Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Scofield 7/31/18, fishery is not there yet
#23
I agree that the best and fastest situation would have been to poison , then stock preditors right off to attempt to control. However the est 2 years ago was in the 1.5 million dollar range. Not a real feasible option. In fact this was my suggestion when the DWR did the survey 2 years ago in the comment section.
And yes , If you consider a poisoning every 10 years for a few good years short term a success , then I guess the others were a success. .
I grew up fishing this lake and the streams in and out . But I am all for trying a better long term solution. I am all for what is happening there. And the thing is if it fail , the poisoning option is still there. But keep in mind the DWR has little financial resources to work with. The poisoning of pelican lake was delayed a couple years due to the budget not being there.
Kent: One month ago my sons and I fished the walk in area on the west side , we caught about 50/50 chubs to cutthroats, and while they were not trophys, their health was much improved. And the ratio of chubs was much lower. The cutthroats were nice and fat, Very few were the skinny ones of the last few years. We fish that bank every year a couple times , and the difference has been noticeable.
Now I use starvation as a model for Scofield, 15-20 years ago It was hard to be catching anything but chubs, If we learn from that lake and keep steryl controlled preditors in Scofield ( instead of the over populating walleye) I think Scofield has a real chance
[signature]
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Re: [PBH] Scofield 7/31/18, fishery is not there yet - by Lonnie - 08-02-2018, 09:13 PM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 18 Guest(s)