09-07-2017, 03:26 PM
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 3] [/size][/#800000][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 3]I’m not going to throw stones at anybody on here but would like to play the Devil’s Advocate on this issue. One of the biggest grips I read on these and other Utah fishing forums is that the DWR doesn’t listen to the general public when making decisions about our fisheries. So in the fall of 2016, the DWR actually conducted an online survey that asked anglers what species they would like to pursue at Scofield and whether they would support another rotenone treatment. They got some 2,500 responses from anglers across Utah that revealed strong public support for introducing new species to the reservoir. Based on those responses, the DWR aquatic managers organized a management committee consisting of biologists, Scofield residents, volunteers who took the survey, and several sportsmen organizations including the state’s Blue Ribbon Fisheries Council, Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife, the DWR’s Southeastern Regional Advisory Council, and the Utah Wildlife Board. The committee was tasked to develop a sport fish management plan that would provide the DWR with recommendations and direction to create a sustainable, high-quality fishery at Scofield. They developed a plan with six management priorities.[/size][/#800000][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 3] [/size][/#800000][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 3]Those priorities are to re-establish the family fishery, and make sure there are fish in the reservoir that people can catch and keep, maintain and enhance trophy fishing opportunities, enhance the diversity of fishing opportunities by adding new fish species, reduce Utah chub numbers with a sustainable management model, increase fishing and recreational use at the reservoir, and manage the reservoir in a way that’s compatible with the management of native fish species that live downstream.[/size][/#800000][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 3] [/size][/#800000][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 3]As part of this NEW management plan, the goals include stocking Scofield Reservoir with three new species: wiper, tiger muskie, and triploid walleye – all of which are sterile, allowing managers to control and adjust their numbers as needed. It is estimated that the new species will likely reach a catchable size by 2018, or sooner. And the revered rainbow trout will still play an essential role in Scofield’s future by stocking rainbow trout that are several inches longer than those stocked in other waters. And managers will take precautions to prevent the tree new species from escaping from Scofield by installing a screen to stop these species from moving downstream.[/size][/#800000][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 3] [/size][/#800000][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 3]As to the possibility of a future rotenone treatment, it will only occur if the new species can’t adequately control the number of chubs. Aquatic managers are pursuing an analysis of the reservoir, its tributaries and tail water should a rotenone treatment become necessary. But this will not occur until the new management plan runs out in 5 years.[/size][/#800000][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 3] [/size][/#800000][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 3]I know from what some of you have said on this thread that the Scofield problem has been around for a very long time and there have been a few attempts to correct the problem in the past. But none of what this new plan proposes has been tried in the past from what you are telling me. You’ve asked for more of an input on management of the reservoir and the DWR gave it to you by listening to your suggestions via the survey, and then involving you through a committee action that included input from fishermen and fishing organizations in the state as well as trained professionals (DWR aquatics employees). You’ve come up with what seems to me to be a viable planned to improve the reservoir to almost everybody’s benefit. The new plan doesn’t appear to me to be just more of the same old, same old.[/size][/#800000][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 3] [/size][/#800000][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 3]I agree that there is a large amount of angst over it taking so long to find a cure. But IMHO, the DWR is doing their very best to seek a workable solution and it CAN”T be done overnight.[/size][/#800000][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 3] [/size][/#800000][/font]
[signature]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 3]I’m not going to throw stones at anybody on here but would like to play the Devil’s Advocate on this issue. One of the biggest grips I read on these and other Utah fishing forums is that the DWR doesn’t listen to the general public when making decisions about our fisheries. So in the fall of 2016, the DWR actually conducted an online survey that asked anglers what species they would like to pursue at Scofield and whether they would support another rotenone treatment. They got some 2,500 responses from anglers across Utah that revealed strong public support for introducing new species to the reservoir. Based on those responses, the DWR aquatic managers organized a management committee consisting of biologists, Scofield residents, volunteers who took the survey, and several sportsmen organizations including the state’s Blue Ribbon Fisheries Council, Sportsmen for Fish and Wildlife, the DWR’s Southeastern Regional Advisory Council, and the Utah Wildlife Board. The committee was tasked to develop a sport fish management plan that would provide the DWR with recommendations and direction to create a sustainable, high-quality fishery at Scofield. They developed a plan with six management priorities.[/size][/#800000][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 3] [/size][/#800000][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 3]Those priorities are to re-establish the family fishery, and make sure there are fish in the reservoir that people can catch and keep, maintain and enhance trophy fishing opportunities, enhance the diversity of fishing opportunities by adding new fish species, reduce Utah chub numbers with a sustainable management model, increase fishing and recreational use at the reservoir, and manage the reservoir in a way that’s compatible with the management of native fish species that live downstream.[/size][/#800000][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 3] [/size][/#800000][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 3]As part of this NEW management plan, the goals include stocking Scofield Reservoir with three new species: wiper, tiger muskie, and triploid walleye – all of which are sterile, allowing managers to control and adjust their numbers as needed. It is estimated that the new species will likely reach a catchable size by 2018, or sooner. And the revered rainbow trout will still play an essential role in Scofield’s future by stocking rainbow trout that are several inches longer than those stocked in other waters. And managers will take precautions to prevent the tree new species from escaping from Scofield by installing a screen to stop these species from moving downstream.[/size][/#800000][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 3] [/size][/#800000][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 3]As to the possibility of a future rotenone treatment, it will only occur if the new species can’t adequately control the number of chubs. Aquatic managers are pursuing an analysis of the reservoir, its tributaries and tail water should a rotenone treatment become necessary. But this will not occur until the new management plan runs out in 5 years.[/size][/#800000][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 3] [/size][/#800000][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 3]I know from what some of you have said on this thread that the Scofield problem has been around for a very long time and there have been a few attempts to correct the problem in the past. But none of what this new plan proposes has been tried in the past from what you are telling me. You’ve asked for more of an input on management of the reservoir and the DWR gave it to you by listening to your suggestions via the survey, and then involving you through a committee action that included input from fishermen and fishing organizations in the state as well as trained professionals (DWR aquatics employees). You’ve come up with what seems to me to be a viable planned to improve the reservoir to almost everybody’s benefit. The new plan doesn’t appear to me to be just more of the same old, same old.[/size][/#800000][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 3] [/size][/#800000][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 3]I agree that there is a large amount of angst over it taking so long to find a cure. But IMHO, the DWR is doing their very best to seek a workable solution and it CAN”T be done overnight.[/size][/#800000][/font]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][#800000][size 3] [/size][/#800000][/font]
[signature]
Bob Hicks, from Utah
I'm 83 years young and going as hard as I can for as long as I can.
"Free men do not ask permission to bear arms."
I'm 83 years young and going as hard as I can for as long as I can.
"Free men do not ask permission to bear arms."