Posts: 244
Threads: 0
Joined: Dec 2005
Reputation:
0
[quote PBH][quote JLW]I sure hope what perch that are left in there have a good spawn this year or all those predators are going to be getting real skinny. Hopefully DWR plants some forage fish in there too..... Fishon[/quote]
Do you consider perch as a forage fish, or a predator?[/quote]
PBH... In my humble opinion they are Both... Fishon
[signature]
Posts: 236
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2012
Reputation:
0
That would make about as much sense as anything I guess.
[signature]
Posts: 2,502
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2004
Reputation:
1
[quote Jedidiah]Why is it considered more right and good that we try to keep the world in some kind of pristine pre-humanity state instead of making it better for humans, anyway? Maybe the June Sucker is an inferior species and it's better that they fade away.
[/quote]
Just out of curiosity, why do you think it is better for humans if the June sucker were extinct/faded away?
[signature]
Posts: 236
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2012
Reputation:
0
You are most likely correct TDT, but you know they monitor this site to take the temperature of what people are thinking. One would think they would just jump on here and give the reasoning behind their decision. Clear the air let and everyone that is interested know. What's done is done. How about it DWR? Please.
If you want to get into the 21st century and get peoples opinions maybe participating in a forum like this would get a better cross section of opinion than a meeting somewhere a couple of times of year that very few seem to attend. I bet a lot more people monitor this site than ever attend one of those RAC meetings.
[signature]
Posts: 920
Threads: 46
Joined: Apr 2005
Reputation:
3
It was not my intent to appall anyone with historical facts.
"Many species that have come and gone. DInosaur's come to mind, or even more recently the passenger pigeon didn't leave much of a void"
[signature]
Posts: 3,084
Threads: 21
Joined: Jul 2003
Reputation:
12
[quote fishday]
If you want to get into the 21st century and get peoples opinions maybe participating in a forum like this would get a better cross section of opinion than a meeting somewhere a couple of times of year that very few seem to attend. I bet a lot more people monitor this site than ever attend one of those RAC meetings.[/quote]
Sure -- if your target is the "interweb" savvy crowd we see on this forum. Thank heaven's decisions are NOT made based of this web site!
FWIW -- the committees that the southern region has been using (Fish Lake, Boulder Mountain, Lake Powell) have been very good. They seem to be moving in the right direction.
I see the DWR participate on occasion on these forums. However, I think they have to be pretty careful. I would guess that as soon as one of them makes a comment there would be a follow-up question, that would then need a response, that would then get a followup question that would need a response, that would then generate a followup question that would then need a response, that would then get a followup question that would need a response, that would then generate a followup questionthat would then need a response, that would then get a followup question that would need a response, that would then generate a followup questionthat would then need a response, that would then get a followup question that would need a response, that would then generate a followup question....
At some point, our biologists need to be able to do their job.
The thing that most people always want to push aside and forget is that with nearly all endangered species work that is done, other species benefit. That includes walleye, catfish, white bass, and pike. They all benefit thanks the June sucker recovery program.
Nobody -- including the DWR -- is blind enough to think that they are reversing history and attempting to restore Utah Lake back to it's original place. It will never be a cold, clear water lake full of trout ever again. But that doesn't mean you can't do something about making the lake BETTER.
The ESA doesn't mean that changes can't be made. It just means that you have some policies and procedures that have to be followed prior to making those changes. You just have to work WITH other people to accomplish something. You also have to have a plan, and a reason with some legitimate backing. It's not something you can just say "hey, let's try this" and go do it...
[signature]
Posts: 236
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2012
Reputation:
0
I think there are many reputable and intelligent people on this forum. Is everyone? Without a doubt no. However, everyone is entitled to an opinion---this is still America isn't it-- and just because it may be unpopular at the time doesn't mean it should not be heard and considered. Doesn't mean one has to take action on it but it may stimulate another way of looking at things none the less.
As to the DWR working with committees I am sure there are some bright people involved, but to they represent the entire cross section of fisherman/hunters in the state? I have been involved with many committees in other areas of my life and it has been my experience that usually only a small fraction of the members contribute in any meaningful way. I have seen the DWR on this site in the past asking opinions and giving answers to certain questions. Just wondering why it can't be a regular occurrence. God forbid there can be any meaningful interaction between the masses and a government agency!
