U.L. White Bass Problem

[hookemup]

Pee into the wind, drop your wallet into a one-hole`r....that`s the June Sucker recovery program!
[signature]

[wormandbobber]

[reply]
Pee into the wind, drop your wallet into a one-hole`r....that`s the June Sucker recovery program! [/reply]

Quotes like the one above show how [#ff0000]sweet[/#ff0000] many of our fishermen really are...they only look at this from a short-sighted naive approach that fails to look at the real issues--habitat degradation, pollution, and the health of the entire ecosystem. The truth is this: even if the june sucker ultimately dies off and the recovery program is not successfull in restoring these fish to utah lake, the program will still be successful because of the habitat work that benefits other species of fish, birds, mammals, and even the benefits it gives to humans through water rights and pollution clean-up.
[signature]

[Flycasting]

I think they should do all of the things you just mentioned. Take the june sucker out of the equation. If they accomplish all of this, plant them back in when things are better.

Stop spending so much $$$ on walleye food.
[signature]

[Carp_Punisher]

[#505000]I agree that we shouldn't complain about the money being "dumped" into Utah Lake to improve it. I think both Tubedude and W&B have some great points. [/#505000]
[#505000][/#505000]
[#505000]It doesn't however take a rocket scientist to see that...[/#505000]
[#505000][/#505000]
[#505000]June Sucker = lost cause[/#505000]
[#505000][/#505000]
[#505000]We can kid ourselves all we want but Utah Lake is and has been for decades changed to a point where June Suckers doesn't naturally reproduce. Only drastic changes to the lake/enviroment, will change that and I don't see enough money/technology avaliable to do that yet or even on the horizon. What the Feds June Sucker program is, is an enviromentalist "feel good" program.[/#505000]
[#505000][/#505000]
[#505000]We try and try on a failed species with hundreds of millions of dollars. Right now if we were serious it would be billions and billions of dollars to really make a difference. What we are doing won't do much of anything to save the species, it barely sustains it. Again it's a "feel good" program. That being said I won't complain about the money being spent to improve the lake as it really does benefit other species. [/#505000]
[#505000][/#505000]
[#505000]Here is where I have a real issue with trying to save the June Sucker...[/#505000]
[#505000][/#505000]
[#505000]Once the carp are "gone" I keep hearing about how great it will be for the sport fish. They will thrive and do great. All the sport fish will dance through the lake fin in fin singing kumbya getting bigger and more plentiful and eating June Sucker. Last I checked carp are primarliy vegetarians. Carp aren't slurping up too many june suckers (yes they do trash their enviroment though). You can bet catfish, white bass, Large Mouth bass, and walleye do slurp up june sucker. When carp are gone and these sportfish flourish as we keep being promised I see them having a huge impact on June Sucker, and I see a big fat federally funded bullseye getting stamped onto the foreheads of our favorite fish.[/#505000]
[#505000][/#505000]
[#505000]How does limitless catfish bags, walleye bags, and whitebass bags sound? I guess it sounds pretty good until we put such a hurt on those speices they are a rarity in the lake. Right now they eat carp fry so they are "part of the solution". Once the carp are gone they will be the problem for a federally protected endangered species. The program will then by it's logical course HAVE to go after the next big threat, predators; ultimately to save an ugly little fish with no real value beyond the fact there aren't many of them.[/#505000]
[#505000][/#505000]
[#505000]At face value, and at this point of the process this program is great for our sports fish. A lot of great things are being done to the lake which need to be done and wouldn't be otherwise. There is a huge downside to this whole program though. Think the logic on this one through to it's conclusion and ultimate end goal of the program and this will ultimately prove to be the destruction a great sports fishery. Utah Lake will be a great June Sucker Habitat but that's all it will be. [/#505000]
[#505000][/#505000]
[#505000]I guess I can take heart that as it stands we are mostly just spinning our wheels.[/#505000]
[signature]

[Nica]

I think it's a matter of the average person not having ever walked in a biologist/ecologist shoes. When I was younger and dummer I remember seeing some of the things my parents would do and saying "man, I'm never doing that". Now that I have five kids, guess what, I'm doing some of the same things.

I would dare say that many of the folks who have strong opinions on the lake, or the recovery program, would probably not do anything different if the responsibility and accountability for success were placed on their shoulders. It's a whole new world once you're in the hot seat.

It's really easy to have/form opinions, specially biased ones, when one's interests are at stake (good fishing for example), but unless one is willing to and puts forth the effort into becoming a subject matter expert, one really should only be glad that someone is doing something about it and that the problems, whether short term or longer lasting, are being addressed.

Is it the perfect solution?, I don't know, maybe....maybe not. I'm not a subject matter expert, so I'm not qualified to criticize, although I am expected to pass along ideas I may have. I do know that it's better to do something well tomorrow instead of perfect never, so at least we're not sitting around waiting for the perfect solution.

my two cents on a very divided topic.
[signature]

[wormandbobber]

[reply][reply]
Pee into the wind, drop your wallet into a one-hole`r....that`s the June Sucker recovery program! [/reply]

[#ff0000]sweet[/#ff0000] [/reply]

Thanks for editing me, Tubedude, from now on I will replace "ignorant" with it's definition: uninformed or lacking in training--because you somehow misconstrue that word with slander. The least you could have done was replace my word with something similar that you find less offensive..."sweet" is hardly the same.

