge and at other lakes across the country. The current plan to address the abundance of chubs might not be working sufficiently but that doesn't mean you just poison the lake and remove such a valuable resource. Stop trying to turn Scofield into a rainbow lake. Doesn't make sense to do that. Use the chubs to your advantage and make it work somehow. Fisheries biologists across the country would LOVE to have "too many chubs" in one of their lakes. They would seek to find the right predator(s) to utilize the resource.
[signature]

[doggonefishin]

[quote Gemcityslayer]This website/forum has the largest group of "armchair biologists" ever assembled. So many experts on here.

Some of you really twist your way into a messy predicament. One lake has too many chubs, another not enough. At one lake it is a problem, at another a boon. I know every lake is different but come on people, having too many chubs is not a problem. "Too many chubs" produced world class Brown Trout fishing at the Gorge and at other lakes across the country. The current plan to address the abundance of chubs might not be working sufficiently but that doesn't mean you just poison the lake and remove such a valuable resource. Stop trying to turn Scofield into a rainbow lake. Doesn't make sense to do that. Use the chubs to your advantage and make it work somehow. Fisheries biologists across the country would LOVE to have "too many chubs" in one of their lakes. They would seek to find the right predator(s) to utilize the resource.[/quote]


LOL. Dissing on the armchair biologists, then pontificating biologic opinion like the best of them. Fair enough, all can play. Perhaps your brilliance can enlighten me on a couple of points you made.


1. Browns are already in Skoalfield in low numbers. I've personally seen an acquaintance catch one there. The lake is carefully checked with gillnetting annually. Where are all of the trophies if browns are the answer in Schofield?

2. I once heard a fisheries biologist in another state say how glad he is that he doesn't have to manage lakes that have Utah chubs around. It is well known that UDWR biologists don't like chubs in many of the fisheries here. Are all of these biologists "fakes" or incompetent and the "real" biologists work somewhere else? Where can Utah hire one of these real ones?
[signature]

[Gemcityslayer]

I never said browns were the answer for that particular lake. I don't know what the solution could be in terms of which predators to put in there. The biologists / officials in Utah thought a possible solution would be to add predators rather than poison the lake. They clearly thought it was worth trying and just because the cutts/tigers aren't working it doesn't necessarily mean you have to give up on adding predators and poison the lake to grow rainbows. Try something else? The people who went to school studying biology and have dedicated their lives to managing our waters realized the "chub problem" might not even be a problem. If they really thought it was hopeless they would have just poisoned the lake... and eventually that might be the best thing to do.

But you can catch rainbows all over Utah. How many lakes have a huge prey base which could produce trophy fish on a regular basis if the right management is in place? Where else in Utah is there too much of a prey base? It's a golden opportunity to produce world class fish... but if you don't have the patience to try a few different things... I think you are giving up too early. If options A, B,C don't work then poison it and move on. At least you tried. They'll always have the option to poison and start over in their back pocket if they can't find an adequate solution with predators.
[signature]

[Gemcityslayer]

I respect the professional's opinions more than the "arm chair biologists" or even the general fishing public. Sometimes anglers want this or that and then put pressure on our officials to fulfill their agenda.

My point was: just let the real experts decide what is best or what is worth trying. If they decide it's time to poison the lake - great, I respect their decision whatever it is. I never claimed to be an expert.

But it is clear they thought it was worth trying to take advantage of the abundant chub population by adding predators. It's easy for us to second guess their decisions when they don't work out. But all they can do is what they think is best - sometimes it works out, sometimes it doesn't.
[signature]

[Fishrmn]

http://wildlife.utah.gov/blog/2011/a-str...-scofield/

[red]After discovering the chubs in 2005,[/red] the DWR responded immediately. Our fisheries personnel stocked approximately 105,000 tiger trout fingerlings that same year. Biologists hoped the aggressive tiger trout would be able to control the chubs through predation (similar to the way Bear Lake cutthroat trout have helped control chubs in Strawberry Reservoir).

12 years and counting. They know what works. They know what doesn't now. The Tiger Trout grew big when they were getting supplemental feedings of Rainbow Trout fingerlings and they had multiple year classes of chubs. 12 years of declining use of the fishery. 12 years, and it just keeps getting worse. It's time to do something.



[red]⫸[/red][orange]<{[/orange][yellow]{{[/yellow][green]{{[/green][size 4][blue]⦇[/blue][/size][blue]°[/blue][#8000FF]>[/#8000FF]
[signature]

[Fishrmn]

[quote PBH]the solution is simple, but people want to find an alternative because the fear of using rotenone.

Mechanical removal of fish isn't going to be cheaper or easier than rotenone. Most likely it would be harder and more expensive -- and less effective.[/quote]

Yep.



[red]⫸[/red][orange]<{[/orange][yellow]{{[/yellow][green]{{[/green][size 4][blue]⦇[/blue][/size][blue]°[/blue][#8000FF]>[/#8000FF]
[signature]