I wasn't asking for a dissertation on the June Sucker from the DWR--just an explanation of what they thought about when planting browns in Starvy and what they think the primary food source for them will be? Any clues? Transparency is a good thing.
Totally agree with you on the ESA, its workings and the interactions needed to make it successful. Maybe better communication and education from the feds and state would make everyones jobs easier.
[signature]
Posts: 2,502
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2004
Reputation:
1
[quote Dog-lover]or even more recently the passenger pigeon didn't leave much of a void"[/quote]
How do you know? They were a popular game/shooting bird at the time. (apparently too popular) We never got the chance to see what the modern world would be like with their continued existence. Birders and upland game hunters may have preferred them to what we have now.
PBH wrote;
"The thing that most people always want to push aside and forget is that with nearly all endangered species work that is done, other species benefit. That includes walleye, catfish, white bass, and pike. They all benefit thanks the June sucker recovery program.
Nobody -- including the DWR -- is blind enough to think that they are reversing history and attempting to restore Utah Lake back to it's original place. It will never be a cold, clear water lake full of trout ever again. But that doesn't mean you can't do something about making the lake BETTER.
The ESA doesn't mean that changes can't be made. It just means that you have some policies and procedures that have to be followed prior to making those changes. You just have to work WITH other people to accomplish something. You also have to have a plan, and a reason with some legitimate backing. It's not something you can just say "hey, let's try this" and go do it..."
+1000.
[signature]
Posts: 920
Threads: 46
Joined: Apr 2005
Reputation:
3
You are correct in that we both really don't know!!!
Conjecture and assumptions about what should have been or could have been are simply that. (Should have, could have) Many decades since the last Passenger pigeon was spotted but in this day and age with the overreaction to something going extinct it is my hope that no one spots one in the near future.
[signature]
Posts: 4,630
Threads: 2
Joined: Feb 2005
Reputation:
0
Replying to the OP because I don't know who exactly to direct this to but after pushing close to 2,000 miles one way across the country there is not one state that is similar to the other as a whole.
Utah, in my opinion, is a crappy fish tank. There are good years and bad years. You work with the hand you're dealt with, sometimes you have water to fill the tank and sometimes you don't. The fish are directly affected year by year. You can throw all the shad in you want but if you don't have the water to support a proper ecosystem then you are just wasting money.
After many, many years of "studies show that we should do this" nothing has really wowed me. I love Utah, I live here. I have fished elsewhere mainly but I love the challenge the state offers. Planting a forage species will do nothing unless we can control water levels.
I have family in Cleveland and I support the browns [  ]
[signature]
Posts: 4,630
Threads: 2
Joined: Feb 2005
Reputation:
0
And being my biggest critic, it is a good quality, I believe my fly is down in my avatar pic [blush]. The story is well worth the picture
[signature]
Posts: 208
Threads: 0
Joined: Jun 2011
Reputation:
0
Does anyone know how much Federal money Utah gets to support this June Sucker cause? If we had to pay for this out of our (Utah's) pockets how much money could we throw at it? My opinion is to let them go, we gave it a valiant effort but ti's not meant to be.
[signature]
Posts: 1,781
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2010
Reputation:
0
I just saw a hundred of them, but now they are called Eurasian Doves.
The way they are going they will be blocking out the sun one day.
[signature]
Posts: 35,986
Threads: 288
Joined: Sep 2002
Reputation:
57
http://junesuckerrecovery.org/
[#0000FF] If you are really interested in getting whatever info they have made public you can go to the above website.
So far the bulk of the program has been the carp eradication program...which pays the Loys a hefty sum each year for netting a specific tonnage of carp.
But they have a lot more ideas on the table. Most of which will be better for June suckers than for fishermen.
Careful about how you voice your opinions. The sucker police will be at your door. Or you will be harassed by PETA or similar groups.
