Chubs at Fish Lake and a tagged perch

[PBH]

[quote Dog-lover]

Scofield definitely needs more water and something different that has been done 4-5 times (Rotenone) with the same failed result.[/quote]

so, let's control what we can control.
We cannot control the water. So forget that one.

you can control regulations. you can use rotenone. you can control stocking. Use those 3 tools together to make a good fishery.

A. Rotenone the lake 2 years in a row. Assure 100% die off.
B. Place regulations to restrict the harvest of predatory C. fish (ie: cutthroat, tigers, etc).
Stock it with those fish.

That plan works. Panguitch and Strawberry have proven that. But anglers and local businesses have to buy off on it. Usually, these people look very short-term and cannot see the long-term benefits of the short-term negatives (1 + year with no fishing at the lake).



dog -- you obviously are not happy with Scofield right now. You've complained -- so, what's your idea on a solution??
[signature]

[Fishrmn]

No need to rotenone it 2 years in a row. Put the rotenone in just before it freezes. Minimal inflow, and restricted outflow for nearly 5 months. Hypoxia would kill every aquatic organism. You'd even have to restart the insect life. The water was very close to that condition 3 or 4 years ago. There was a significant fish kill in Lower Fish Creek when the water from Scofield was released.




[red]⫸[/red][orange]<{[/orange][yellow]{{[/yellow][green]{{[/green][size 4][blue]⦇[/blue][/size][blue]°[/blue][#8000FF]>[/#8000FF]
[signature]

[PBH]

Fshrmn -- any ideas why they didn't take the opportunity to kill it then? I know that they look at lakes like this and try to take the opportunity on low water years -- obviously, the less water, the less rotenone needed.

I guess I shouldn't say "2 years in a row", but rather 2 treatments. Do 2 treatments on a low water year, followed by stocking after the second treatment and you'll have fish by the following fall.


so, what's the story on Scofield. Why hasn't the public gotten on board with a total rennovation? Why keep trying "unproven" methods (aka: stock the hell out of it with tiger trout) vs. proven methods (aka: rotenone)? Is it just a simple issue as pointed out by this thread (lack of understanding by anglers)? If so, using a committee method like was done on Boulder, Fish Lake, and even Panguitch might be the ticket. Get a group public, Blue Ribbon, and DWR people together to discuss and go over the options. The end result usually ends up being the result the DWR wanted to do in the first place -- it just takes some discussion to get the public to understand the "what's" and "why's".
[signature]

[doggonefishin]

[quote PBH]
so, what's the story on Scofield. Why hasn't the public gotten on board with a total rennovation? Why keep trying "unproven" methods (aka: stock the hell out of it with tiger trout) vs. proven methods (aka: rotenone)? Is it just a simple issue as pointed out by this thread (lack of understanding by anglers)? If so, using a committee method like was done on Boulder, Fish Lake, and even Panguitch might be the ticket. Get a group public, Blue Ribbon, and DWR people together to discuss and go over the options. The end result usually ends up being the result the DWR wanted to do in the first place -- it just takes some discussion to get the public to understand the "what's" and "why's".[/quote]


I was hoping you could tell us. The DWR did a survey last year, released the results, and said it would start a committee. In the results, a majority of respondents favored treating the lake, with the expected vocal minority complaining about it, as demonstrated on this thread. Then nothing. The crickets have lasted over 6 months.

Whatever they decide, I hope they make changes soon. The current status is one of the dest situations I've seen a fishery be in our state.
[signature]

[Fowl-Hook]

My solution would be plant Wipers and Sterile Walleye, the addition of more predatory species would bring the chubs under control in a fairly reasonable time span. Fisherman would benefit from exposure to something that is different, aggressive, fights, and exceptional table fare. Let the chubs be taken advantage of until under control and then consider what gets planted next. Instead of wishing we had more chubs at Fish Lake take advantage of the over abundance of them at Scofield.
[signature]

[PBH]

dog-lover -- I like your ideas....well, maybe not exactly the sterile walleye...but, still. Not bad.

