08-07-2018, 04:42 PM
[quote gofish435]
Since the cost of treating the reservoir has been such a big part of the discussion, think about how much money that the reservoir being, a poor fishery for so many years, has cost the State of Utah.
Lost revenue for the State Parks campgrounds, local business, fishing licenses, fuel, property values, and tourism makes the cost of treament insignificant.
There has been a lot of colateral damge over the years all associated with the quality of the fishing.[:/][/quote]
It's been posted numerous times that the cost of not treating a fishery is more expensive than treating:
[quote wormandbobber]Just an FYI, but the USFWS and the American Fisheries Society have both determined that using rotenone as a kind of reset button for managing fisheries is very cost effective. In fact, it is often viewed as more costly not to rotenone fisheries. According to the USFWS, “It has been estimated that for
each dollar spent on rotenone
and stocked trout, anglers gained
from $32 to $105 worth of fish
ing. On trout lakes that were
stocked but not treated, the gain
from fish stocking alone was
only $10 to $15.”
https://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/fed...onebro.pdf[/quote]
But some of these guys only want to hear (and read) what they want to hear (and read). They want to keep saying "try something new". They won't accept that none of this is new. It's all been done, with data to back it up.
[signature]
Since the cost of treating the reservoir has been such a big part of the discussion, think about how much money that the reservoir being, a poor fishery for so many years, has cost the State of Utah.
Lost revenue for the State Parks campgrounds, local business, fishing licenses, fuel, property values, and tourism makes the cost of treament insignificant.
There has been a lot of colateral damge over the years all associated with the quality of the fishing.[:/][/quote]
It's been posted numerous times that the cost of not treating a fishery is more expensive than treating:
[quote wormandbobber]Just an FYI, but the USFWS and the American Fisheries Society have both determined that using rotenone as a kind of reset button for managing fisheries is very cost effective. In fact, it is often viewed as more costly not to rotenone fisheries. According to the USFWS, “It has been estimated that for
each dollar spent on rotenone
and stocked trout, anglers gained
from $32 to $105 worth of fish
ing. On trout lakes that were
stocked but not treated, the gain
from fish stocking alone was
only $10 to $15.”
https://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/fed...onebro.pdf[/quote]
But some of these guys only want to hear (and read) what they want to hear (and read). They want to keep saying "try something new". They won't accept that none of this is new. It's all been done, with data to back it up.
[signature]