More June Sucker info

[cat_man]

Wednesday, May 05, 2004 - 12:00 AM [url "http://www.harktheherald.com/print.php?sid=20609"][/url] | [url "http://www.harktheherald.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=Recommend_Us&file=index&req=FriendSend&sid=20609"][/url]

[url "http://www.harktheherald.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=20609&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0"][#800080]June sucker information meeting fails to draw crowd[/#800080][/url]

Caleb Warnock THE DAILY HERALD



After spending thousands to mail 17,000 invitations to Utah County residents living around Utah Lake, only 15 people showed up on Tuesday for an informational open house about the endangered June sucker.

Sponsored by the June Sucker Recovery Implementation Program, officials had hoped the meeting would be a step toward garnering the good will of the community for projects [url "http://adserver.harktheherald.com/adclick.php?n=a4616ee2"][/url] to improve Utah Lake, said program director Reed Harris.

"It's about improving Utah Lake, and improving habitat for sport fish," he said. "We're talking about a cleaner, more usable Utah Lake."

In the 1800s, Utah Lake was home to at least six native species of fish, said Chris Keleher of the June Sucker Recovery Program. Today, the June sucker and the Utah sucker are the only two remaining. The June sucker occurs naturally nowhere else in the world.

Introduced species dominate Utah Lake, eating the young spawn of the June sucker and Utah sucker, Keleher said. After nine years of study, experts believe Utah Lake has only 450 adult wild June suckers left.

On Tuesday, in conjunction with the open house, officials released 25,000 hatchery-raised June sucker into Utah Lake.

"Stocking the lake is part of our research to look at the survival rate of different sizes of fish," he said. "Up until now, we have stocked large fish so they wouldn't be eaten by predators. Today we stocked 25,000 fish of different sizes and then we'll monitor those for survival rates over the next few years."

Before Tuesday, a total of 9,000 8-inch June sucker had been stocked in the lake since 1995, but few or no adult offspring have survived, Keleher said. In 1994, the federal government named the June sucker an endangered species, allowing its habitat to be protected by law.

Soon thereafter, nine water-user groups with interest in Deer Creek Reservoir formed a 40-year, $40 million plan to save the fish, called the June Sucker Recovery Implementation Program. If the 2-inch fish stocked in the lake on Tuesday thrive, the program will stock more smaller fish in the future, which are cheaper to produce.

The program has been controversial because, for the past 10 years, officials of the program have purchased the rights to 21,000 acre-feet of water -- equating 6.8 billion gallons. The water is released from Deer Creek and Jordanelle reservoirs to simulate the way an undammed river would spike in water flow following the annual spring runoff, allowing the June suckers to swim upstream and spawn.

Some public officials have criticized the program as a waste of water, especially as Utah County enters its sixth year of drought.

"I think we have been criticized in the past because we don't communicate and people don't about what we are doing and they feel like they don't know what is going on," he said. "People feel conflicted between water and flows for the fish but they don't see the big picture about creating habitat, about the impact of non-native fish, and restoring Utah Lake to its historic conditions. We are trying to get some support and involvement from the public."

In an effort to get people out to the meeting, postcards were mailed to 17,000 residents living around the lake, but apparently to no avail, he said.

"I think people have a negative impression of Utah Lake," he said. "They don't think it is ever going to get better and maybe that's why they didn't show up. They don't think there is much hope for it."

One of the reasons for holding Tuesday's meeting was to find concerned residents to join a local review board, he said.

"We'd like to get this established so that if we are planning something in conflict with a local issue, we can get that to the table as soon as possible, to change our plan or approach it in a different way," he said.

Program managers have scheduled one more meeting and are hoping that hundreds of people will show up in support of plans to improve Utah Lake, he said.

"We'd love to have 400 to 500 people," said Harris. "We are going to continue to try and reach people."

The next meeting will be held May 12, at Utah Lake State Park Visitor's Center, 4400 W. Center Street in Provo. This story appeared in The Daily Herald on page A1. There are 3 comments on this story
[signature]

[hashbaz]

I've seen this topic before but didn't raise my opinion then so I will now. I don't like the idea of an entire species going extinct, but isn't this part of nature. Yes it is our fault that the june sucker is going down hill, but at the same time - so what. I don't know a lot about ecology, but I don't think the june sucker plays a big role in the ecology of Utah Lake.

It sound like a lot of money is being spent to only accomplish a little. In my opinion, saving the june sucker should be all or nothing:

Option A: Do nothing. Let nature take its course and spend that money somewhere else. If the june sucker dies, it really won't change much.