[/#0000FF]
[signature]
Posts: 3,505
Threads: 26
Joined: Apr 2006
Reputation:
3
There were some nice cuts in there back in the day TD. The 1st trip I made to Starvation was in Feb. 1978 ice fishing. We knew nothing about the lake so we parked at the old parking area by the boat ramp and hiked to the big island fishing the South side. between 4 of us we caught maybe 8 or 10 trout with the largest being a male cut that went a little over 8 lbs. It was in beautiful spawning colors so my buddy kept it and had it mounted. I can't remember what the other trout were but it seems like we had a mixture of browns, rainbows and cuts with several in the 3 to 4 lb. class. [fishin]
[signature]
Posts: 3,084
Threads: 21
Joined: Jul 2003
Reputation:
12
[quote RangerRat] My opinion is to let them [June suckers] go, we gave it a valiant effort but ti's not meant to be.[/quote]
[quote TubeDude][#0000ff]
But they have a lot more ideas on the table. Most of which will be better for June suckers than for fishermen.
[/#0000ff][/quote]
The #1 goal of the recover is:
Recover the June sucker to the extent that it no longer requires protection under the Endangered Species Act.
What is the tool they are using to help achieve that goal?
HABITAT IMPROVEMENT
A healthy habitat for the fish benefits the entire ecosystem of the lake and the people who live around it.
I just cannot understand how a community of anglers can possibly not be FOR the recovery program.
Clean up Utah Lake. Improve water quality. Improve tributaries. Improve riparian areas. Secure access. Protect access.
Better for the suckers than for anglers??
I think not.
[signature]
Posts: 35,986
Threads: 288
Joined: Sep 2002
Reputation:
57
[#0000FF]"Habitat Improvement" is one thing. Total destruction of the lower river and rerouting into a shallow marshy inlet area is something else (The Delta Plan). That may have been the environment in earlier times but since then there have been a lot of changes that make it a less attractive idea. It would displace a few farmers and other businesses along the river. And the change in flows would undoubtedly affect the spawning of species other than the Junies.
Improvement is in the eye of the feds. If there were an open election as to what outcomes were preferred by the "average" citizen and/or angler I question how many would vote for the continued costly pursuit of Junie Nirvana as opposed to having the plain old good fishing of Utah Lake.
Yeah, yeah. I know. I'm a heathen for still not buying into the save the sucker program. I'm all in favor of a major cleanup of the lake, but not at the expense of the otherwise good fishing it provides.
The politics and the expense of the sucker saving efforts are disproportionate to the amount of benefit the suckers will actually receive. I wonder if anybody has ever done a cost analysis on how much per sucker we are spending.
[/#0000FF]
[signature]
Posts: 35,986
Threads: 288
Joined: Sep 2002
Reputation:
57
[#0000FF]Yes, I too caught some decent sized cutts...and a few healthy bows. But my primary targets when I fished in the open water was the ice-out browns.
I tried ice fishing there by the dam a couple of times in the late 70s but unless we used large jigging spoons we got swarmed by chubs. Liked to stop there for a little while on the way back from Pelican. We did get a few trout ice fishing but none as large as right at iceout.
I know there are still some big browns in there, but not as many as during the chub infestation. Just like the Gorge. During the Ray Johnson big brown heyday at the Gorge you could walk across the water on the chubs massing inside the harbors at times. Browns grow fast and large on that kinda diet.
About 2 years ago on Starvy I had a big wide brown follow in a crankbait up at Knight Hollow. I watched it keep pace for quite a ways and then turn off and dive back down in the depths. I thought it was a huge carp at first, but got a good look at it's shape and the spots when it was close enough. Scared me.
[/#0000FF]
[signature]
Posts: 165
Threads: 2
Joined: Feb 2015
Reputation:
0
I am no tree hugin granola cruncher fighting for the planet but Givin the history of my older family members that would take what ever they wanted off public lands because it was there "right" I am glad somebody is fighting for "useless fish and nuisance animals" because that attitude would leave us with sterile ponds and the only wildlife would be hanging over the fireplaces. Don't get me wrong I love to hunt but I also love the view.
One thing that does bother me is when millions of dollars get spent managing animals that some farmer let go wild years ago but we think they are native endangered animals like wild horses. Now there is a waste money that could go towards endangered species. Wild cats, wild dogs, and wild horses should have the same laws as the walleye on the Green River. This is going to touch a few nerves because they are soft and fury not cold and slimy like Northern Pike.
[signature]
|
