Posts: 2,041
Threads: 180
Joined: Aug 2007
Reputation:
20
I have not heard of anyone catching Kokanee at fish lake
Other proposals include eliminating a yellow perch limit at Fish Lake to provide more food for kokanee salmon,
[url "http://www.ksl.com/?sid=31400154&nid=1288&fm=home_page&s_cid=toppick3"]http://www.ksl.com/?sid=31400154&nid=1288&fm=home_page&s_cid=toppick3[/url]
[signature]
Posts: 1,781
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
0
I think they have a typo? Kokes in FL was a proposal, I don't believe it happened yet?
I down rig quite a bit at FL, I would like to believe I had the skills to catch one if indeed they were in the lake.
I love perch fishing, PLEASE remove the posession limit of yellow perch on all waters except waters that have healthy sized perch in them.
[signature]
Posts: 15,547
Threads: 1,315
Joined: Feb 2002
Reputation:
13
The plan is to begin stocking them in 2015 (Per the Fish Lake Fishery Management Plan).
[signature]
Posts: 3,724
Threads: 0
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation:
0
And don't forget if the koke get planted you can keep all the perch you want [laugh].
[signature]
Posts: 1,156
Threads: 1
Joined: Jul 2012
Reputation:
0
According to the posted plan, no Koke's yet but Tiger Trout were introduced this year to compliment a shortage of Splake minnows.
[signature]
Posts: 180
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2009
Reputation:
0
Kokanee once roamed the depths of Fish Lake in the '60's and '70's. I sure hope they plant them back in there, but not as fingerlings. Hopefully they will plant them 8" and up, lots of big predators in there.
[signature]
Posts: 3,085
Threads: 22
Joined: Jul 2003
Reputation:
12
kokanee were stocked in Fish Lake previously. However, the difference is that today we have "lake spawning" strains. We also have a better hatchery system that can support additional stocking to help sustain a population.
As for stocking 8" "catchable" kokanee: don't plan on it.
Will fingerling get eaten? You bet.
Is this bad? Not necessarily. This will provide lake trout in Fish Lake a forage base -- something they do NOT currently have. This should help improve the lake trout fishery at Fish Lake, which is something anglers have asked the DWR to do.
Isn't that a waste of money? No. fingerling kokanee are much cheaper to raise than the current "feeding program" of stocking catchable rainbow trout for the lake trout to eat. So we should be able to stock more kokanee at a cheaper price.
This is a good plan. Not only does it provide a new angling opportunity, but it should also help out other species in the lake as well.
[signature]
Posts: 1,781
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
0
Very educational post, thank you.
I always wondered if kokes were cheaper to plant then bows.
Kokes seem to be the flavor of the month these last couple of years.
No complaints here. I just wish some would get dumped in DC also.
[signature]
Posts: 180
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2009
Reputation:
0
I know planting 8" kokanee would not happen, just wishful thinking. The Lakers will definitely benefit from the young kokanee, I just hate the thought of the muskies getting in on action. Maybe they won't.
[signature]
Posts: 3,085
Threads: 22
Joined: Jul 2003
Reputation:
12
[quote SBennett]Very educational post, thank you.
I always wondered if kokes were cheaper to plant then bows.
[/quote]
almost any fingerling would be cheaper than 8 - 10 inch rainbows. Catchable rainbows are expensive. Kokanee would be a very good alternative in theory -- good enough that it sounds like the DWR would like to give them a try. I'm hoping that it works!
[quote MR.PIKE]I know planting 8" kokanee would not happen, just wishful thinking. The Lakers will definitely benefit from the young kokanee, I just hate the thought of the muskies getting in on action. Maybe they won't.[/quote]
they might -- but you have to consider a couple things:
1. TM population size: how many are really in there?
2. niche. The TM and the kokanee will be occupying a completely different niche. Kokanee are open water fish (where the lake trout live) and tiger musky are not. Tiger musky should be in the weeds preying on perch.
[signature]
Posts: 180
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2009
Reputation:
0
PBH, what I like most about Kokanee being reintroduced into Fish Lake is its one more place to catch Koks, and the fact that they don't compete with trout or Muskies for food. I truly hope that they take off and provide a healthy fishery.
[signature]
Posts: 553
Threads: 32
Joined: Sep 2010
Reputation:
5
Tiger muskies will go where the bang for the buck is. Have caught a lot of muskies trolling open water basins that have ciscoes in them. Would think Kokes are an upgrade as a food source over ciscoes. But since they are sterile the DWR can keep them under control.