Option B: Take drastic measures to restore Utah lake as best we can. Keeping the water flowing to allow the sucker to spawn is only one small part of the problem facing the sucker. Addressing only one part of a big problem is a waste of time effort and money. What good is good spawning grounds if the babies won't survive anyway? The sucker is not doing well because of the predators and the condition of the lake itself (I think). The carp are at least partly to blame for the poor conditions of Utah lake. My understanding is that carp stir up the bottom of the lake, uprooting plants and mixing phosphates back into the water. And then these phosphate increase the algae. I don't know how all this affect the zooplankton, the food source for the june sucker, but I imagine that it hurts the zooplankton.

I don't know how to deal with the carp problem. It sounds like a lot of anglers harvest them already, and I don't know how much difference we can make. Is there a way to poison off only the carp? If not, I suggest poison the whole lake and start over right in such a way that the june sucker can do better. I see this as the only way to properly save the June sucker. The way things are going now we will have to continue stocking june suckers till the end of time because they obviously can't make it on their own.

Personally, I'm in favor of option A. I don't fish Utah Lake, but I think poisoning it would madden a lot of people.

Please understand that I know I am not a biologist and don't know a lot about the whole situation, but what I have said makes sense to me based on my limited understanding of the topic. I am curious to hear other more informed opinions on the subject.
[signature]

[doggonefishin]

I was one of the 15 or so that showed up last night. I hope that they didn't count my daughter in that total. (She is 3) I did find the presentation interesting. There are some substantial problems that are currently faced in this program to say the least. Since it was so sparsely attended, I had a chance to talk for 10-15 minutes with the Water district biologist about it. Regrettably, the question about the carp seems to be the most insurmountable problem. If they could somehow return the shorelines to a grassy state as it was before carp were put in, the thinking is that there would be enough cover to have the sucker fry survive, even with whities and eyes there. This is not possible with carp there, and ly, the biologist hadn't yet come up with a solution. The biology grad in me took the time to read some scientific abstracts regarding the project. The favored method of carp removal was to have intensive commercial carp fishing. The problem was to find a suitable market for our scaly friends. other solutions had major (insurmountable IMO)problems. One other idea that might be more promising in the opinion of the biologist was to have part of the lake diked off and treated, then managed for an ecosystem of suckers, possibly cuttthroats, and other suitable species. That does seem more possible to me too and may have some interesting sportfishing ramifications.

Hashbaz, I think your sentiments are consistent with the feelings of many of us in the fishing community. As for what will happen, The Federal government has decreed that the June sucker is to be saved at all reasonable (TO CONGRESS) costs. (via the endangered species act) Ted Kennedy and Hilary Clinton have as much say on the policy issue here as our representatives. So option B is what will happen, assuming the laws aren't changed. Whether it will work and benefit the sportsmen, waterusers, farmers, and equally importantly the ecosystem and fish is what remains to be seen. We may even have a smidgen of input as well how the recovery effort is undertaken too. Now off to try my float tube for the first time this year.
One last thing, I do believe the efforts to save the sucker WILL improve the overall fishing and water quality at Utah lake, regardless of whether it ultimately saves the sucker.
[signature]

[cat_man]

Hey Loren thanks for sharing your opinion that's how we all can learn and determine our own opinion, by listening to others and drawing our own conclusions. Of course, the more facts we know about the situation, the better we are able to determine an appropriate opinion. I'll share with you what I know so far(I'm still forming my opinion on this, I think both sides have a point):

1- Poisoning Utah Lake is not feasable, because of its large size. Small reservoirs are relatively easy to treat with chemicals such as rotenone, since there isn't near as much water. Poisoning Utah Lake has many problems:

- Like you mentioned, the anglers that like to fish there wouldn't support it
- Poisoning would kill all of the remaining June Suckers that have lived naturally in the lake. These are probably the strongest in their species since they have survived when others haven't.
- Utah Lake drains down into the Jordan River, and much of this water is used for irrigation in farms in both Utah and Salt Lake Counties.

2- You are right -- carp are a HUGE part of the problem. The DWR has been looking into ways that they can reduce the carp population. Addressing spawning grounds is not enough, you're right about that, but the DWR is addressing other areas as well, including how to improve habitat in Utah Lake, carp control, and maybe others(not sure).

