Limit question

[Redrebel]

I’ve practiced catch and release for numerous years, but I’ve got into the Kokanee fishing and can’t throw those guys back if they’re good enough size. The question is is if you get a limit of Kokes at the gorge and then you go fish for lake trout and you accidentally kill a fish that’s over 28 inches You technically now have two limits. Would this be in violation of the rules? would it be best to only keep three kokes and then continue to fish for other species in case I got a limit. Last thing I want is to be cited for a technicality .

[FishfulThinkin]

That scenario applies to more than just a Laker at the Gorge. If you fill your limit of any species and continue to fish, there is always that chance that you kill or cripple a fish and then comes the ethical and legal dilemma. I have seen so many slot cuts scooped up by pelicans at the Berry because of improper release techniques or handling the fish too hard, or keeping it out of the water too long, or sometimes it just happens that the fish stays on the surface. I saw a small Kokanee swimming circles on the surface of Jordanelle just this past Saturday that someone had "released" probably due to size. I was raised to believe that you eat what you kill so leaving a crippled fish to waste is an ethical dilemma for me. However, I was also raised to honor and sustain the law so I believe in that also. These 2 things clash in the scenario you presented. To answer your question, from a legal and law enforcement standpoint if you are stopped and have over your limit of fish you should and probably will receive a citation no matter what your story. To prevent this possibility one thing I have done if I want to continue to fish is to stop one shy of the limit so in the event I do cripple a fish, I don't have a problem.

[2knots]

Lakers have a separate limit at the gorge ( 12 with 0nly 1 exceeding 28”s) and are not included in the trout/kokanee limit (which is 4 in any combination)

[dubob]

I’ve practiced catch and release for numerous years, but I’ve got into the Kokanee fishing and can’t throw those guys back if they’re good enough size. The question is is if you get a limit of Kokes at the gorge and then you go fish for lake trout and you accidentally kill a fish that’s over 28 inches You technically now have two limits. Would this be in violation of the rules? would it be best to only keep three kokes and then continue to fish for other species in case I got a limit. Last thing I want is to be cited for a technicality .

As Alan (2knots) stated, you are allowed to keep the over 28" fish (assuming it is a laker) as part of the laker limit which is separate from the kokanee/trout limit.  If you accidentally kill a second laker and keep it, THEN you would be in violation of the law.  The ethics value here is up to the individual and GENERALLY not covered by the law.  Proving legally that you willfully killed a game fish and put it back in the water would be difficult for an LEO.  A percentage of released fish are going to die.  You, and you alone, can decided if that is okay with you, and with you alone.  Whatever you decide - tight lines to you.  

[2knots]

I will add that based on the meeting I attended in Evanston the Wyoming F&G hosted and Utah DNR was in attendance at in regard to the Kokanee fishery collapsing at the gorge, they are strongly encouraging people to fish for and harvest the 12 laker pups you are allowed (less then 27”s) to reduce the numbers of these smaller lakers that they feel are preying on the Kokanee fry

[BearLakeFishGuy]

Any harvest of lakers, including all legal limit fish, will help the Koke fishery.

[Redrebel]

Thank you for all of the responses. I feel I have a better understanding now. I always spend a bit of time chasing the pups. I love FG and want it to be productive for generations.

[Fowl-Hook]

That scenario applies to more than just a Laker at the Gorge. If you fill your limit of any species and continue to fish, there is always that chance that you kill or cripple a fish and then comes the ethical and legal dilemma. I have seen so many slot cuts scooped up by pelicans at the Berry because of improper release techniques or handling the fish too hard, or keeping it out of the water too long, or sometimes it just happens that the fish stays on the surface. I saw a small Kokanee swimming circles on the surface of Jordanelle just this past Saturday that someone had "released" probably due to size. I was raised to believe that you eat what you kill so leaving a crippled fish to waste is an ethical dilemma for me. However, I was also raised to honor and sustain the law so I believe in that also. These 2 things clash in the scenario you presented. To answer your question, from a legal and law enforcement standpoint if you are stopped and have over your limit of fish you should and probably will receive a citation no matter what your story. To prevent this possibility one thing I have done if I want to continue to fish is to stop one shy of the limit so in the event I do cripple a fish, I don't have a problem.

