Utah Lake: 100 Million Carp, ENORMOUS Walleye Potential

[lurechucker]

An interesting read about Utah Lake restoration:

[url "http://www.harktheherald.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=64866"]http://www.harktheherald.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=64866[/url]
[signature]

[Parasite]

That was an interesting article. I wonder if someone accidently miscalculated the number of carp in the lake. 100 million carp seems very steep to me.

Also the concern with the blue algea and phosphorus was interesting. I don't know too much about the lakes history but was this problem caused from the steel mill?
[signature]

[Out4Trout]

[cool]That was an interesting read. In all of the previous articles and studies I've read on the carp problems in the lake have said that there's 7.5 million of them, not the grossly exagerated 100,000,000 that this guy is stating.

Also, what do you all think of this statement:
"Studies in which June sucker, Utah sucker, carp and walleye were fitted with radio tags and tracked to discover their travel patterns in Utah Lake have revealed startling behavioral patterns in the fish -- but have also revealed that walleye "are growing huge and abundant and getting out of control," and represent a new threat to the future of the lake's ecosystem, said Todd Crowl of Utah State University."

I really don't agree that the walleye are "getting out of control." I'd say it's the carp and the phosphorous and blue-green algae that are getting out of control in that lake.

Also, isn't Utah Lake supposed to be getting a lot more water in the future years as part of the June Sucker rehab program? Funny how this article didn't mention a dang thing about that tiny little detail...
[signature]

[Bigfishrule]

I wondered when the walleye would be villified. The June Sucker recovery biologists have been saying that they don't want to get rid of the walleye, just carp. I have felt all along that that was just to get fishermen to but into thier june sucker recovery. Next will be channel cats and the white bass. The carp were just the easy first target. Don't they get the lake will never be what it was. Get over it, move on, let the JUNE SUCKER die in peace.
[signature]

[lurechucker]

Here's the Trib's take:
[url "http://www.sltrib.com/utah/ci_3054624"]http://www.sltrib.com/utah/ci_3054624[/url]


And KSL's:
[url "http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=111171"]http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=111171[/url]


And a side article from a week ago or so about carp in Utah Lake. I'm thinking that someone slipped an extra zero in that first article. 10 million maybe. 100 million? Now that would be a lot of carp. Carp article:
[url "http://www.harktheherald.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=64247"]http://www.harktheherald.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=64247[/url]


lurechucker
[signature]

[utfishguy31]

Carp Punisher better get busy!![]
[signature]

[bassrods]

What this guy did was take a sample (number of carp) in one spot and used it to guess the numbers for the hole lake.
He's not to smart all fishermen knows that 90 o/o of the fish is in 10 o/o of the lake...[][cool][]
[signature]

[Carp_Punisher]

[#505000]It's obvious I've been slacking. Time to dust off the bow and get to work!!! [cool][/#505000]
[signature]

[hashbaz]

I don't know why the government is trying so hard to figure out how to get rid of Phosphorus. Plants consume phosphorus. If we knock the carp down far enough that the plants come back, the plants will eat up all the phosphorus. Or is the phosphorus in a form that cannot be used?

PS get to work CP, you slacker![]
[signature]

[Fin-S-Fish]

My personal take in response to Lurechucker's trib and ksl articles is leave things alone! Utah lake like many other lakes are better off left alone. Sure, less water pumped out of it is a plus, but the other ideas are nonsense. Building a causeway and dredging the lake deeper, for example will destroy the lake's present thriving populations of Lmb, 'eyes, white bass, crappie, and bluegills. Or at least it will alter traditional location patterns and make fishing more difficult for the shorebound. There are lots of game fish in the lake. We don't need such an intense focus on those suckers. Yeah, there may be a bit of overpopulation of 'eyes. But a change in bag limits and opening up the inlet streams during spawn will be effective in population control. It seems that the whole issue about carp is also nonsense. We don't want to restore Utah lake to become gin clear and full of trout and suckers. I want to point out that the abundant game fish population of eyes, white bass, catfish, crappie, etc have maintained stable and in some cases increasing population levels during all these years that "the lake has been ignored." Further, they have coexisted with the carp and have been successful in the lake despite "competition" from carp. Also the herald article states that carp and eyes are competing for food. It states "walleye are physically stunted from competing with carp for food." What a load of bull. They don't eat the same things. That writer needs to do some fact checking before publishing the article. Therefore I hope that the lake will continue to be ignored and I remain quite apprehensive about any efforts at "restoration."
[signature]