I think the biggest issue with starting to stock wipers and walleye at this point is: how do you get those fish big enough to start preying on chubs?

Right now, the lake is way, way, way too full of chubs. Those chubs will directly compete with wipers for food until wipers get big enough to switch over to a predatory diet. I don't think you could do that in the current situation.

but, if you hit that lake with rotenone, then came back with stocking wipers....now we're talking! You wouldn't need a complete kill. It would be more like what happened at Minersville. Get those chubs knocked back, then hit them with wipers. Trout could be a compliment to the fishery with wipers.

Sterile walleye scare me. If they scare me, then they also scare others. Getting 100% sterile walleye would certainly be a challenge, and something we probably could not be certain of. It would only take a few to screw the whole thing up. I think a better alternative would be saugeye -- but we already know that getting saugeye is a challenge. I think wipers are the best idea.


As for utilizing the chubs from Scofield at Fish Lake...well, that's not a good idea. Aside from disease certification, etc., it would be a temporary "bandaid" type "fix" that would result in only a temporary bump. The problem at Fish Lake is NOT the lack of chubs. The problem is the abundance of perch! You have to solve the perch issue. Adding chubs does nothing to help the perch issue -- in fact, that would actually compound the problem by providing more forage for perch, which would just bolster the perch population. not a good thing!!
[signature]

[PBH]

[quote doggonefishin]
I was hoping you could tell us. The DWR did a survey last year, released the results, and said it would start a committee. In the results, a majority of respondents favored treating the lake, with the expected vocal minority complaining about it, as demonstrated on this thread. Then nothing. The crickets have lasted over 6 months.
[/quote]

Has anyone contacted the SouthEast region and asked the status of the Scofield committee / management plan?
Heck -- I'd bet if someone started a thread titled "Scofield Management Plan / Committee status" we'd probably get some yahoo from the DWR that would give us some comments....
[signature]

[Fishrmn]

Well... the last time they treated Scofield was to get rid of walleyes. There was mention of Scofield not being good habitat for walleyes. Now someone wants to put sterile walleyes in there? If you ever depleted the chubs, you'd have to plant forage fish to maintain the fishery. You think it's expensive to use rotenone? How expensive would it be to feed walleyes? When the walleyes finally eliminated the chubs at Starvation after 30 years, someone decided to put the scourge of Yellow Perch in there. And just what would everyone want to use to fish for walleyes? Well the number one thing for walleyes everywhere else is live minnows. What do you think got us in this situation in the first place?

White Bass were deemed to be a poor choice for Deer Creek. Elevation and cold water equals a short growing season. Wipers aren't really growing by leaps and bounds in Otter Creek. What makes anyone believe that Wipers would do well in Scofield? It is covered with ice from the end of November till sometime in April. Smallmouth Bass aren't the answer either.

Northern Pike are completely out of the question. It's been discussed, and the lack of protection from downstream migration COMPLETELY eliminates ANY new species that could reproduce in the streams below Scofield.

Rotenone treatments work. Why wait for 25 or 30 years with what we have now in order to see if Tiger Trout or Wipers will take care of it. We could have a fishery in two years.

Since you've asked, I'll tell you why I think they didn't take the opportunity to use rotenone. I've sent a couple of emails back and forth with the Fisheries Chief for Southeastern Utah. I really think he wants to be the first person to eradicate chubs without rotenone. There is a committee. The majority of the responses were in favor of using rotenone. But when the committee is headed by someone who doesn't want to spend the money for rotenone, or disrupt his aspirations for fixing the problem without rotenone, you get what you've been getting. Stonewalled.

Walleye are great table fare. I've caught my share before, but they aren't much of a fight. Wipers are cool, but they aren't going to like the cold water of Scofield. Rotenone. Slot limits. Tiger Trout and Cutthroat Trout.



[red]⫸[/red][orange]<{[/orange][yellow]{{[/yellow][green]{{[/green][size 4][blue]⦇[/blue][/size][blue]°[/blue][#8000FF]>[/#8000FF]
[signature]

[Jedidiah]

I love the perch at Fish Lake. This year's catch down there has definitely increased in size as a result of the translplating to Yuba, I think.