3- Any change to improve water quality in Utah Lake would directly benefit both the June Sucker AND the other species in the lake(catfish, white bass, smallmouth, largemouth, bluegill, crappie, walleye, perch, etc etc.). This is why I support the effort.

4- Doing nothing is out of the question, since Federal Regulations (The Federal Endangered Species Act) requires us to act. I'm not sure what kind of repercussions there would be if the state ignored a Federal law like that, but be assured it wouldn't be pretty.

5- I still have mixed feelings about all this. A lot of money is put into this, and so far results have been not very promising. Hopefully they will improve in the future. We should work to secure more federal funds to aid this effort since they're the ones requiring us to do it. [unimpressed][unimpressed]
[signature]

[poorfisherman]

A lot of money to who. The legislatures waste a million dollars all the time look at that stupid congressinal seat thing that cost 1.3 million. Is it right to waste money, I think not but its gonna happen its a fact of life, and if its getting wasted on something that we screwed up, I'm O.K. with that.

I think there is to much shucking of responsibility of things we humans screw up anyway. Thats the reason we all have to carry 2 bags of someone elses garbage out when we fish. Our outdoors are just like a marriage its give and take. And if you screwed up something with your wife you dam well know you have to fix it and its gonna cost you a lot. Same with the outdors.

just my 2 cents.
[signature]

[Kayote]

IMHO I say save the June sucker. We lose species on this earth one at a time. One day you'll wake up and the only critters left will be cows and rainbows. That would be a very sucky world indeed.

Good Fishing, Kayote
[signature]

[Theekillerbee]

It's too bad the the June Sucker is nigh on the virge of extinction, but I don't think we are going to reverse hundreds of years of human interference. That's what caused most of the problems in the first place. I say let them go the way of the dodo, and put money into improving other fish habitat. Don't flog the dead horse, just make improvements so we don't lose any more. Just my 2 cents.
[signature]

[stevation]

It's hard to feel sympathetic for a sucker. No wonder no one came to the meeting. That said, the endangered species act is really just a tool to improve ecosystems, and when we have a species in trouble, that's the final legal signal for some money and effort to flow into improving the ecosystem so it can survive. If these efforts make the lake able to support June suckers, then it will probably make the lake better for a bunch of other species, too.

I've heard that the pioneers wrote about huge 10 lb. cutthroat trout living in Utah Lake and running up the rivers to spawn. Now THAT'S something that ought to be restored! I guess the only problem is that cutthroats live in other places, so they're not endangered. But wouldn't it be cool to restore the lake so well that massive trout could live in it again? That should be our goal. I frankly don't care much about a silly sucker. I usually kill suckers when I catch them, because they always overpopulate wherever they live. If the June Sucker isn't making it, it must be a very wimpy sucker fish!

Also, I don't think diking off a part of Utah Lake would be good at all. This is one the largest natural freshwater lakes west of the Mississippi (isn't Tahoe the only one bigger?), and from my house looking down the hill, Utah Lake is a treasure. We should treat it much better so it becomes the treasure it looks like from up here. Marring its beauty with a dike or a causeway (as has been suggested recently) would be a disaster.
[signature]

[doggonefishin]

"I've heard that the pioneers wrote about huge 10 lb. cutthroat trout living in Utah Lake and running up the rivers to spawn. Now THAT'S something that ought to be restored!"
The conditions that the June suckers thrive in are the same conditions that permitted the cutts to get so huge. The cutts were eating the suckers as forage. You save the lowly sucker and you just might get the big cutts back too. Conversely, with the carp doing what they do there is zero chance of a cutthroat fishery like that as the Utah lake ecosystem currently exists. As for the causeway proposal, it is just that, but it may be the most practical way to actually save these fish and return part of the lake to its historic character. I also feel the lack of interest in this project is as much a factor in people being disinterested in Utah lake as it is saving a species of sucker.
[signature]

[travelinangler]

I have to disagree with stevation on the dike option. There has been a lot of discussion on this topic in the past and I see nothing but good coming out of it. Yes a dike would destroy the natural look of the lake, but at the rate the lake is deteriorating there isn't going to be anything left but a mud flat.

The overall problem is the water quality. Back when the pioneers arrived the lake was a lot deeper. With time, runoff has filled the lake with sediment. The size of the lake allows for more wind action to stir up the water causing the water to be muddy. The shallow water has also increased the environment that carp thrive in and in turn the carp have destroyed a lot of vegetation. And the cycle continues.