[Kraizee_Skot]

[font "Viner Hand ITC"][#ff4040][size 3]I kinda have to agree with Fin on the walleye limit. It seems that almost all the walleye i catch are always over 20 inches. I always end up having to keep only one. It is fun to catch the big ones, but sometimes you might want to keep a few for a fish dinner with your friends and family.[/size][/#ff4040][/font]
[signature]

[cat_man]

The problem is that there is far more phosphorus present than aquatic plants can use, and it ends up causing an massive algae bloom every late summer/fall. In protected spots (like the Lincoln Beach Boat ramp) it can become very thick and sticky especially in the shallows and it chokes off the life of everything else, especially when it dies and robs the water of oxygen. The farms and sewage treatment facilities are releasing way too much phosphorus into the water.
[signature]

[ocean]

I totally agree with you about the eyes doing good at utah lake.Its rare that you catch one under 21".Also the white bass and cats and crappie are there too in abundance.You just have to find them in that huge lake![]
[signature]

[ocean]

[signature]

[PrinceFisher]

I would assume that Utah Lake is tested just as much or more than any other Utah lake for its water quality and to determine if its fish are healthy to eat.

I've heard from many on this board that the fish are perfectly safe to eat out of UL, but with all of this talk about elevated phosphorus levels and how farm and sewage plants dump into Utah Lake, I'm beginning to wonder once again if it's a good idea to eat a lot of fish out of UL.

Do the high phosphorus levels harm humans who happen to consume fish regularly out of UL?

Food for thought......
[signature]

[doggonefishin]

Excessive phosphates exert their negative effect on the water by stimulating rapid growth of algae and aquatic plants. The growth and then decay of these plants will potentially use up all of the oxygen in the water and can cause fish kill by hypoxia. The process is called eutrophication. The phosphates themselves do not taint the meat of the fish, so fish from an elevated phosphate lake are still safe to eat. This link explains it in more detail.
[url "http://www.italocorotondo.it/tequila/module2/pollution/forms_water_pollution.htm"]http://www.italocorotondo.it/tequila/module2/pollution/forms_water_pollution.htm[/url]

I may be the only "regular" member who sees some potential benefit from the june sucker recovery program, but I too found the gentleman's comments about the walleyes to be very suspect. They "are growing HUGE and are getting out of control" then they are "physically stunted"? Which is it? If this guy wants to see stunted walleyes, I would suggest a trip to DC or Starvation. It is true they were skinny earlier this year due to a poor forage spawn in 2004, but it looks like the good spawn this year has taken care of any problems in that regard. Oh well.
Tight lines.
[signature]

[PrinceFisher]

Thanks, dg, for your response that set my mind at ease. I guess every once in awhile I need to be reminded that it's okay to eat those tasty 'eyes out of dirty UL.

By the way, everytime I look in my tackle box and see the crappie jig you graciously gave me, I think of that day on UL when you introduced me to crappie fishing. Thanks again.
[signature]

[Fishhound]

Hey Thanx DGF,

Great link ! I'll be peruseing it for a while. I can also see some benefit for the recovery program. Moreover, I think the original article was more sensationalism than anything else.

Now, if the "real" carp population were to be addressed, there could be some progress made on that lake.

CP - I got a bow - let's go ![]
[signature]

[wormandbobber]

I have an acquaintance who used to be a june sucker biologist in the central region; he now works as the blue ribbon specialist. On several occasions I was with him gillnetting on Utah Lake...from what we saw and from what he has told me, there really aren't that many walleyes (but some big ones) in Utah Lake. The carp are a huge problem, but Utah Lake is definitely one of the most underutilized sport fisheries in the state.

Also, I personally worked with Todd Crowl at USU and know what kind of person he is. My personal experience taught me that Crowl is a non-fisherman who is a radical environmentalist. He is the type of person that would support the elimination of all species of fish within Utah Lake and its tributaries except the june suckers.

My personal opinion is that work done to help the june suckers establish a healthy population is probably a good thing. Habitat improvements to the lake and the water quality are good things for all of the sport fish. The biggest problem with the lake, though, are the carp....and, I am not sure what can be done to really improve this problem.
[signature]