Gorge macks...keep and consume

[TubeDude]

[#0000FF]Tom Wharton had an article in this morning's Salt Lake Tribune on the overabundance of lake trout in Flaming Gorge. [url "http://www.sltrib.com/artsliving/outdoors/2017/12/11/keep-not-release-new-mantra-for-fishing-lake-trout-at-flaming-gorge-reservoir/"] LINK TO ARTICLE[/url]
[/#0000FF]
[signature]

[Springbuck]

I'd love to......still working on the "catch" part.

Might give it another go this year. We went zero for 6-7 trips a few years back. Same with burbot, despite all the good advice floating around here and elsewhere.
[signature]

[Tarponjim]

Keep those pups! There's a population explosion of them. Carefully release the ones over 28 inches because now, more than ever, it takes a long time for them to grow to 28 inches, or 38 inches, or even 45 inches! A long time. Thin the pups so that those that do grow out of the bubble and become larger have plenty to eat. Many never will. Those that do are the ones everybody dreams of, or targets, for the most part.
[signature]

[a_bow_nut]

It's funny that they beg people to keep the smaller fish but if I go up and fish for three days all I can keep is eight fish.

It would help if they would either up the limit or set a possession limit of two or three days on the under 28" fish to help harvest these fish from the food chain.

I only get to the Gorge a few times a year and keep my limit like they ask but I'm afraid that it doesn't make much of an impact.
[signature]

[Duckbutter]

I would love to hear others input, but what if the regs removed limits on Macs under 28 inches? Perhaps that would encourage a bigger harvest?

Speaking of harvesting pups, I still haven't found a recipe I have loved with them, and I would be more likely to target them if I knew a great way to prepare them for the plate. Any thoughts?
[signature]

[Tarponjim]

It's an "acquired taste" as they say. But a search will bring up lots of recipies. The longer and more elaborate you prepare them, the more palatable, it seems.
[signature]

[03_to_5-0]

I would love to keep some, but have to figure out how to catch 'em first. We tried this summer without success. Guess I'll have to just keep after it.
[signature]

[tigerpincer]

Bottle them. They are great eating and easy to do this way. Once bottled you can just eat em straight out o the bottle while ice fishing etc.. You can substitute the bottled Mac for Tuna in your Tuna fish sandwiches. I love bottled mac this way. You can also sprinkle some of it atop a nice bed of greens as a sidel salad with a nice juicy Elk steak n call it surf n turf.

I don't have the equipment so I also take some to Thompsons smokehouse n have them make me some fish jerky with it. Thats a great snack when Im out hunting birds or big game.
[signature]

[PBH]

Just a few comments:


A. numerous replies already concerning the undesirable taste of lake trout.
B. comments to increase the limit of small fish.
C. comments concerning the lack of ability to catch small fish.
D. comments to continue protecting big fish.


These all contradict with the desired goal of reducing the population size in order to keep average size of fish high. So, how can this work?

If anglers can't catch those smaller fish, then encouraging anglers to keep them won't help.

If anglers won't keep those smaller fish because they don't taste good, increased limits won't help.

If anglers won't keep smaller fish, then keeping larger fish will help, but would be very unpopular (regardless of effectiveness of increasing average size overall).


So -- you have a dilemma, very similar to that of other waters such as the Provo River.

what do you do?

Education is the key element here. The DWR needs to launch a campaign to educate anglers on the importance of removing fish -- big and small -- from the population. Lake Powell has done a very good job of this. They don't attempt to protect the large fish either -- anglers keep them too.

Remember, when you have fish that are "stunting" because the population is too high, the genetics to grow "large" fish are still there. You will not be removing those "superior" genetics by harvesting the large fish. The "small" fish are still spawning an still contain those supposed "large" genetics. By removing fish, any fish, you provide opportunity for other fish grow. That's the goal -- increase growth rates.

So, while it may be very unpopular, the best thing for managers to do would be to open up harvest to include any size class of fish.


Pikeman has a good thread with information that eludes to this very thing. Big fish are a result of fast growth rates.

