Cascade Walleye

[AverysAdventure]

https://idfg.idaho.gov/press/walleye-dis...ke-cascade

So what's everyones thoughts on this?
[signature]

[Duck-Slayer]

I think they should widely stock Walleye. Every place that has them all the other fish do better period.... but it definitely needs to be done the legal and right way. I would imagine that with walleye in the lake how big those perch could really get.
Matt
[signature]

[AverysAdventure]

I agree Matt.
[signature]

[AverysAdventure]

[quote AverysAdventure]I agree Matt.[/quote]

LOL, I had a change of mind - I no longer agree with you Matt.

This has been a hot topic on FB today. After hours of discussions one of the F&G biologist has actually changed my mind. His point is this, we don't have the forage fish to sustain walleye, perch and SMB in the same lake out west. The only fisheries in the west that can sustain them are the ones feeding on salmon smolt and fry. On the eastside of the continental divide the lakes have shiners and minnows for them to forage on so everything can coexist without wiping each other out. He made some good points and he's a heck of a lot smarter than me. So until someone can bring facts to the table to change my mind again I'm going with walleye are not good for Cascade. Don't get me wrong, I still like walleye and enjoy fishing for them but not all waters are suitable for them out west.
[signature]

[Biigfish33]

Those are the same facts I’ve heard from biologists. It’s easy to look at Midwestern ecosystems and say, “hey the same thing will happen out west”. But, ecosystems are fickle, and not all behave the same. Seems like there’s a lot distrust in our biologists and those managing our fisheries, and a lot of it happens to come from their priority to promote trout, salmon and steelhead. Just because they have a priority, doesn’t mean their philosophy on warm water species and their potential impact is flawed. I think people need to start trusting the scienctific facts that our fisheries managers bring to the table. Nothing is perfect, but bucket biologist are the perfect example showing that people do not want to listen to the facts. Idaho has a lot of opportunity, and it’s hard to make everyone happy, but I think people need to be thankful for the opportunity rather than continue to push for more and more. Just my two cents.
[signature]

[AverysAdventure]

Very well said Biigfish33
[signature]

[Duck-Slayer]

LOL...... um not sure if you knew this or not but Perch are a forage base / minnow in your example...... that's a fact jack,
Matt
[signature]

[AverysAdventure]

Yep I realise that and that is the problem. They will be forage base for everything and the perch fishery will suffer in the end. I could not ever explain it as well as a biologist could. One thing that he asked stumped everyone. Name one lake out west that supports a great fishery for walleye and perch?
[signature]

[hooknhunter]

Last few times I went, I found some fish with scars and wounds. I assumed it was either boat props or Tiger Muskie. Perhaps they were Walleye teeth wounds?

I wonder how many are in there. Odd that they've never pulled them up in their nets. I've seen net setups in Cascade the last several years. I would think they would catch some eyes in those. Am I wrong?
[signature]

[hooknhunter]

Just in case I get lucky and catch a few, what is the limit on eyes in Cascade?
[signature]

[AverysAdventure]

I would think the will fall under the "All other fish species" for SW region. No bag, size or possession limit. I believe that's the approach in Lake Pend Oreille also.
[signature]

[hooknhunter]

Who knows. Maybe those walleye are the reason the fishery has maintained the large perch as well as it has. Fish and Game has stated in previous reports on Cascade that they felt the large perch would go away at some point and that they weren't sure why they had persisted as long as they have. Maybe this is why?

I think we shouldn't get overly freaked out by it until we see how it all plays out. It might end up being a good thing.
[signature]

[Biigfish33]

Not necessarily disagreeing with you, but wouldn’t people have caught walleye regularly if they were responsible?

I think all you can do is take the “time will tell” approach, because they’re there. My concern is for the perch fishery, yes, but also for downstream fisheries. People mention brownlee, the snake, but where the payette dumps into the snake you’re not far from the Boise, owyhee, etc. Not sure what walleye would do to the prized brown fishery up the owyhee, or if they’d even make their way there, but that’s more concerning in my mind. I’m a salmon and steelhead guy too, what’s the impact below hells canyon? I know they’re moving into those stretches anyway, but just a potential to hurt things more.

P.S. to all, with all the drama and Keyboard warriors on the Facebook reports, I sure do miss the more frequent reports on this board! Thanks to those who report here and respectfully share their opinions!
[signature]

[hooknhunter]

I was just thinking about this more. There have been crappie in Cascade for a long time. Very few people catch very many if any at all. I've talked to many who think it is a false legend, but I personally have caught several. Perhaps the Walleye will end up being like the Crappie. Present, but not really a factor in the fishery.

