Survey on fishing at Red Fleet Reservoir

[AmyC]

Last week, we posted a survey about Red Fleet Reservoir that will remain online for another week or so. If you like to fish at Red Fleet, please take the survey and let us know what you think: https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/redfleetreservoir

Amy Canning
Communications Specialist
Utah Division of Wildlife Resources
[signature]

[Irish_Miner]

Done. Thanks Amy..
[signature]

[fishnate]

I took it last week. It'll be interesting to see the results. Will they be posted anywhere?
[signature]

[flyfishkeller]

just leave the lake alone. why is utah so against walleye and species like them. the fish were put in because thats what people like to catch and to eat. their are way to many lakes in utah that are mostly trout based.
[signature]

[bassrods]

I would like to see how this survey turns out and post it on here..
[signature]

[tlarson]

completed survey
[signature]

[fishnate]

Do you have any idea what the issues with Red Fleet, the drainage or Utah fisheries are? Walleye were illegally introduced into Red Fleet. This is outside the management plan for the fishery. Consequently the DWR now has to decide how to deal with the issue, thus the open house last year and the survey this year. There are proposals but no decisions as yet. There are federally endangered species at risk, management plans disrupted, illegal activity to deal with, social desires for and against walleye and other non-native fish, etc, etc. I love the walleye but I want what's best for the fishery and drainage. I welcome discussion on this to hash it out. If you have an informed opinion let the DWR know but your stated argument isn't going to influence much.

Not employed by the State, simply a passionate, multi-species angler.
[signature]

[AmyC]

Thanks to all of you who've taken the survey. I chatted with one of our sportfish coordinators this morning, and he said he'd talk to the Red Fleet biologist about putting together a summary of the survey results. I'll post that summary here as soon as it's available.
[signature]

[zman2]

I agree with you kinda, I do not condone the people who are dumping fish where they should not be....But what makes me nuts is the only way that the dwr can deal with this is to kill all... .bad management in my eyes....Ya go kill redfleet and the bucketbios will find another lake . let em have redfleet. It may help us all ...just a shout don't nobody take offense.
[signature]

[Fishrmn]

Kinda two ways to look at that. If you leave Red Fleet the way it is maybe the bucket bios decide to add another Walleye lake in Utah. If they've succeeded at Red Fleet, what's to say they won't try the Gorge? Plus it gives 'em another place to move them from. On the other hand, if they see that the UDWR has a zero tolerance policy about illegal transplants, maybe, just maybe, they'll learn to quit wasting everybody's time and money trying to make Utah look like Minnesota.



[red]⫸[/red][orange]<{[/orange][yellow]{{[/yellow][green]{[/green][size 4][green]⦇[/green][/size][blue]°>[/blue]
[signature]

[wiperhunter2]

The only problem I see with your thoughts, is that guess who has to pay to have the eyes removed from that lake, it is the tax payer and that is money that would other wise go to a better cause, imo. I do not see it in the Wy fishing guide book this year but a few years back they had walleye listed as being in the Gorge, it said if you catch one, it could not be put back in the lake. I'm not sure what has changed but I did hear that they had caught at least one in their gill nets. Maybe that was the only eye in the Gorge or maybe they just never caught another one but it would seem surprising to me that there was only one in the whole lake, if they are really there. The word was they got into the Gorge about the same time as the burbot. Wasn't perch illegally introduced to Starvation? If so, how has that gone so far? It is likely that I will never fish Red fleet, especially since it has the mussle in there but I bet those that live in the Vernal area aren't too upset with them being in that lake. Hopefully this survey will shed so light on this, maybe it isn't as big of a problem as they think.
[signature]

[Sirfilletalot]

I decline to take this survey for the following reason. The last survey I participated in included a question in regards to the Willard Bay Inlet and what I thought about opening it during the walleye spawn. Since I live near Willard Bay, I knew the history of why the Inlet was closed 30 + years ago. Obviously, many of the participants of the survey did not know the history of the Willard Bay Inlet and why it was closed in the first place. The DWR used the statewide survey at the Wildlife Board Meeting as their primary tool to overturn the Northern RAC recommendation to close the Inlet for 2 months during the walleye spawn.

The informal survey taken last year on BFT indicated just the opposite results.

