|
Red Fleet walleye
|
07-01-2010, 04:57 PM
cross -- you have to have control of the water before you can manage water levels. The DWR doesn't own the water on the majority of our reservoirs, and thus has no control over water levels. So, how do you correct that?
[signature]
07-01-2010, 05:15 PM
[quote CROSSINEYES] ive seen them to 9 pounds.[/quote]
people make comments like this, and then expect have credibility! My very first comment in the opening post of this thread certainly still applies. [signature] 
07-01-2010, 05:22 PM
where there is a will there is a way. they have to spend money this is fact. how did we put men on the moon. hmmmm money and a will to get it done. other dessert states are doing a grand job with walleye. utah just has excuses. its all we here excuses. instead of how can we do it better. spend money on bait fish populations. if they never try they will never succeed. the dwr is not going to do squawt thats why walleye guys have a dislike for the dwr they are worthless to a walleye angler. no one can change my mind on the dwr. or on wanting moore walleye waters.
[signature]
07-01-2010, 05:31 PM
This thing- this thing you call money- Where does that come from ?
How about trying to buy my water rights for my property with this thing you call money- I am sure hoping you have a lot of that stuff because I'm not selling unless you do. Sure wish money was the answer and it was easy to come by. But I think it isn't and it isn't. Though there are some out there that think that's no a problem at all and the country is fine [signature]
07-01-2010, 05:33 PM
[quote CROSSINEYES]where there is a will there is a way. they have to spend money this is fact.[/quote]
You have to have a seller before you can have a buyer. The DWR can't just go buy water if there is no water for sale. [quote CROSSINEYES] other dessert states are doing a grand job with walleye. [/quote] Really? Like where? Wyoming has a handful. Idaho doesn't allow for any new walleye waters. Montana doesn't allow walleye on the west side of the continental divide. Nevada -- where are the quality walleye lakes in Nevada? Other states in the west have the same issues as Utah. Wyoming is probably the best off when it comes to walleye, but it is still limited to a select few waters. the grass is certainly always greener on the other side of the fence! I want to have striped marlin in Powell. Nothing can change my mind that if enough money is spent, that they can turn Powell into a quality striped marlin fishery. [signature]
07-01-2010, 05:36 PM
Please somebody explain to me how this state is more suited for trout than walleye. Sure, there is a natural population of cutthroat and suckers and chubs blah blah. But they do not fair well in our resiviors, if they did, we wouldnt have to plant the crap out of them. The state creates some of its own problems by wanting to control the populations. You see, by planting steril fish, they are in effect taking a good portion of the food base out of the equation. With out spawing fish, there are far fewer babies to feed everything else.
Walleye are the most geneticaly diverse species in north america. A bass, trout, bluegill, musky, ect are almost identicall where ever they are found. But walleye adapt so quickly to new water it actually changes them geneticaly. This is biology and a fact, look it up. You almost cant use the same techniques on one body of water to another for em, why, cause they are actually a different fish. So you want an answer of what is a good fit for Utah resiviors? WALLEYE. They will survive and thrive wherever you find them. The only way to keep the slimers alive is to plant adults with a life support systems attached to their backs, and hope and pray they survive one year. 76% of a walleyes diet is mayflies[shocked], trouters dont believe me, look that up too. Its not just the prey fish population. And you dont think that bass and blugill wont find a way to coexist with the walleye? In my opinion this is the way nature works, cause only the strong fry will survive. It will produce a stronger smarter population of fish. [signature]
07-01-2010, 05:48 PM
there is one thing i think even PBH is missing here.. who's job is it to keep this kind of thing from happening in the first place? hum let's see oh yeah it's the DWR's job to keep stuff like this from happening... well let see what kind of grade would they get for this job?
when are them idiots going to learn to outlaw working livewell's and aerotor's ????? they make it illegal to have corn then fishing but not a woring livewell or aerotor?? and we are the idiots???? [signature]
07-01-2010, 05:49 PM
mike4 -- so, you want a Yuba type fishery everywhere? One that crashes every 5 years?
makes sense. If Utah is so far off base, why do Idaho and Montana have similar issues with walleye?? Here, read this. See if you learn anything new today. http://wildlife.utah.gov/blueribbon/4-step_plan.pdf [signature]
07-01-2010, 05:59 PM
[quote fuzzyfisher]
when are them idiots going to learn to outlaw working livewell's and aerotor's ????? [/quote] Me missed it? I don't think so..... http://www.bigfishtackle.com/cgi-bin/gfo...83;#588683 I completely agree with you fuzzball. I've even talked with the DWR specifically about this. Outlaw livewells, and enforce it. That's the only way to keep this from happening. How popular are we (me and the fuzz) going to be for pushing this? mike -- you on board? Cross? Mojo-bojo Cliff? come on, who else wants to support outlawing livewells?? [signature]
07-01-2010, 06:20 PM
What we really Don't need is more Laws that are just as UNINFORCABLE as the existing ones. Anything that holds water can be used to transport fish, lets not Outlaw every container.