If they got completely rid of the perch and managed it as a lake trout fishery, I might end up going there maybe 4 or 5 more times in my entire lifetime, realistically speaking. Instead, I go 4 or 5 times a year. It's also a great place for me to take kids and friends to get them hooked on fishing, unlike any other. If anything there should be MORE lakes with lots of perch.
[signature]

[PBH]

there you go.


Thanks Fishrmn. Good info.
[signature]

[PBH]

[quote Jedidiah]I love the perch at Fish Lake. This year's catch down there has definitely increased in size as a result of the translplating to Yuba, I think.

If they got completely rid of the perch and managed it as a lake trout fishery, I might end up going there maybe 4 or 5 more times in my entire lifetime, realistically speaking. Instead, I go 4 or 5 times a year. It's also a great place for me to take kids and friends to get them hooked on fishing, unlike any other. If anything there should be MORE lakes with lots of perch.[/quote]

Jed -- imagine going to fish lake and catching the same number of splake that you catch perch now. Now, add in the very high liekly hood of throwing in a 10lb mack here and there. And maybe one 20+ lb mack every couple years.

It wasn't very long ago that we had 100 splake days at Fish Lake. I can promise you, kids enjoy catching 16" splake all day long more than they do 6" perch all day long!! That's a reality that is within reach!
[signature]

[Fishrmn]

In the early 90s I went there nearly every week on the ice. It was nothing to catch 60 Splake in a day. And they would average roughly 17 inches. Imagine my disappointment when the dinky perch took over. I've been roughly 4 or 5 times since then. Whose enjoyment is more important? Yours? Taking buckets full of dinky perch? Or mine? Catching dozens of hard fighting, beautiful Splake?



[red]⫸[/red][orange]<{[/orange][yellow]{{[/yellow][green]{{[/green][size 4][blue]⦇[/blue][/size][blue]°[/blue][#8000FF]>[/#8000FF]
[signature]

[doggonefishin]

[quote Fishrmn]In the early 90s I went there nearly every week on the ice. It was nothing to catch 60 Splake in a day. And they would average roughly 17 inches.
[/quote]


Don't give up on it. I've had many days like that in the past 5-7 years. Assuming the DWR can meet their splake stocking quota, it is still an amazing fishery. (I'm not arguing that perch are a scourge in FL, they are, and I'm someone that enjoys them elsewhere.)


Back to Scofield, from your conversations with the SE region, what ARE they going to do? Starve out a few more stocking truckfulls of tiger trout and cutts?

At this point, if they flat refuse to use rotenone, I would vote for the wipers. Give folks something worthwhile to catch there if they work and if they don't we are no worse off.
[signature]

[Fishrmn]

Yep. Status quo. Keep up the good work. If you'll look at their fishing reports, they often say that the fishing is good at Scofield. Right now it is only considered as fair.

Scofield Reservoir
Fair

On Feb. 17, Scofield Reservoir had a top layer of weak ice with 16 or more inches of solid ice underneath. Try using white or bright-colored jigs tipped with mealworms or nightcrawlers. Chubs have been biting about six feet from the bottom. (02-24-17)

Keep giving the public what it doesn't want. Skinny Cutthroat and non existent Tigers. But, hey! You can catch all of the chubs you want.

I like Wipers, but I really don't think they'll ever do well at Scofield. It's too damn cold for them. Wipers, Stripers and White Bass do well where people can waterski (without wetsuits) for several months a year. How many people waterski at Scofield without a wetsuit? And how many months each year? 2?



[red]⫸[/red][orange]<{[/orange][yellow]{{[/yellow][green]{{[/green][size 4][blue]⦇[/blue][/size][blue]°[/blue][#8000FF]>[/#8000FF]
[signature]

[Jedidiah]

I see your point, and also wasn't aware of the number of splake back in the day. Still I want to have a good place to catch perch, it would be nice to have at least one body of water without much fluctuation of water level that has perch in it. Wouldn't tiger muskie be a good fit at Fish Lake? Being ambush predators they would have a hard time approaching kokanee but would do an awesome job on the perch in the weeds.
[signature]

[Fishrmn]

There are a few Tiger Musky in there now. The Tiger Musky in Pineview don't seem to be able to significantly affect the number of perch or crappie in there. And they are a significant part of that fishery. There is not much hope that even several thousand Tiger Musky would do what needs to be done.