Let the beating begin.
[signature]

[Tarponjim]

If you have a boat, a half-way decent sonar, and an electric motor, the small lakers are all over the lake on main lake points. Deeper in summer, shallower in spring and fall.

The guys trolling for kokanee say they catch tons of laker pups, often so many they get in the way of catching the kokes. Just have to get down the preferred water temperature range. The smaller fish will eat darn near anything. Tube jigs, spoons, feather jigs, bucktail jigs, blade baits, you pretty much name it. You have to find them, hold on them or troll through them, and get something in their face. Probably the easiest fish to catch in the Gorge.
[signature]

[TubeDude]

[#0000FF]Sounds like another variation of the old "cookie jar" analysis. You can only get so many cookies in the jar...or only so many pounds of fish from an ecosystem with limited or changing food resources.

Like most species, younger macks feed more aggressively and consume more food resources per pound than larger older fish. So removing more of them at a smaller size will ultimately leave more food for "the old folks"...at least in principle. But then again it may be assumed that smaller macks are often utilizing different foods than those of larger macks.

I know the fluctuating population of kokanee play a part in the edibles for macks. I wonder if Ryan has been able to determine what role the burbot have had in the current status.

As far as the expressed problem with anglers being able to catch more pups...well, that is likely more a matter of lack of knowledge and experience. Those who have spent any time on the Gorge...especially with other more experienced Gorgers...can usually pick up the locations and techniques fairly quickly. And, as many pup fanciers have found, once you find some pup macks it is often more difficult to find something they won't hit than something they will.

I don't disagree with the suggestion of liberalizing limits on macks of all sizes. But those who live and breathe for the opportunity to catch a trophy size mack will weep and wail and gnash their teeth over the suggestion to remove restrictions on larger fish. Of course that could be partially offset by stronger enforcement of anti-snagging regulations or more seasonal closures on spawning areas.

Yeah, right. Dream on.
[/#0000FF]
[signature]

[PBH]

[quote TubeDude][#0000ff]

Like most species, younger macks feed more aggressively and consume more food resources per pound than larger older fish. So removing more of them at a smaller size will ultimately leave more food for "the old folks"...at least in principle. [/#0000ff]
[#0000ff][/quote]

[/#0000ff]
[left]do you have anything to support that idea that young fish consume more food resources than old fish?[/left]
[left]
[/left]
[left]Your comments emphasize a common misconception that most anglers have. That misconception is that old age = larger size.[/left]
[left]
[/left]
[left]Acceptance of catch-and-release practices among anglers has generally been good and needed. However, the assumption that released fish are predestined to become large with old age is false. It's all about population density and indeterminate growth. The size-limiting factor is most often not age (or time) but rather the environment. Fish grow to match environmental conditions. Catch-and-release can lead to over-crowded conditions and small fish. In many cases, some harvest is beneficial and needed to maintain quality-size fish.
[/left]
[#0000ff]
[/#0000ff]
[#0000ff][quote TubeDude][#0000ff][b]
[/#0000ff]I don't disagree with the suggestion of liberalizing limits on macks of all sizes. But those who live and breathe for the opportunity to catch a trophy size mack will weep and wail and gnash their teeth over the suggestion to remove restrictions on larger fish.
[/b][/#0000ff][/quote]

They only weep and wail and gnash their teeth because they lack the understanding and knowledge (ie: ignorance) of how fish grow. If they understood growth rates, and the benefits of getting a population of fish to enter that zone of maximum growth rate, then those weepings, wailings, and gnashings would be replaced with whoops, hollers, and cheers. Large fish (not necessarily old fish) removed from the system would quickly be replaced by another fish that would assume that large status of its predecessor.

Removing a lot of smaller sized lake trout will certainly help Flaming Gorge. The DWR needs to utilize their Outreach program and continue to educate anglers on the what's, why's, and how's of keeping lake trout.
[signature]

[Anglinarcher]

"Cookie Jar"? I like that. In the old days, All Linder, previous co-owner of In-Fisherman Magazine, use to use the term biologist used, "Biomass". Good explanation.