Education is the Only thing that may curb the movement of fish from water to water. In order for Education to work some logic must exist to support a basis for not Moving fish around, the difinituve conclusion of what is best is not the CUT and DRIED Apparently. [signature]
07-01-2010, 06:26 PM
Um, yes, I want a Yuba type fishery everywhere. But one where the state plants some forage in extreme low water years. That would keep the boom bust cycle under control. Something the state could do that wouldnt require a crap load of planting catchables would be to manipulate limits. I was actualy happy when I seen the 50 perch statewide limit. Lets take willard for example, why cant we have an emergency 2 fish limit to let them get back the numbers? What about slot limits? That has been proven in the midwest to be a succesfull way to keep good populations up. Ya know, the mid west, with multiple imoundments with fluctuating water levels designed for drinking and farm use. Kinda sounds like Utah a little[
 ]. Nobody has given me a good example of a good self sustaining utah trout lake. One that isnt manipulated constantly by the state. My god, they planted rainbows in bear lake cause people were complaining the cutts were too hard to catch from shore. So even the precious native bonneville cutthroat are starting to suffer the same fate as utah walleye, they wont eat cheese off the bottom! [signature]
07-01-2010, 06:31 PM
If I cant have my livewell how am I going to get all those baby crappie to my aquarium[laugh]. (joke, dont send the dwr to my house!)
[signature]
07-01-2010, 07:12 PM
[quote mike4cobra]
Nobody has given me a good example of a good self sustaining utah trout lake. One that isnt manipulated constantly by the state. [/quote] I'll give you two: Paragonah (Red Creek) Reservoir. 100% self-sustaining rainbow trout reservoir near Parowan, UT. Kolob Reservoir. considered to be used as a brood source lake for cutthroat trout because of it's ability to sustain BOTH rainbow trout and cutthroat trout. In fact, Kolob has recently undergone some regulation changes because rainbows and cutthroat are reproducing at a rate faster than what anglers could keep up with under the 21" slot rule. Now, bait regulations and relaxed slot limits have been implemented to try to cut back on the numbers of fish in Kolob. Aside from that, I could name a whole shit-load of lakes that brook trout self-sustain in. And, just like walleye, it's NOT a good thing!! Yuba. You want band-aids! When walleye populations get to the point that they eat all the perch, you want to stock additional forage to feed the walleye. This sounds good on the outside, but what really happens? You hurt the walleye. They then reproduce more, and now you ahve even more to fee, so you stock more, then the walleye population grows again, so you stock more, and more, and more forage. It's a never ending problem. At some point, you run out of available biomass. You can't continue to stock enough. It doesn't work that way. When you have a pasture full of cows, don't you try to manage the number of cows based on the amount of grass available for them to eat? What happens if you have too many cows and they eat all of the grass? Do you add more grass to the field? or, do you get rid of some of the cows? You can't keep adding grass, especially while the cows reproduce and add more cows to the same pasture. control populations. It's really very simple. Unfortunately, most can't comprehend this simple concept. [signature]
07-01-2010, 07:28 PM
i love my live well!!!!! hello no i will not support that... and if you want. and if you want to poke at me being credible do it. i dont hurt. poke away. [
 ][signature]
07-01-2010, 07:39 PM
Really? We're going to argue about this stuff? Trout, walleye, bass, I love em all.
[signature]
07-01-2010, 07:50 PM
well the problem is that the pepole doing this kind of thing already know it's wrong and way it's wrong!! they just dont care.. and not just any contaner will keep fish alive.. try putting 3 live walleye (you need at lest 3 to make sure you have a breeding pear) in just a bucket put the lid on it and let it set there for 10 min's and see how long them eye's live.. ok take the same bucket put an aerotor in it and see how long you can keep them alive.. [crazy]...
[signature]
07-01-2010, 07:50 PM
Outlawing livewells is not the answer. In fact its the same argument that anti gunners use. Ban guns bad things wont happen (yeah right). Livewells are not the problem people are the problem. Prosecute them to the fullest extent of the law. If you see someone planting how about the guy who turns him in gets a lifetime fishing license or possibly a govenors tag. I love my livewells and would be one pissed off individual if they banned their use. It is already illegal to leave the lake with water in them. Making a law does nothing to criminals. You can enforce the law at the dock as easily as you can on the water.
[signature]
07-01-2010, 08:00 PM
as others on here have allredy said they want walleye in every lake and or river they can put them in.. even with good water levels and good food base's the walleye will clean out a lake if the food base can not keep up with how fast the walleye can eat them... look at starvation it was loaded with chub at one time. the walleye did a great job at cleaning the chub out of the lake in a short time.. then they started to starve to death.. the lake could not sustane the walleye for very long. even chub could not out breed the walleye. whith meny lakes here in Utah there is not much of a choise on what bait fish can be used becouse of endangered spices the fed's will not alow the state to plant some of the other kinds of bait fish that could surport the walleye for any amout of time.. if chub can't do it then what chance do red sides, spoted dace, or utah sucked have??
as i just stated the fed's will not alow the state to plant other kinds of fish even perch! so what kind of bait fish will they be planting to feed the walleye?? [signature]
07-01-2010, 08:04 PM
How about like idaho. Your forage fish are your game fish. Plant fingerling walleye, trout, perch and so forth. A few of them do grow up and create great fishing for a variety of fishermen, from powerbait thrower to jiggers to pop gear guys. Its being done right now and it is no experiment... it is a success.
[signature]
07-01-2010, 08:10 PM
[quote mike4cobra]
Walleye are the most geneticaly diverse species in north america. A bass, trout, bluegill, musky, ect are almost identicall where ever they are found. But walleye adapt so quickly to new water it actually changes them geneticaly. This is biology and a fact, look it up. You almost cant use the same techniques on one body of water to another for em, why, cause they are actually a different fish. [/quote] Say WHAT?????????????? You done lost all credibility there bud. They're still walleye. Nothing in their DNA has been changed. Everything that you've posted is suspect if you believe in voodoo. Different techniques in different bodies of water... Sure. But their genetics haven't changed. [signature] |
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
