05-16-2012, 09:52 PM
Doggone,
I would accept your recommendations if that were the only way to get tigers (and maybe brookies) in the berry.
But I like the idea of all fish in the slot but an angler can keep one over the slot, one in the slot, and 3 or 4 total. It seems that there are an abundance of 16-20 inch cutts anyways, and if the other fish were included in the slot, not every slot fish kept would be a cutt; probably only 50% or less. In addition, almost every trip on or two slot cutts seem to get fatally hooked but have to be released to die anyways.
By allowing one fish in the slot to be kept, I don't think the harvesters would complain much about including all fish in the slot, and adding some tigers and brookies instead of the full allotment of rainbows. It really seems like a win win and the best use of resources to allow selective harvest and mantain a trophy fishery.
PBH,
If finding the tiger or making more tigers is the greatest obstacle, I am not too worried. As techniques and technology improves, the cost for producing more tigers will be less.
There are also dozens of lakes that receive healthy allotments of tigers that could use a decrease in plantings. Huntington, Electric, several high uinta lakes, CCR, etc. It also seems like several times a year the DWR plants thousands of tigers into lakes for the sole reason that they produced too many and had no where to plant them (look at yuba plantings a few years ago). It would make sense to reduce tiger plantings at lakes that see very few angler hours and produces few big fish and often winterkills, and plant them at a lake like the berry.
The other option is making millions of dollars and donating a fish hatchery at Strawberry and paying for tiger and brookie production myself.
Jazzperch,
I don't know you but it doesn't sound like you fish these lakes much. DC is overrun by 6-8 inch small mouth. The perch are coming back. White bass may be setting up shop. There are some crappie and some chub. Musky would do very well in DC and the smallmouth fishery could use some major thinning.
Jordanelle isn't as prime as DC but still has a very healthy perch population, tons of chubs and lots of little small mouth. Musky would also do very well there.
In addition, there aren't any musky legs within a reasonable distance to Utah County. It would be very nice for thousands of us fishermen to have a musky water a little closer to home.
Again all of these fish are sterile, so if at any point it is determined that it is not working, we can stop planting them. Low risk, high reward!
[signature]
I would accept your recommendations if that were the only way to get tigers (and maybe brookies) in the berry.
But I like the idea of all fish in the slot but an angler can keep one over the slot, one in the slot, and 3 or 4 total. It seems that there are an abundance of 16-20 inch cutts anyways, and if the other fish were included in the slot, not every slot fish kept would be a cutt; probably only 50% or less. In addition, almost every trip on or two slot cutts seem to get fatally hooked but have to be released to die anyways.
By allowing one fish in the slot to be kept, I don't think the harvesters would complain much about including all fish in the slot, and adding some tigers and brookies instead of the full allotment of rainbows. It really seems like a win win and the best use of resources to allow selective harvest and mantain a trophy fishery.
PBH,
If finding the tiger or making more tigers is the greatest obstacle, I am not too worried. As techniques and technology improves, the cost for producing more tigers will be less.
There are also dozens of lakes that receive healthy allotments of tigers that could use a decrease in plantings. Huntington, Electric, several high uinta lakes, CCR, etc. It also seems like several times a year the DWR plants thousands of tigers into lakes for the sole reason that they produced too many and had no where to plant them (look at yuba plantings a few years ago). It would make sense to reduce tiger plantings at lakes that see very few angler hours and produces few big fish and often winterkills, and plant them at a lake like the berry.
The other option is making millions of dollars and donating a fish hatchery at Strawberry and paying for tiger and brookie production myself.
Jazzperch,
I don't know you but it doesn't sound like you fish these lakes much. DC is overrun by 6-8 inch small mouth. The perch are coming back. White bass may be setting up shop. There are some crappie and some chub. Musky would do very well in DC and the smallmouth fishery could use some major thinning.
Jordanelle isn't as prime as DC but still has a very healthy perch population, tons of chubs and lots of little small mouth. Musky would also do very well there.
In addition, there aren't any musky legs within a reasonable distance to Utah County. It would be very nice for thousands of us fishermen to have a musky water a little closer to home.
Again all of these fish are sterile, so if at any point it is determined that it is not working, we can stop planting them. Low risk, high reward!
[signature]