Now, as for some of the comments. First, I admit, I have never fished the George, and now that I am without water shoes (boat), I probably never will. But, I have fished for and caught far more Lakers then I can count so I do know the species.

1) Macks, or lakers, can overpopulate. Fisheries managers realize that you can have lots of small fish but few to no big fish, or you can have a decent population of big fish but few to almost no small fish, or you can have a moderate number of medium sized fish. In the old days, with the kill off and replant, fast growth, overpopulate, kill off and replant cycle, they managed for medium number of medium sized fish because 10 years seldom grew "big fish". That cannot always be done, especially on a lake like FG.

2) The age of C&R created a surge in trophy hunters. We always wanted to catch a big fish, but now we expect to do it.

3) C&R has caused many people to release most if not all of their fish.

Lakers, or Macks, that feed on oily fish will not taste as well as Lakers that feed on other food, so the smaller fish should taste better than the bigger fish. A proper recipe will make the pups taste good.

10% of the fisherman catch 90% of the fish. Knowledge is the difference between the 10% and everyone else. It took a long time for me to catch my first Walleye, now I can expect to catch Walleye on every trip I target them on. If you can't catch the pups, go with someone that knows how for a few trips and you will soon be catching pups.

I have observed that the fisheries managers often set limits as goals. If the average fisherman can't catch 10 fish, but they want to reduce the total number of fish, they set the limit at 8, or 5. Far more fisherman will try for the 8 than for 10. Funny how it works, but setting a limit often causes more fisherman to keep at it longer then if there was no limit. In Louisiana they usually have a 50 bass a day limit, but I knew of no one that kept more then 3 or 4.

And, last, the Burbot will have an impact, but Pandora's box is open, and you can't go back. We need to find a way to catch them as well, and they do taste awesome. I admit, I am not that good with them.

[6x7]

Aside from agreeing with the "keep the pups" idea, I have a question regarding the "snagging" that is tolerated on the Utah side. I love chasing the big Macks on the ice, and have been lucky enough to ice some absolutely beautiful fish. I guess my question would be that some of the bigger fish have had some gaping wounds on them, which I assume is due to this snagging practice. Forgive the ignorance, but it is my understanding that this practice is not illegal in Utah? If that is true, why not?

[wormandbobber]

[quote Anglinarcher]
1) Macks, or lakers, can overpopulate. Fisheries managers realize that you can have lots of small fish but few to no big fish, or you can have a decent population of big fish but few to almost no small fish, or you can have a moderate number of medium sized fish. In the old days, with the kill off and replant, fast growth, overpopulate, kill off and replant cycle, they managed for medium number of medium sized fish because 10 years seldom grew "big fish". That cannot always be done, especially on a lake like FG.[/quote]

Lake trout studies at Fish Lake have found that lake trout can grow to 30 inches in less than five years (and then stay between 30 and 40 inches the rest of their lives). What I think everyone would like is if growth rates at the Gorge were high enough to allow individual fish to reach 30 inches in length by age 5. The problem is that too much competition exists among fish and fish species to allow such high growth rates and fisheries managers really have no means of controlling the competition other than educating the public on keeping fish.

The Fish Lake study I referenced also states that "In addition, the high exploitation rate (16%) of lake trout at this size [20-30 inches] could potentially remove 60% of all individuals before they reach 30 inches. Even more important, a lack of adequate forage may prevent some lake trout from exceeding 20 inches in length. Donald and Alger (1986) reported that inadequate forage prevented mature lake trout in a Canadian lake from reaching even one pound....Current exploitation rates at Fish Lake do not appear to be excessive."

The following paper was written a number of years ago by my father....but it directly applies to this subject. I have posted it a number of times, but it is always worth another good read:
[signature]

[TT600]

I caught some bone skinny Macs out in NV this summer. They can't even make the jump to eating Brookies. Not many people fish them because they are too deep. In hindsight I suppose I should have littered the banks with my catch.
[signature]

[gmwahl]

I think the liberalization of the limits is good, but whether it is 8, 10, or no limit it will not matter if the current view of catch and keep is stigmatized.