Wounded and dying Cuts at the berry are not an ethical or moral problem, they are a direct result of the slot limit that requires release regardless of condition. When you are required to release fish after fish because of a slot liimit you meet that requirement over and over again and eventually care less about mortality.

[BYUHunter]

That scenario applies to more than just a Laker at the Gorge. If you fill your limit of any species and continue to fish, there is always that chance that you kill or cripple a fish and then comes the ethical and legal dilemma. I have seen so many slot cuts scooped up by pelicans at the Berry because of improper release techniques or handling the fish too hard, or keeping it out of the water too long, or sometimes it just happens that the fish stays on the surface. I saw a small Kokanee swimming circles on the surface of Jordanelle just this past Saturday that someone had "released" probably due to size. I was raised to believe that you eat what you kill so leaving a crippled fish to waste is an ethical dilemma for me. However, I was also raised to honor and sustain the law so I believe in that also. These 2 things clash in the scenario you presented. To answer your question, from a legal and law enforcement standpoint if you are stopped and have over your limit of fish you should and probably will receive a citation no matter what your story. To prevent this possibility one thing I have done if I want to continue to fish is to stop one shy of the limit so in the event I do cripple a fish, I don't have a problem.

Wounded and dying Cuts at the berry are not an ethical or moral problem, they are a direct result of the slot limit that requires release regardless of condition. When you are required to release fish after fish because of a slot liimit you meet that requirement over and over again and eventually care less about mortality.

With the literal millions of Cutts that the DWR stocks every year into Strawberry, and constantly having to bring up my downriggers because one of those old wet-socks has grabbed my Kokanee gear, I don't mind seeing the pelicans get more than a few.

[Therapist]

The safest way to deal with this is to only keep 1fish shy of your limit till you are getting ready to leave, then you can keep that last fish. You may not catch your "limit", but you eliminate the chance of killing or injuring a fish that you have to keep !! Regarding the Gorge!! I can't believe that people don't target the "pups" more. They are great eating, butterfly filet and grill !! Smoke em ! Sure Kokes are the target up there, but the pups offer a GREAT fishing opportunity !!!

[FishfulThinkin]

That scenario applies to more than just a Laker at the Gorge. If you fill your limit of any species and continue to fish, there is always that chance that you kill or cripple a fish and then comes the ethical and legal dilemma. I have seen so many slot cuts scooped up by pelicans at the Berry because of improper release techniques or handling the fish too hard, or keeping it out of the water too long, or sometimes it just happens that the fish stays on the surface. I saw a small Kokanee swimming circles on the surface of Jordanelle just this past Saturday that someone had "released" probably due to size. I was raised to believe that you eat what you kill so leaving a crippled fish to waste is an ethical dilemma for me. However, I was also raised to honor and sustain the law so I believe in that also. These 2 things clash in the scenario you presented. To answer your question, from a legal and law enforcement standpoint if you are stopped and have over your limit of fish you should and probably will receive a citation no matter what your story. To prevent this possibility one thing I have done if I want to continue to fish is to stop one shy of the limit so in the event I do cripple a fish, I don't have a problem.

Wounded and dying Cuts at the berry are not an ethical or moral problem, they are a direct result of the slot limit that requires release regardless of condition. When you are required to release fish after fish because of a slot liimit you meet that requirement over and over again and eventually care less about mortality.

Whether or not you agree with the management plan at Strawberry is not the point. If you catch a slot cut at Strawberry, you are required by law  to release it unharmed. You also have an ethical responsibility to do so in a manner that does not injure or kill the fish. I recognize that there is some mortality on released trout no matter what, but I am referring to people who intentionally harm fish out of frustration or carelessness. I have witnessed people throw a fish several feet in the air to release it and seem to be taking out their frustrations on the fish. Not cool. I know there are some including on this forum who disagree with the management plan at Strawberry but killing all the slot cuts possible is not the way to address that.