I understand the worry that if carp are eliminated more efforts will be placed on june sucker predators like walleye and bass....BUT, if carp are eliminated more room will be made for both forage and prey. I am not sure that a better balance can be struck that will allow room for both the June sucker and predators to flourish. The truth is that carp not only destroy june sucker habitat, but they also destroy habitat for bass and walleye. We may never seen harvest limits placed on white bass, but if we can somehow see the carp numbers drastically reduced we can still see white bass numbers improve...that's a good thing and only possible if the june sucker recovery stays in place. Without the recovery program we will never see the same amount of money spent to improve the health of Utah Lake.
[signature]

[cat_man]

The one thing about losing an endangered species, even a seemingly 'worthless' one such as the June Sucker, is that they are considered 'indicator species'. What this means is that there are problems in our environment and ecosystem. The June Sucker may only be the first (or one of the first, Utah Lake has already lost cutthroat trout) species to go down, but others may follow.

If we can improve habitat enough to save the June Suckers, it would mean that the habitat and environment has been improved for all species of wildlife in the lake, plant and animal.

That much I agree with. Specifically referring to the June Sucker, I don't care about it either, but I do care about the overall habitat as stated above.

I just hope that the money being spent will be spent in worthwhile endeavors.

For example, I know the DWR plans to (and already has) acquire property around 'Mud Lake' (Provo Bay, where Hobble Creek enters Utah Lake), and plans to revitalize the floodplain there so that the stream will be returned to a more natural state, including some form of 'delta' and meandering streambed instead of the canal-like channel that is there now. This they hope will provide a second spawning area for June Suckers where fry can survive better. However, it will also benefit all the other species of fish in the lake, as well as waterfowl.

So, there are some good things that will come out of this program. I do think it might be futile, but let's at least reap what benefit we can from the situation: 'Make lemonade from lemons'.
[signature]

[Bigcat]

Until they get rid of the carp the June Sucker recovery program will be a waste of time and money. It seems the only reasonable way to get rid of the carp will be to "nuke" the lake like they did at Strawberry back in the early 90's. Sure it will non-selectively kill off everything in there including any June Suckers as well as all game fish. Don't they have some breeding stock of June Suckers they they could use to reintroduce once the carp are gone and the normal lake vegetation starts re-growing. Seems like it would be worth sacrificing a few for the greater good of reestablishing the habitat so that the reintroduced suckers have half a chance to grow and reproduce.

W&B I know you think that most of us fisherman are narrow minded and can't see the big picture. Might be true. But I can't help but think that it is very narrow minded to think that the restoration of Utah lake can only happen through the June Sucker recovery program.

I say "nuke" the lake, get rid of the carp, reestablish the vegetation and habitat, and then reintroduce the June Sucker as well as the useful game fish that are currently in there. Then let them duke it out in the survival of the fitest model without the carp being an issue.

I'm sure my thinking is flawed as I am sure you will point out. I did read the book about the history of Utah Lake written by the June Sucker recovery program people so I can understand your point of view. I just don't think it has a chance without a reasonable method to get rid of the carp.
[signature]

[Kent]

It would not be possible to poison the carp in Utah Lake. There are many springs that would allow some fish to survive. Many feeder rivers, small streams and lakes also have carp that would quickly replace the carp (there are carp all the way up into Deer Creek for example, that would make their way down the Provo River into the lake). The Jordan River and its many feeder streams have carp in them that would move back upstream into Utah lake.
[signature]

[wormandbobber]

Bigcat, I think you misunderstood what I meant...I think that the restoration of Utah Lake won't happen without the june sucker program because of the lack of money...the major reason all this work to fix Utah Lake is being done is because of the sucker....the funding comes through the ESA. If the June sucker dies off and they are gone, the funding goes with it. The cleaning up of Utah Lake could happen through many other means...but who/what is going to fund it?

I can honestly say that I don't THINK the June sucker would ever really interest me if it were around in number...BUT, I don't know. I would like to find out if they are a decent fish...I do know that historically they were used as food and found to be tasty by those who came before us (afterall overfishing is one of the reasons these fish declined so rapidly in number). I also know that they are much different than the suckers we all have come to know--they are not bottom feeders and are adapted at feeding throughout the water column and not off the bottom. They are only found one place in the world and are very unique--much like the cisco in Bear Lake. I can also say with much certainty that most fishermen have never caught them and never will...they are too few in number...so, most fishermen know as much about them as I do the African titsi fly--nothing. And, even though i don't care anything about the cisco in Bear Lake, others do...and others may very well like these unique fish found nowhere else.
[signature]

[hookemup]

hehehe (i hooked a big`n...chill W&B) I was just a fun`n!
[signature]

[hashbaz]

W&B, you bring up a very good point. Some of us may consider throwing money at the june sucker a waste of time/money, uphill/losing battle etc - but only as far as the june sucker is concerned. All of the money and effort going to help the june sucker also helps the sport fishing and improves the fishery in general. None of us should complain about that.