Now this is a huge assumption on my part, but since the crappie haven't really taken off, I assume it is due to the habitat not being ideal for crappie. Is Cascade "ideal" for Walleye? I wouldn't know. But if not, we probably don't have anything to worry about.
[signature]

[AverysAdventure]

Who really knows how it will play out. F&G will step up their netting surveys and try to figure out what the population is. When they finally did that on Lake Pend Oreille after reports of people catching them they netted thousands. I know or a few reports of people catching them over the last couple of years and even had a friend claim to catch one last year. No pictures so I never put much credit in the claims. Perch are already a forage for bass, trout, squaws and coho. What will be the result down the road is up for debate. My thinking is it will make for great fishing short term but will have a negitive effect long term.
[signature]

[Biigfish33]

Good point with the crappie. I’ve only personally caught them once. Could be that the walleye are just reaching catchable numbers, or like you said, the habitat may not allow them to boom like we may think. All speculation but good comparison with the crappie.
[signature]

[duksnfish]

First off let me say I totally disagree with the bucketologists that seem to want to put their favorite fish species wherever they want if they are not present. Yes, I'd love crappie in more waters in the Upper Snake River area as I do believe they can be sustained, but, do it right.

As for the walleye issue, think about Ririe Reservoir. They were introduced there about 10 years ago or so according to F&G and the fear/threat that they would take over Ririe and go downstream into the prized Snake River and affect the fishery there.

To date, as far as the last report I saw, they haven't moved and still are not in a catchable population. In fact, I cant remember one being caught by the public in ages that has been confirmed. And F&G If I remember right catches one here or their in their nets. If F&G is reading this, it would be interesting to hear their gill net results on walleye.

So, the question is, as one person asked, is the biology/niche of these waters such that they just cant survive and produce to the point of over taking other fish species? And as to perch, look all over the west and Canada. Large perch do exist and co-habitate with walleye and do quite well as far as I know.

I know that in talking with F&G years ago about increasing crappie, it was stated that #1 they wouldn't survive our cold winters (mid-west and other northern states have much colder winters and do well) but the most important point to me is that the impact and perception to the public wants over what can be done. This came directly from a former F&G fish biologist many years ago.

So, as one said, time will tell, but, my personal thought is, and based on watching Ririe, I don't believe that it will be a big deal in our lifetime.
[signature]

[psanders71]

Late to the party but love the discussion and the differing opinions!

From my perspective, illegal introductions should never be the answer for any species... land, water or air for that matter. They are not based on science and most always do not have the intended effect and can require tremendous efforts, resources and money to resolve.

With that in mind, I love walleyes and wish we had more options to fish for them beyond SFCR, Oakley and Oneida. They are fun to catch, can be caught year round on many different methods and are also great to eat!!!

As far as Ririe is concerned, I fish it fairly often for kokanee, perch and smallmouth and in the process have picked up some trout, chubs and suckers... but never a walleye. I have seen the F&G survey reports that indicate their presence and have heard the stories of "I know a guy, who knows a guy that heard that another guy has caught one". It is my understanding that F&G has a pretty intensive plan in place to catch and kill walleye during their spawn in an attempt to reduce abundance in the reservoir... it is obviously working.

We can all SPECULATE on what a sustainable walleye population MIGHT do to a specific fishery, but none of us really knows for sure. Every body of water is unique, has its own carrying capacity and other variables that will determine how species interact in each specific environment. We have the ability to look at bodies of water that are similar to one another and make assumptions based off of those similarities, but again I do not think that any decisions can be made with 100% confidence and certainty when mother nature is involved. For every body of water that will support a diverse fishery with desirable populations and size structures, there is another that it just does not work at all...

From an overall cost perspective, would it not make sense to establish fish populations in areas that could sustain natural reproduction and provide fishing opportunities than to continually grow fish to a catchable size, knowing that they are only there to be caught or to die of natural causes? Wouldn't those who enjoy eating fish like more opportunity to do so with a better quality option than the "mushy meat" stocked trout we have all caught? Just saying...

More food for thought while I am at it... If we were all only able to fish for the fish that are native to each of the lakes, rivers, streams and reservoirs that we fish in Idaho, we would never be able to catch Brook Trout, Brown Trout, Lake Trout, Tiger Trout, Splake, Coho, Kokanee (few lakes), Largemouth Bass, Smallmouth Bass, Bluegill, Sunfish, Crappie, Tiger Muskie, Northern Pike, Catfish, Bullhead,Yellow Perch and yes, Walleye. I for one am very glad that we have these options available to chase, to catch and to eat!

Paul
[signature]

[customweld]

Just playing devils advocate here. 193,000 Perch from Phillips Reservoir were brought in and transplanted. Phillips reservoir also has walleye. It's entirely possible that there is no bucket biologist, but rather an accidental transplant with the perch from the beginning. https://idfg.idaho.gov/press/making-perch-lake-cascade
[signature]

[hooknhunter]

Hmmmmm. That might be noteworthy. Thanks for pointing that out!
[signature]