[dubob]

If you catch a slot cut at Strawberry, you are required by law  to release it unharmed.

Okay, I have to disagree with that statement.  Here is the direct quote from the Guidebook:

“Strawberry Reservoir, Wasatch County. . . .

•All cutthroat trout from 15 to 22 inches must be immediately released."

The word 'unharmed' does not appear anywhere in that quote.  In fact, the only place it does appear in the guidebook is in this quote:

"The bonytail is currently found in limited stretches of the Green and Colorado mainstem rivers, where the species is stocked by the Upper Colorado River Recovery Program. The species is endangered and, if caught, should be returned immediately to the water unharmed. The body is highly streamlined, with a bluish, dusky color above to pale below. The head is short and noticeably concave. The area just in front of the fish’s tail fin is exremely narrow. Bonytail can reach lengths of 22 inches and weigh more than two pounds in the wild."

You will also note that it says 'SHOULD be returned immediately to the water unharmed', and not 'SHALL be returned immediately to the water unharmed'.  Shall is often used to express a mandatory obligation, while should is used to express a recommendation or suggestion.

You also have an ethical responsibility to do so in a manner that does not injure or kill the fish.

Ethical responsibility is the ability to recognize, interpret and act upon multiple principles and values according to the standards within a given field and/or context.  Unfortunately, we find way too many folks in today's world that lack that ability. 

[Fowl-Hook]

That scenario applies to more than just a Laker at the Gorge. If you fill your limit of any species and continue to fish, there is always that chance that you kill or cripple a fish and then comes the ethical and legal dilemma. I have seen so many slot cuts scooped up by pelicans at the Berry because of improper release techniques or handling the fish too hard, or keeping it out of the water too long, or sometimes it just happens that the fish stays on the surface. I saw a small Kokanee swimming circles on the surface of Jordanelle just this past Saturday that someone had "released" probably due to size. I was raised to believe that you eat what you kill so leaving a crippled fish to waste is an ethical dilemma for me. However, I was also raised to honor and sustain the law so I believe in that also. These 2 things clash in the scenario you presented. To answer your question, from a legal and law enforcement standpoint if you are stopped and have over your limit of fish you should and probably will receive a citation no matter what your story. To prevent this possibility one thing I have done if I want to continue to fish is to stop one shy of the limit so in the event I do cripple a fish, I don't have a problem.

Wounded and dying Cuts at the berry are not an ethical or moral problem, they are a direct result of the slot limit that requires release regardless of condition. When you are required to release fish after fish because of a slot liimit you meet that requirement over and over again and eventually care less about mortality.

Whether or not you agree with the management plan at Strawberry is not the point. If you catch a slot cut at Strawberry, you are required by law  to release it unharmed. You also have an ethical responsibility to do so in a manner that does not injure or kill the fish. I recognize that there is some mortality on released trout no matter what, but I am referring to people who intentionally harm fish out of frustration or carelessness. I have witnessed people throw a fish several feet in the air to release it and seem to be taking out their frustrations on the fish. Not cool. I know there are some including on this forum who disagree with the management plan at Strawberry but killing all the slot cuts possible is not the way to address that.

The slot regulations at Strawberry mandating release regardless of condition, treble hooks, power bait, soft bait all forms of bait is a very pitiful management plan indeed. The current regulations simply kill slot fish on a regular basis while attempting to make the fisherman the guilty party which is not the case!

[wormandbobber]

A pitiful management plan that has been successful in providing excellent fishing for how long? Where is a giant eye rolling emoji when I need one? Talk about the pinnacle of dumb comments...

[Kent]

The management plan assumes a percentage of slot cutthroat will die from handling. The number of fish stocked takes this into consideration. That said, I would hope that people would use reasonable care in releasing all fish in order to minimize death from handling.

[Fowl-Hook]

A pitiful management plan that has been successful in providing excellent fishing for how long? Where is a giant eye rolling emoji when I need one? Talk about the pinnacle of dumb comments...

My comments would have been better conveyed with an Emoji I'm sure. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and not everyone views the largest fish hatchery in Utah as a thing of beauty.