There have been several interested investors who have expressed desire to dredge the lake. One such individual was willing to pay the state of Utah for this right because the soil is so rich with nutrients he could sell it for a nice profit. If the middle portion of the lake was dredged to a decent depth we would see a considerable improvement in water quality.

Additionally, a dike across the middle of the lake would accomplish a couple of things. First it would, given plenty of water tunnels for circulation, reduce the size of the waves created by the wind which in turn reduces the amount of water stirring up sediment. Second it would be used as a roadway to connect the east and west sides of the lake (say provo center street west).

All in all, improve the water quality, improve the habitat for all species, improve the boating/recreational appeal, increase water capacity (needed for drought times), and overall improve/save one of the best natural lakes this side of the mississippi.

By the way, Geneva has been sold to the Chinese and will be completely disassembled and moved to China. Just an FYI.
[signature]

[cat_man]

I think the idea of creating rock islands around the lake for structure is an awesome idea! We could even put long skinny islands of riprap that are more like dikes, maybe in L shapes 100 yards long per side. That would create windbrakes in certain areas which would slow down waves, and allow for some awesome structure to be created in deeper water near the middle of the lake for bass, walleye, cats, and any other fish to congregate around. Definitely would have to mark them well with buoys or whatever so noone slams into one with their boat! [crazy]
[signature]

[doggonefishin]

I agree, the addition of such structure would be helpful to the entire lake. For the endangered species project, though, I feel it will require a dike around a portion of the lake that would need to be carp free (if possible) and would be maintained to allow the aquatic grasses to regrow. Then, the suckers might be able to reproduce naturally again. One thing the managing biologist told me at the meeting was that he felt the need to have a "top" predator over the suckers and he mentioned specifically cutthroats. The periphery dike would contain structure that would enhance the fishing for the rest of the lake. Look how the bass fishing is the best there around the harbors. Additional projects could improve the rest of the lakes structure too.
[signature]

[cat_man]

Yeah, I think you're right. I would definitely support diking off a control area, at least for investigation research to determine if a larger area would be feasible and helpful to the suckers. Dredge it 10 - 20 feet deep in some areas, leave others as shallow as 4 feet, some mud bottom, some gravel/rock bottom. Allow vegetation to grow, make sure clear water flows into and out of it (without allowing carp or other species in). Then introduce some suckers, then a couple years later add some Bear Lake Cutts. Give it a few years and see what survives.
[signature]

[Curtisfish]

As long as we are restoring, let's drain both Deer Creek, and Jordanelle. Then remove any man made structure so the river returns to its "natural" state. Then, kick all of the people off of the benches and level the homes built there that have destroyed the vegetation that contained the runoff and provided winter and drought shelter for animals that are now found in the garages and back yards of these homes. What I can't believe is that the home owners actually seem surprised when it happens.

Now that you are either laughing or ticked off. I guess I'll share my thoughts. Some will agree, some won't. I don't mean for anyone to take anything personally. Just what I think for now. Could, and probably will, change tomorrow. In case you start to wonder; No, I'm not a tree hugger.

Man has made a lot of mistakes growing up. We still do. Unless we become all knowing (yeah, right), we will continue to make mistakes. Unfortunately, a lot of animal species have paid the price for the mistakes that ancestors of old, and some a lot more recent, have made. Whether it was deliberate, accidental, lack of knowledge, or lack of giving a darn.

It is the responsibility of us all to at least try to remedy what we, as a species, have broken. Some are simple, and some are impossible.

I learned how to water ski on that lake. I'm only 35 and I can remember the lake deeper and cleaner. I even caught a cutthroat in the mouth of the Provo River a number of years ago. Closer to 10 inches than 10lbs., but a cut none the less. This one seems to be one heck of a challenge. Personally, I hope someone comes up with a great plan that can restore Utah Lake to some degree. I wish I could. The dike idea sounds like it would have the best chance of what I've read so far.

Man is not going to reverse all of what has been done. We can't. For us as a species to continue, some of the changes must remain. do I think we should go so far as to clone a Dodo or Thylacine? As neat as it would be to see; No, they are gone, let them rest in peace. I know a lot of us here have made efforts to try and help. I applaud, and thank everyone that has done anything to help out. From picking up trash, to paying millions of their own money to help fund projects. And I can't leave out everyone that gives his or her time. These people should feel like they have gotten a pat on the back, or a hug, or at the very least, a sincere thank you, from everyone that benifits from their labor.

I'll get off my box now, just felt like venting I guess. Thanks for listening. I hope you all have whatever kind of day you desire to.
[signature]