[red]⫸[/red][orange]<{[/orange][yellow]{{[/yellow][green]{{[/green][size 4][blue]⦇[/blue][/size][blue]°[/blue][#8000FF]>[/#8000FF]
[signature]

[PBH]

Jed -- you have to consider habitat. Sure, stocking a bunch of tiger musky might help, but that isn't a long term solution. Utah doesn't have the means to stock enough tigers forever. Eventually, the perch would win out (again).

You have to do something to remove the perch, or reduce their habitat to the point that it reduces their numbers. This is why the weevil has been introduced to reduce the millfoil, and thus reduce the perch habitat. With perch habitat reduced, perch numbers should fall and provide opportunity for chub populations to increase, and thus provide better forage for lake trout.

You asked:

"I want to have a good place to catch perch, it would be nice to have at least one body of water without much fluctuation of water level that has perch in it.

But, therein lies the issue. You just described Fish Lake, and look at the problem they [perch] create there.

Stable water levels = good spawning habitat every year = too many perch.

The places that you should look for perch would be those places with water fluctuations in place to reduce available spawning and keep populations in check. But, those places (Yuba) have other issues that make things difficult.
[signature]

[Fowl-Hook]

Sterile Walleye were one of the planted species at RedFleet, it confirms that the DWR and the Feds had confidence in the sterilization process at locations that drain to the Colorado Drainage.
My reference to Fishlake was not to transplant chubs but the fact that at one place we want more chubs and when they abound we want to kill the hole lake. Seems like a good plan would simply take advantage of of an abundance of natural Bait. Scofield is a small body of water that would be a good test spot for something different than Rotenone especially when it's been used 4-5 times in the past at that location.
[signature]

[Fishrmn]

And every time it did what it was intended to do.

You only have to look at Starvation to see what would happen if you use Walleyes to control the chubs. 30 years from now there would be a crash of the chub population. In the mean time you'd have to plant sterile walleyes every year. Boy, wouldn't that be fun. Fish that taste good, but don't fight. Starvation was a great Walleye fishery when there were enough chubs to feed them all. But there weren't very many people fishing there. Once the word got out about the Starvation Steelies, the number of fishermen increased significantly. And aren't the perch a wonderful addition to Starvation? Non existent for the last couple of years. Dinks when you can find them.



[red]⫸[/red][orange]<{[/orange][yellow]{{[/yellow][green]{{[/green][size 4][blue]⦇[/blue][/size][blue]°[/blue][#8000FF]>[/#8000FF]
[signature]

[Jedidiah]

From my limited point of view, the perch at Fish Lake have gotten better this year from last year and the year before. March 2015 I went to Fish Lake once and caught about 35 perch in a couple hours, they were all under 4 inches. 2016, two trips totaled about 140 perch and maybe 30% of those were 4 inches and under. This year I'm at two trips and about 110 and around 15-20% were 4 inches and under. Caught a tagged one last time! Generally I always sightfish for perch, so I can see a good deal of the bottom and I can tell you that places where there were massive piles of milfoil there is now maybe a third of the same amount of vegetation. If I recall, the year they introduced the weevil was 2014/15, and I can tell you that there was a massive, detached weed mat under the ice in a ring that seemed to go around the whole reservoir. I realize that my catches are a narrow sample, but having covered some ground on the west side I am pretty sure that a lot of the milfoil has at least been reduced in stature.

Things really might be getting better fast. The lakers and splake should start eating kokanee, the kokanee will capitalize on the plankton that is mostly under-utilized in the water column from 70-130 FOW, the perch cover seems to be receding.

All in all I would say it's much more fair to manage it back into a splake/laker fishery though. I always have TubeDude's perch treasure map of Starvation to get me a perch chowder supply.
[signature]