[Mildog]

As stated before beauty and excellence in the eye of the beholder! I agree with others that DON’T consider “Bear lake slot cutts” in Strawberry an excellent fishery ! IMHO Its great for people who can’t catch fish regularly . Cutts are easy to catch don’t fight much and are not very “sporty”.
With that said I used to love catching Bear Lake Cutts at Bear Lake where they evolved , they are a totally different fish than what you see at Strawberry. Strawberry and Bear lake are SO different. Bear lake is perfect for Bear Lake cutts, there are multiple prey fish (Cisco, Sculpin, whitefish to name a few) that live in the same areas and depths as the cutts live in. Strawberry is so different, much of the year chubs and shiners are living in the shallows and weed beds and the cutts are out roaming in deep water, not where the prey fish are. The cutts often eat Daphnia and other bugs plankton etc. not the fish they were intended to help control. It can easily be argued other cutts might be a better fit for Strawberry. The concern about “protecting” Bear lake cutts puts other constraints on other fish so they don’t interbreed. Shore fishing at Strawberry is much
More limited than it was pre Bear Lake cutts. The tributaries provided some great fishing back in the day, but not now. I drive out of state to catch Cutts, hybrids and big rainbows in a couple other states. I wouldn’t fish Strawberry at all if it weren’t for Kokes! Enjoyed fishing it a lot before Bear Lake Cutts or Kokes were introduced. I think Strawberry could be so much better, but I think we are stuck with what it is.
That’s just my opinion, but I can say I know many people and many of my angling cohorts that also feel this way as well.

[TubeDude]

As stated before beauty and excellence in the eye of the beholder! I agree with others that DON’T consider “Bear lake slot cutts” in Strawberry an excellent fishery ! IMHO Its great for people who can’t catch fish regularly . Cutts are easy to catch don’t fight much and are not very “sporty”.
With that said I used to love catching Bear Lake Cutts at Bear Lake where they evolved , they are a totally different fish than what you see at Strawberry. Strawberry and  Bear lake are SO different. Bear lake is perfect for Bear Lake cutts, there are multiple prey fish (Cisco, Sculpin, whitefish to name a few) that live in the same areas and depths as the cutts live in. Strawberry is so different, much of the year chubs and shiners are living in the shallows and weed beds and the cutts are out roaming in deep water, not where the prey fish are. The cutts often eat Daphnia and other bugs plankton etc. not the fish they were intended to help control. It can easily be argued other cutts might be a better fit for Strawberry. The concern about “protecting” Bear lake cutts puts other constraints on other fish so they don’t interbreed. Shore fishing at Strawberry is much
More limited than it was pre Bear Lake cutts. The tributaries provided some great fishing back in the day, but not now. I drive out of state to catch Cutts, hybrids and big rainbows in a couple other states. I wouldn’t fish Strawberry at all if it weren’t for Kokes! Enjoyed fishing it a lot before Bear Lake Cutts or Kokes were introduced. I think Strawberry could be so much better, but I think we are stuck with what it is.
That’s just my opinion, but I can say I know many people and many of my angling cohorts that also feel this way as well.

I remember the "olden days" when we had the Anglers Inn "floatillas" on da Berry...fly roddin' for 'bows, cutts and even a few nice brookies.  Everybody caught fish and the fish all fought well.  

I haven't fished that lake for years...with the exception of a koke jaunt with Liketrolling a couple of years ago.  Got a good/bad taste of the wet blanket cutts that kept interrupting our fishing.  As they came in easily on koke gear you could almost hear them saying "Okay, turn me loose so I can go bother someone else."

[MrShane]

The real travesty at Strawberry is the dumbing down of our anglers by not allowing the filleting of Kokes while at Strawberry Reservoir.
Dumb, dumb, dumb……

[doitall5000]

The real travesty at Strawberry is the dumbing down of our anglers by not allowing the filleting of Kokes while at Strawberry Reservoir.
Dumb, dumb, dumb……

Yes but the real problem is fisherman can't tell the difference between a kokanee  and a rainbow.