Since I know nothing about Red Fleet, I will not state my opinion on this forum or take the aforementioned survey.
[signature]

[doggonefishin]

[quote wiperhunter2] Wasn't eyes illegally introduced to Starvation? If so, how has that gone so far? [/quote]

No, they weren't. The DWR put them in there to control chubs back in the 70's.

I don't fish there, but as with so many illegal introductions, there may be unintended consequences. Every time this comes up, we hear the "I'm sick of trout, lets have a lake with something else" crowd pipe up. The funny thing is that the trout would probably do fine with eyes in there. Starvation steelhead sure aren't suffering in Starvy are they? Ditto with Deer creek. From what I understand, the biggest biological worry at Red Fleet is the walleyes ruining the forage base for the bass. Also, as much as you all hate to hear it, endangered species trumps all when there is an illegal introduction. Even if eyes had no net bad effects at Red Fleet, if they imperil some endangered chub downstream, then you can whine all you want, but the DWR is bound to act aggressively.

Carry on.
[signature]

[fishnate]

It's a pretty complex issue. I personally don't want to see the reservoir poisoned but I'm also open for the options I saw on the survey of introducing other sterile species. I know the DWR is concerned about the endangered species in the area but they already have pike, walleye, SM bass, and catfish well established in the Green River drainage below Red Fleet. Poisoning would seem to be a waste of money with the walleye and other illegal and "invasive" species already downstream threatening the endangered species. Red Fleet doesn't get a lot of fishing pressure but I know of many who now go there because of the walleye introduction so I'm glad the DWR is exploring options besides just trout. I think another good cool/warm water fishery will draw quite a few new anglers to the area.
[signature]

[fishnate]

Thanks Amy, I'll be looking forward to seeing it.
[signature]

[fishnate]

[quote doggonefishin] From what I understand, the biggest biological worry at Red Fleet is the walleyes ruining the forage base for the bass[/quote]

From what I can tell so far the walleye, bass and trout are scarfing up the bluegill pretty good. Last spring I caught and kept a 17" trout that had nearly 2 dozen bluegill in its gut. A few friends have seen similar results. It will be interesting to see if the bluegill fishery can support the predators.
[signature]

[wiperhunter2]

Opps, not eyes, I meant to say perch. I hear you on endangered species trumping everything else, so I guess time will tell what they will do. I just think that most fish will find a nitch, if enough time is given for the fish to adapt but who knows.
[signature]

[Ryno]

Wiperhunter2,

Not sure where that information originated, but there have never been any walleyes detected in Flaming Gorge. In the 2010-11 WGFD regulation book, the exceptions indicated creel limits were "unlimited" for burbot and walleye in Area 4, which includes the Gorge. They now read "must kill" for walleye in Area 4, along with burbot, perch, and northern pike.

Hope that helps, Ryno
[signature]

[WiperMac]

+1
[signature]

[Duckbutter]

I took it. Haven't dedicated much time on Red Fleet, but I do have an opinion. Frankly, poisoning would be a poor use of tax payer money. I say leave it be, as the walleye there probably pose a minimal risk of the natives downstream.

Speaking of the endangered fish, best thing we can do to help them would be to help inform anglers as the to the species present. How many anglers, if they actually caught a chub in the Colorado, could differentiate between roundtails and bonytails off the top of their head. People are ignorant. Best way to teach anglers, would be to allow a limited harvest for the non endangered natives, such as the blueheads and flannelmouths. Get angler's involved more in the rivers, and educate them. They are FAR from being endangered, especially flannelmouths, and actually managing the fisheries in the rivers would help. Improved stocking programs for the endangered fish would be a better use of funds to help them than poisoning Red Fleet. With such a small population of wild razerbacks remaining around the White river and such, stocking programs are probably the only way to save them at this point. The shocking programs in the rivers have, well, failed. Plain and simple. Seeing how populations have not improved at since the shocking has began shows us we need to do something different, and quit spinning our wheels.

I do condemn ALL bucket bio's. If anybody on this site is guilty of it, I hope you are caught and are punished to the fullest extent of the law.

Just my $0.02, which is probably worth less than that. Didn't mean to offend anybody if any offense was taken.
[signature]