There might be ways that the money could be spent that would be more beneficial to the sport fishing, but the money would not be spent on UL at all if not for the june sucker program. Should we should not complain about how it is spent - we should just be glad that it is spent on UL and not somewhere else.

At the very least, the june sucker program is a nice way to feed them walleyes.[][][]

TD, I love the "carry a carp program" I'm picturing carp dressed in babies clothes and strapped in a car seat. We just might start seeing ugly babies popping up everywhere. LOL
[signature]

[UTBASS]

Rotenone (Speling?)
Imagine if you may ... the poisoning of Utah Lake.
You couldn't kill ALL of the carp BUT once this happened, re-introducing Walleye, LMB, White Bass, Catfish, Crappie & Bluegill would definitely control the carp numbers. Right now, because the carp population is 90% of the Bio-Mass ... There is no way that predators can keep control.

If you rotenone the lake and all of the rivers / streams flowing in to the lake ... Not the full length but just the first 100 yards or so, some carp will survive but there would be no way they would have 90% of the biomass again. After the poisoning takes place, introduce predators, plants and suckers ... the predators will establish and keep control of the carp populations. You could pretty much guarantee a much better fishery and piece of mind for the future of this great lake!

I am an avid bass fisherman and flyfisherman who really loves this sport. It's killing me to see Utah Lake NOT getting the attention it needs with proper gamefish management. Maybe a combination of diking the lake and some rotenoning would be the best solution. I will be there at the RAC meeting this spring to voice my opinion.
[signature]

[doggonefishin]

One point that hasn't yet been made, (in our latest June sucker thread), is how much the PCB advisory in the carp buzzkilled all of the plans the recovery people had for removing and using the carp. Most of the plans on the table called for using the carp for either human or animal consumption (or fertilizer). That went right out the window in a hurry. This may be why it seems that the Recovery program hasn't "done anything". I do hope that suitable alternative ideas can be found. This development makes it far more difficult for the biologists to ultimately succeed. (and it was already a longshot)

If the carp were reduced even to 50% of the biomass, the fishing
in UL would be phenomenal! (it isn't bad now.)Habitat improvements would result in better fishing and maybe waterfowling, as well as a more aesthetically pleasing lake. We debate this 2-3 times a year though and I doubt that opinion changes very much.
Tight lines.
[signature]

[TubeDude]

[cool][#0000ff]Yeah, it was too bad for a lot of people and a lot of interests when the PCB thing was revealed. It put the Loy family out of the carp business...and they had been seining carp from Utah Lake for several decades. They were about the only serious predators the adult carp had to worry about, and now even that drain on the carp biomass is gone.[/#0000ff]
[#0000ff][/#0000ff]
[#0000ff]Instead of commercial fishermen we have to call in the hazmat crews to get rid of the carp. Maybe our new sponsors of the Delta Center can come up with something. They can open up their toxic waste dump sites for carp from Utah Lake.[/#0000ff]
[signature]

[doggonefishin]

[#0000ff][size 1]'Maybe our new sponsors of the Delta Center can come up with something. They can open up their toxic waste dump sites for carp from Utah Lake"[/size][/#0000ff]



You might be on to something. Maybe they could change the Jazz bear to a Jazz carp to enhance public awareness [], and run ads on TV, telling us what a great service they are doing for Utah, and all the jobs they are providing.[cool]
[signature]

[Fin-S-Fish]

lmao!!!!
[signature]

[cat_man]

I wonder if they could be turned into a source of biodeisel fuel or something like that. That would actually be a beneficial use that would probably be profitable. I don't know if fish oil is good for that though. I know they use chicken fat for it, as well as soybean oil.
[signature]

[TubeDude]

[cool][#0000ff]Carp ARE oily, and almost any oil can be turned into combustible fuel...either by itself or when mixed with other oils.[/#0000ff]
[#0000ff][/#0000ff]
[#0000ff]If they are able to pull that off, economically, then all we have to do is work out the carp combustion engine. Maybe we will need a special "carp-uretor" to mix the carp oil with air.[/#0000ff]
[#0000ff][/#0000ff]
[#0000ff]They say that the fumes from biodiesel made from recycled restaurant fry oils smells like french fries. Not sure I would want to be driving behind a carpmobile.[/#0000ff]
[#0000ff][/#0000ff]
[#0000ff]Pretty soon people will be bragging on "how many carp per mile" they get.[/#0000ff]
[#0000ff][/#0000ff]
[#0000ff]Hey...I'm down widdat. Just not ready to trade in my Jimmy for a "Carpilac" or "Carpinental" quite yet. Now, if they come up with something sporty, like a "Carpvette", maybe I can look a little harder. Could be tough to carry a couple of tubes though. [/#0000ff]
[signature]

[cat_man]

Wow, that is a LOT of carp puns! lol []

Maybe we could package them into bombs and use them as lethal weapons in some of our wars overseas. That would teach those terrorists a lesson!
[signature]