Question I have is why don't the lakers in Fish Lake feed more on perch especially during winter. Perch are a major laker food source in the upper Midwest, Great Lakes and Canada.
[signature]
Posts: 1,964
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2003
Reputation:
0
Because the perch stay in the Eurasian Milfoil. Hence the introduction of a weevil to thin the milfoil. It would've been so much easier if some bozo hadn't introduced perch and milfoil in the first place.
[red]⫸[/red][orange]<{[/orange][yellow]{{[/yellow][green]{{[/green][size 4][blue]⦇[/blue][/size][blue]°[/blue][#8000FF]>[/#8000FF]
[signature]
Posts: 553
Threads: 32
Joined: Sep 2010
Reputation:
5
Plenty of weed cover in Midwest and Canada for perch so that isn't the reason. And I catch perch out to 30ft depths in Fish where the weeds are thinner. I have caught smaller Lakers in Fish thru the ice while perch fishing but not like I did in northern MN.
[signature]
Posts: 5,856
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2003
Reputation:
0
Interesting that they are going to plant the Judy strain of kokes down there. Do you know where they get them from? I've not fished down there, but does Fish Lake have a fairly stable vertical water column to help promote egg and fry survival? If so, I would imagine they could create a fairly sustainable population down there. I sure hope it works out well.
[signature]
Posts: 3,085
Threads: 22
Joined: Jul 2003
Reputation:
12
[quote stan55]Plenty of weed cover in Midwest and Canada for perch so that isn't the reason. And I catch perch out to 30ft depths in Fish where the weeds are thinner. I have caught smaller Lakers in Fish thru the ice while perch fishing but not like I did in northern MN.[/quote]
I don't know the reason, but there plenty of studies on Fish Lake that show that the lake trout do NOT utilize perch as a prey source. Feel free to read the attached study.
Since perch were introduced the chub population (primary food source for lake trout in Fish Lake) have dramatically declined, to the point that you can barely find any. The result is that lake trout in Fish Lake struggle to make the transition from to a strictly pisciverous diet (ie: fish only). So, you end up with two size classes of lake trout: Big and little. We have a good number of small lake trout (<26") and big lake trout (>30"). What we don't have are those in between. Why? Forage. Lake trout in Fish Lake struggle to make that switch because the forage is poor. Those small lake trout don't eat perch. Period. Even the large lake trout ignore the perch. Rainbow trout currently make up the entire diet of lake trout (read the report). In fact, according to the report "Only rainbow trout were identified in the stomachs of fish >25 inches. The stomachs of lake trout less than 20 inches in length were dominated by invertebrates...".
Again, why? Because perch are poor prey for lake trout. They simply do not eat them. They do eat rainbow trout. Why is this? My belief is because rainbow trout are an open water fish that occupy a very similar portion of the lake as lake trout.
[signature]
Posts: 15,547
Threads: 1,315
Joined: Feb 2002
Reputation:
13
Well clipping and pasting from the report didn't work.
[signature]
Posts: 4
Threads: 0
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation:
0
they were stocked in Fish Lake years ago but not recently.
Edit: Links are not allowed for new member, see FAQ above.
[signature]
Posts: 58
Threads: 0
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation:
0
[quote PBH]kokanee were stocked in Fish Lake previously. However, the difference is that today we have "lake spawning" strains. We also have a better hatchery system that can support additional stocking to help sustain a population.
As for stocking 8" "catchable" kokanee: don't plan on it.
Will fingerling get eaten? You bet.
Is this bad? Not necessarily. This will provide lake trout in Fish Lake a forage base -- something they do NOT currently have. This should help improve the lake trout fishery at Fish Lake, which is something anglers have asked the DWR to do.
Isn't that a waste of money? No. fingerling kokanee are much cheaper to raise than the current "feeding program" of stocking catchable rainbow trout for the lake trout to eat. So we should be able to stock more kokanee at a cheaper price.
This is a good plan. Not only does it provide a new angling opportunity, but it should also help out other species in the lake as well.[/quote]
Never plant forage fish!!! THAT'S WHAT THE GREAT PBH HAS SAID IN THE PAST. I guess it's only ok if it is to supplement a cold water fishery.
I am glad to see your still drinking the cool aid.
[signature]
Posts: 1,415
Threads: 18
Joined: Sep 2003
Reputation:
15
Oh geez....you are actually comparing the stocking of a sportfish--kokanee salmon--to the stocking of baitfishes like utah chub, dace, threadfin shad, or other nongame fish?
[signature]
|
