plant tiger trout in the berry

[duckdog1us]

well it far off from as good as it could be so why not tweek it a bit to see what it can be if it dont work just stop planting the and they will go away
[signature]

[mojorizing]

Save the money and put more ' bows in there. Lots more. Kams, or whatever.
[signature]

[PBH]

[quote duckdog1us]...why not tweek it a bit to see what it can be if it dont work just stop planting the and they will go away[/quote]

[quote PBH]


Why do they stock 7-10" rainbows?
What time of year would tiger trout be available when they reach 5-6"
Would hatcheries be able to produce enough 5-6" tiger trout to stock Strawberry without negatively impacting other fisheries that rely on tiger trout stocking? What about sterile brook trout -- which other fishery would lose their quota of sterile brook trout in order to accommodate Strawberry?[/quote]


some of you guys are about as dense as depleted uranium.

duckdog -- you want it to be "tweaked". So, which other lake should be "tweaked" in order to free up some tiger trout to stock in Strawberry??

Fisheries management isn't like stocking shelves at Walmart. You can't just call the warehouse and say "more tiger trout on aisle 6".

I could care less whether you get tiger trout in Strawberry or not -- but another lake (or two, or three) will have their quotas of tiger trout cut in order to accommodate an increased quota for Strawberry. So, which lakes would you consider cutting?

This generation of fishermen is truly spoiled. Not only do we always want "trophy" sized fish, but we want an unlimited variety at every lake (within 20 minutes of our homes, no less!).

duckdog -- just out of curiosity: are you an engineer?
[signature]

[duckdog1us]

I'm sure in the grand scheme of things it wouldn't be that hard to plan one less hatch of bows and one more of tigers come on give UDWR some credit
[signature]

[Fishrmn]

If there is anyone on the board that does give credit where credit is due, it is PBH. It ain't quite as easy as some would think to just add more Tigers. You'll just have to take someone's word, that most of what can be accomplished has been thought of, and they're doing what they can with the available resources and capacities. Of course there will still be those who have their doubts.
[signature]

[duckdog1us]

i could show you spot if they was to gill net chubs there would be tens of thousands right now
[signature]

[doggonefishin]

Re"Why not stock ten thousand smaller tigers (5-6 inches) in 3-5 different places in the lake instead of a few thousand larger bows (7-10 inches)? Small tigers seem to survive better than small bows due to their behavior."


What behavior have you seen that would allow 5 inch tigers to survive predation from the big cutts better than 5 inch bows or cutts? From what I've seen, small tigers have not exhibited superior survivability compared to other trout.

RE" dumb anglers can still catch their cutts,"

Hey, I like those cutts. Yes, you can catch them hand over fist with the right techniques at certain times, but the "toss out the powerbait and wait" crowd are as likely or more likely to catch bows. And as Mr. Ward explained, most of these guys and others don't want to cut the bow quota.
[signature]

[PBH]

[quote duckdog1us]I'm sure in the grand scheme of things it wouldn't be that hard to plan one less hatch of bows and one more of tigers come on give UDWR some credit[/quote]

It has nothing to do with how many bows are being raised in the hatcheries. It has to do with how many tiger trout are being created. Before you can have the DWR stock more tiger trout, you need to find out what their capacity for raising tiger trout is. So, the question becomes:

1. can additional tiger trout be raised?
2. if not, which quotas get cut (what waters do you steal tiger trout from)?




I'm also sure that you could find lots of chubs in isolated areas right now. The problem is matching that to historical gill-netting data from other times of year. It would be like comparing a football score to a soccer score. The data would be just plain "out of whack". That's the problem with many "arm chair biologist" anglers -- they can't see the whole picture. They look at one little corner of a painting, and think "well....duh! Look at this!". They fail to look at the whole thing -- including historical records.

Duckdog -- have you even spoken with Allan Ward? If not, maybe you should.
[signature]

[Jacksonman]

I understand that plant tigers in strawberry, other lakes would lose some tiger plantings. But I can think of a dozen lakes that could handle or benefit from less tiger planting (Huntington, Electric, Currant Creek, several lakes in the Uintas, Hyrum, Mantua, Minersville, Nine Mile, Ogden River, Duck Fork, etc). Take 200-2000 from each of these and wa-la, 5,000 to 10,000 little tigers to plant.

I also don't think it would be too difficult to raise more tiger trout and brookies if angler hours doubled at the berry. I would fish it 3 or 4 times the amount I currently do (like I did with Scofield) if this were too happen and I wouldn't be alone.

Tiger trout seem to stay close to shoreline and hide in rocky crevices while bows and cutts seem to stay out in open water. Tigers also seem to be a more bit wiser and elusive than both cutts and bows, maybe due to the brown trout in it. From my personal observations, small tigers have a higher probability at survival than both cutts and bows.

Brookies are planted all over the high mountain lakes and often dropped in by airplane. That can't be cheap. I imagine driving up and dumping 10,000 brookies throughout the lake wouldn't be too hard to do. Most of those high mountain lakes have too many fish in them anyways, receive little pressure, are full of stunted fish and most die of old age.

I love catching the cutts at the Berry on occasion, but don't think I am acting "spoiled" by attempting to improve a place I love to fish. Do you call all innovators "spoiled" for continuing to attempt to improve things? Although extremely appreciative for how well we have it in Utah as fishermen (arguably the best land-locked state for fishing), I see nothing wrong or spoiled with innovative thinking to try to improve things.

You are right that we are not fish biologist but only fishermen, but I know that cutts and tigers tend to do well together and brookies like the mossy/weedy shoreline. I am sure the real biologist could figure out how to make it work and make best use of resources and funds. But in our experience and observations, we think it COULD work and would like it to be considered.

