Posts: 527
Threads: 20
Joined: Jan 2008
Reputation:
4
Fished Twin yesterday, good ice, over a foot still edges great but hard snow crust on top. Not a lot of people but a lot still must have had the day off. Took a nice mess of perch, one 13 incher and rest were about 8-9. They werent hitting hard n fast but just enough to keep the interest. Talked to others and depended on were you were if you got perch or trout. Trout steady by the dam, perch more towards middle of lake just north of boat ramp. Still not a lot of blue gill being caught. One perch i got had a very very small blue gill in it so it was the only one i caught [unsure].
Lake is filling some what and perch seem to be in about 15-18 foot of water from bottom to about 4 foot off of it.
Would still like to hear if any one is catching any blue gill or crappie, no one on the ice when im there seems to be.
[signature]
Posts: 1,418
Threads: 0
Joined: Nov 2006
Reputation:
0
Good to hear that the lake is filling up a bit. Hopefully we will be able to fish it this summer (they are threatening to keep fishermen off Twin)!!! We had a great year last year there and at all the Preston area lakes. Caught a few 3-4 lb Rainbows and a couple 6+ lb largemouth, so hopefully it is as good as last year. Thanks for the report.
TS
[signature]
Posts: 527
Threads: 20
Joined: Jan 2008
Reputation:
4
As I stated in an earlier post, I talked with Fish and Game and as far as they knew, there was nothing to the threat from the Twin Lake Canal Company at least at this point. If there is something done, the public should stand up in a big up roar for all the resivoirs they close as a lot of public money has been put into the fisheries there. The least to say is that Fish and Game also has a fishermans access agreement with the Canal Company and and piece of BLM land accesses the lake part way down the main road the F&G has an special use agreement with the BLM for access to the lake also. So there are a lot of issues I think if they try to close off the resevoir besides the public pressure and opinion sides that I am not sure they are willing to take on if they want to put more resevoirs in at a later year.
[signature]
Posts: 1,281
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation:
0
Thanks for the report. I also think the Twin Lakes Canal Company would find themselves in a legal battle if they wanted to close off public access to the reservoirs they own. Too much public money has subsidized the roads, boat ramps and fishery management over the years to completely close off public access. I’m surprised the Twin Lakes Canal Company is able to charge a fee for launching boats and parking in areas the county paid to create.
[signature]
Posts: 897
Threads: 13
Joined: Feb 2007
Reputation:
1
I think thayt canal company could only threaten to close two lakes - maybe 3 but I know they are not over the close Preston lakes.
[signature]
Posts: 527
Threads: 20
Joined: Jan 2008
Reputation:
4
Hey packfish, can you clearify what you said, it didnt make any sense. And as far as charging a fee to camp and access the lake, this has been disucssed between F&G, Canal Company and BLM and since it is private land, like it or not, they can charge what they want to access their private land. I dont agree that they should be allowed to charge a fee on the BLM land that accesses the lake which F&G has a special use permit on for sportsmans access, but, it appears no one has or will push it.
And I agree, I would hope that if they tried to close the lakes, that some one or some group would take them to task for the public monies expended there and push for reimbursement of that money into the appropriate coffers.
[signature]
Posts: 897
Threads: 13
Joined: Feb 2007
Reputation:
1
What I meant was that there a 3 canal companies up there and Twin Lakes Canal has nothing to do with Glendale, Foster, Lamont, Johnson and a few others. I think the only two they could threaten would be Twin and Condie. I was just replying to the earlier post that sounded like Twin could close other lakes. I agree with you on the BLM land that is around Twin.
[signature]
Posts: 527
Threads: 20
Joined: Jan 2008
Reputation:
4
Thanks, they do have 3 resevoirs, the two you mentioned but i cant remember the other one they have. Either way it would be a tradgedy for the fisheries if they close it.
[signature]
Posts: 1,418
Threads: 0
Joined: Nov 2006
Reputation:
0
The other one I believe is Winder. I know that it was drained completly this past summer, but dont know if it was for good or for dam repair or what. They were trying to get people out there and catch all the fish that the DWR couldnt "relocate" so that they didnt go to waste. You could literally walk across it in September!!!
TS
[signature]
Posts: 897
Threads: 13
Joined: Feb 2007
Reputation:
1
Yes- it's Winder--- the only charge as I understand it is for the parking. Everything else they claim is very questionable. I still think the share holders are being represented by one that really doesn't have thier best interests in mind.
[signature]
Posts: 527
Threads: 20
Joined: Jan 2008
Reputation:
4
Totally agree packfish, and if all the share holders really knew what was happening, I dont think they would stand up for it. Let's all just hope they dont get it done.
[signature]
Posts: 921
Threads: 0
Joined: Sep 2006
Reputation:
0
as far as I've read and seen charging a price is on twin lakes only. For the reason of the place gets so crowded in the summer and alot of the boaters and campers somehow always forget to clean up after themselves. So it supposedly pays for someone to try and keep it clean behind all the pigs. And thats the only place they are charging a price winder and the others area lakes are all free to park fish
[signature]