I remember many years ago almost going to blows with a yuppie in the latest gloomis and orvis garb on the green river. I caught a 27" cutthroat and wanted to BBQ it for supper that night and this guy who stood next to me and watched me catch and land the fish then started giving me the lecture of the fish being too valuable, beautiful, noble, etc... I bashed it on the head with my pliers and kept it and you'd think I killed his mother!

Point of the story is he was the majority and I was the minority in the flyfishing community and this is what we deal with now in all methods of angling. People are conditioned to view keeping fish as something to try to justify instead of something that they can rightfully do and enjoy themselves while doing it. I live on bear lake and I see it all the time with the guys that fish here. Keep ANY laker and your looked at as a jerk and same goes with the cutthroats. Though the lakes don't compare to each other concerning the fish management, the mentality is the same. I've caught many pups on flaming gorge and even though it is pretty much accepted that it is ok, I still feel ready to defend my actions and many still look at it like those fish should be released to become trophies. The mindset needs to change back to one of keeping a limit is ok if you will eat them.

Most guys that land a laker over 30-32" voluntarily release them anyway and there isn't much of a threat of the guys that chase them keeping the big ones very often, so getting them to actually KEEP pups is the real challenge facing fisheries managers.

The Lakers under 28" are excellent to eat in my opinion and if you haven't found a way to cook them that appeals to you then I suspect that trout aren't on your list of "good eats" anyway, though I could be wrong. I have found that grilling these fish is the best way to cook them and rivals the finest salmon if cooked within a couple days or so. The ones under 15" are even good fried although I'm still inclined to grill them. As was already mentioned, bottled is good if you like tuna fish. Here at Bear Lake I keep about a half dozen Lakers every year in the fall that are around 27-32" and bottle them in pint jars and it is enough to get me through to the next fall. We use it the same way as canned tuna and it is sooo much better! My little girl named it Bear Lake Tuna and it is her favorite sandwich, so I would say that if people could learn to wrap their heads around bottling or grilling laker pups then they would actually enjoy eating them. They are very mild in the smaller sizes. If you still don't like the taste much then I'm sure that you have family members or neighbors that would love you if you caught them a limit and gave the fillets to them! This could help reduce the population a bit hopefully.

Just my .02 cents worth of opinion.

Mike
[signature]

[Anglinarcher]

If I could give you a thumbs up, I would!

[fishjon]

As several replies suggest, the pups can be surprisingly selective. I’m ashamed to admit it took me a few years and several trips to get to the point that I know I can take a group of people and everyone will catch a limit. I only ice fish for them.

2.5” fats freshwater basic tubes and 1/4 round jig with the knot pushed forward so the jig is parrellel. A small peice of fish skin. No freezer burnt sportsman’s sucker or chub. I catch chubs in the late fall and freeze just the skins. They work for a couple of months. Braided line with 20’ flouro leaders. Fish finder. One jig 8’ off bottom another mid depth or higher.

Most importantly, if they can see more than one jig they get finicky. Get away from the other people in your group. Our rule is 2 jigs every100 yards. Anything closer than that and your splitting your catch.

Location on lake matters. The gorge is big. Don’t fish anywhere near where others have fished. Find a nice spot in the middle of buckboard 1 mile from any old holes and there will be lots of uneducated pups.

Love bottling, smoking, and prepared fresh. We can 30 pints each year for our tuna supply. Pups out of ice cold water are a treat if you like trout/salmon. Anybody saying different is full of it.
[signature]

[Troll]

What about keeping a few big fish so they don't produce as many Pups?
Killing off fish that are not sexually mature doesn't sound like it will help as much as removing a few breeders from the pool. When we want to increase populations we only allow taking of not sexually mature fish, why not the opposite?

I was also under the impression that the Burbot were going to decimate the young laker population by eating the eggs, is that not happening?

Lakers are great smoked, the high fat content keeps them nice and soft and allows a long smoke time without drying out. I love smoked laker.
[signature]