The thought of cutts in 20-25 feet of water on shelves, tigers up in the rocks, brookies in the weeds and bows in the open water sounds like not only fun, but increases odds of catching fish. If one or two species turn off or are too deep, at least they other ones are catchable. Anglers can also target a certain species.

I see it as a win-win but I am dense![crazy]
[signature]

[bassrods]

I never in my wildest day.. But yes I do agree with PBH about the Berry and putting tigers in..[]

But how about BASS that would not take away from any other hatchery or lake...[crazy][sly][]

And sense they can't spawn in the Berry they could be controlled...[]

I think they both have about the same chance...
[signature]

[Jacksonman]

I don't.

Would be fine with sterile smallies being planted, or even regular smallies if it was shown that they absolutely could not take over or successfully spawn.

Variety is great by me!
[signature]

[duckdog1us]

Variety is great by me! +++1
[signature]

[PBH]

[quote Jacksonman] I am sure the real biologist could figure out how to make it work and make best use of resources and funds. [/quote]

I completely agree.

Maybe that statement right there explains why tiger trout are not a regularly stocked fish in Strawberry!!
[signature]

[Jacksonman]

Maybe. Or maybe not. They aren't in there ... yet. You know your statement is ridiculous. By that logic, we could state that we are done adding species to any lake because they aren't currently in there and the biologist know best.

Maybe the lack of tiger trout in the berry is just a result of planning and resources and waiting for angler demand. I don't think the decision to add new species to lakes, especially very successful lakes, should be made lightly. But if a new species is going to be introduced, a sterile fish that can be controlled and is well known in the state would be a logical choice.

If Henry's only had cutts, it would probably get one half the angler hours. Why not create our own Henry's? A few pictures of 10 lb tigers and 3-5 pound brookies to go along with the 22-28 inch cutts and the occasional 5 lb bows would definitely drive some out of state traffic. And if it doesn't work, stop planting the sterile fish.

I am also a huge advocate of Tiger Musky being introduced into more lakes. If I had to choose between the above discussed ideas for the berry or adding tiger muskie into Deer Creek, Jordanelle and Rokport, I would have a very difficult decision. We all know Deer Creek could use some Musky to control those 6 inch smallies and I could use some mucky 30 minutes from my house!
[signature]

[PBH]

[quote Jacksonman] You know your statement is ridiculous. [/quote]

Actually, it was YOUR statement. Not mine.

You said "best use of resources and funds". How do you know whether or not the biologists have already looked into the possibility of managing Strawberry with tiger trout, and come to the determination that they would not be the "best use of the resource and funds"?


If tiger trout were a great option for Strawberry -- WHY AREN'T THEY ALREADY BEING USED???

Personally, I believe it to be hatchery production. The question that MUST be answered before any further discussions can take place is: can hatcheries raise enough tiger trout to accommodate Strawberry without negatively affecting other places currently managed with tiger trout? Has anyone asked that question of Alan Ward, or Mike Slater (or Drew Cushing or Roger Wilson)?
[signature]

[Kent]

I can't believe you want folks to do actual research instead of just going with passionate emotion.[]

Why would anyone want to resort to obtaining logic and facts (from those actively involved in the decision making process) when unbridled emotion is so much more fun?[][]

I guess there is a party pooper in every crowd.

PBH, you know I am just funnin' you, Your advice makes total sense, now if they will just follow it.
[signature]

[PBH]

[quote kentofnsl] Your advice makes total sense, now if they will just follow it.[/quote]

[b][red]The trouble is that when we hear something that goes against our version of the truth, we dismiss everything that is being said.[/red][/b]
[signature]

[duckdog1us]

D.N.R. open house, this a good place to hear what they think about this idea i know i will be there any else
[signature]

[TubeDude]

[cool][#0000ff]Good thinking.[/#0000ff]
[#0000ff][/#0000ff]
[#0000ff]I'll be there.[/#0000ff]
[signature]

[KC5]

I have been watching this post for awhile now, Its always interesting to see how things evolve, I for one congratulate our biologists who have been working so hard to bring Strawberry back to such a great fishery. They have adapted several times through this process and made tweaks and changes as needed. We are finally to the point that there are some great Rainbow being caught, Last year was such a success, with many Bows being caught in the 7-10lb range and a few over that. By planting the larger Rainbows they are growing fast and surviving and becoming great fish to catch and enjoy a few for good table fair.

My frustration is armchair Biologists who think they know better. The Biologist assigned to the Berry spend countless hours there all year, gilnetting, checking fishermen, and everything else they do trying to keep right on top of any issues that come up. The balance of the lake right now is doing well. We have the chance to catch Kokanee, Great Rainbows, and Huge Cuts. There is nothing funner than fall on the berry and 50 plus fish days catching cuts.

For those of you hooked on Tigers, for heavens sake there are countless waters that already have them, Go fish those lakes, Just because you like to catch them doesn't mean they need to be in every lake,

I fished strawberry over 20 times last summer, it has never been better, It rivals the days long ago for the number and quality of fish we are catching. Strawberry is and always has been a special place to fish, I believe it is the Division Blue Ribbon Trout Lake, I'm sure we have no Idea on how many hours of discussion, research and funding goes into keeping it in top shape, I am sure they have discussed every option with every fish available, I congradulate them for the great success they are having and I for one plan on fishing it again at least 20 times this year, I trust they have that lake dialed in and I appreciate there efforts and hope they leave it as it is.
[signature]