Posts: 2,320
Threads: 0
Joined: Oct 2002
Reputation:
0
Any person Who likes to fish any river or lake in the old Lake Boneville drainage will want to keep an eye on the law suit put forth to put the Boneville Cutt on the endangered species list. Filed in Denver. This could potentially fubar every fishery you like to fish. If this makes it as an endangered species it will take the management out of the hands of the Utah DWR and puts it in the hands of the feds. Waters can be shut down to fishing to protect the species. Controls of what species can be planted were, can change.
Just wanted to make you all aware.
[signature]
Posts: 1,762
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2003
Reputation:
0
Man thats bogus, that eliminates most of the waters in utah that have cuts in them. If that happens the revineu from fishermen would plumit.
Besides i would think that the numbers of the bonivilles would be sufficient to keep the fish off of the list
[signature]
Posts: 2,514
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2004
Reputation:
1
I posted on this very subject a few weeks ago. I don't think guys realize the potential this could have to mess up both warm and coldwater fishing in the state. We should commend the DWR though for their restoration efforts on the bonneville cutts. Their successes in this effort will probably mean that efforts by environmental and animal rights extremists will fail. (at least in regards to the bonneville cutts)
[signature]
Posts: 5,856
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2003
Reputation:
0
I think the state is doing a lot to help out the Bonneville cutts. It isn't all bad though, there are a number of fish in Utah on the endangered species list, and fishing in those waters hasn't been halted. The most high profile of those is the June sucker in Utah lake. Razorback suckers, and virgin river chubs down on the green are another fish on the list. So far none of those waters have been shut down for fishing. You just have to throw any of those fish back that you catch. I still feel it is a bogus lawsuit, but hey, environmentalists know it all.
[signature]
Posts: 2,778
Threads: 0
Joined: Aug 2003
Reputation:
0
I wonder if that means all waters with bonn. cutts or just where native strains are found? It would make sense to leave waters where they are artificially planted open to fishing. It will be interesting to see how this plays out. Thanks for sharing HFT[  ].
[signature]
Posts: 1,428
Threads: 19
Joined: Sep 2003
Reputation:
15
You are right about fishing in the virgin river...it is allowed. However, the DWR is not allowed to stock other more interesting game species within the virgin river. In fact, the stocking of catfish in Gunlock has been discontinued because of their possible impact to virgin river species...brown trout can also not be stocked within the virgin river. If you translate this over to the cutthroat situation, there are numerous potential bad-case scenarios that could arise for fishermen. If the cutts are listed, fishing may be allowed, but other species of trout and/or bass, perch, and walleye may be eliminated from entire drainages. The listing of cutts is a very scary possibility...
[signature]
Posts: 2,514
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2004
Reputation:
1
Based on regulations in place for currently endangered trout (ie greenback cutts in Colorado) there probably wouldn't be any "bans" on fishing in most waters. Where changes would occur would be in regulations and management (especially planting). For instance, Strawberry might be changed to C&R only for cutts, with no rainbows allowed to be planted and Bear lake might be C&R on cutts and liberal limits on Lake trout (with no planting) to minimize or eliminate them. It would be out of the DWR's control and decisions would be made by a bureaucrat in Washington. It could even be the chaos of when we have a conservative president, one set of rules and a liberal administration, another set.
All of the nauseating scenarios aside, it appears that the great work the DWR has done to re-establish the bonnies will probably keep these lawsuits from being successful. We should continue to support these restoration efforts vigorously in the future.
[signature]
Posts: 5,856
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2003
Reputation:
0
Does anyone know if the Bear Lake cutt is a bonneville cutt, or is it a subspecies that is unique to BL (planted elsewhere) with no close relation to the bonneville cutt?
[signature]
Posts: 3,088
Threads: 22
Joined: Jul 2003
Reputation:
13
Bear Lake Cutt is a strain of Bonneville Cutt.
[signature]
Posts: 528
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2003
Reputation:
0
I was of the understanding that the bear lake cutt/bonn cutt question is crucial to the lawsuit. If the enviros can show that the BL cutt is indeed a seperate sub-species, then their case has a better chance. If the BL cutt is shown to be the same as a Bonn, then protection is less likely.
[signature]
Posts: 2,320
Threads: 0
Joined: Oct 2002
Reputation:
0
From the view points that I have heard from the Cutts may actually get less help than if they were left under the DWR as they are now.
[signature]
Posts: 2,514
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2004
Reputation:
1
I hadn't heard they were trying to do that and you are right, they would have an enhanced chance of success if they could pull it off. I would like to read their position paper. All papers/opinions (scientific and public oriented) I have read on the subject list the Bear lake cutts as Bonnevilles, so I don't know if scientific opinion would suport their arguments very much.
Here is a link to a DWR info page about bonnies.
[url "http://dwrcdc.nr.utah.gov/rsgis2/Search/Display.asp?FlNm=oncoclut"]http://dwrcdc.nr.utah.gov/rsgis2/Search/Display.asp?FlNm=oncoclut[/url]
[signature]
Posts: 224
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2005
Reputation:
0
Ok I may not have a clue what I am talking about guys so be gentle with my post....... [crazy]
I was thinking about this earlier today when driving around at work. The DWR does do a great job but sometimes they seem way obsessed with Rainbow Trout. I can't imagine it would be much harder to raise cutts in the hatcheries instead of the rainbows. If the DWR was cranking out tens of thousands of bonneville cutts instead of rainbows would endangerment be an issue?
Don't get me wrong I like rainbows but I would think raising cutts couldn't be too much different, and they are a native game fish.
[signature]
Posts: 27
Threads: 0
Joined: Dec 2004
Reputation:
0
svpdga,
I am no expet either, but fom eveything I have eve heard, Rainbows are cheaper to raise, and easier to catch than any other cold water species, which is why they are used so extensively in American hatcheries. It would be interesting to see a comparison between the rearing of Bonnevilles and Bows. Does anyone have any info? PBH?
Also, whoever said the Virgin River isn't stocked is false. The upper reaches of the north fork contain Browns, and possibly bows, and the East Fork is full of little Browns that are stocked every once in a while. Just check the stocking reports.
[signature]
Posts: 2,514
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2004
Reputation:
1
Maybe I should have watched a sit-com tonight, but I researched the possible scientific basis for "excluding" the bear lake strains from the other bonneville cutts. There are some researchers that found some evidence that there are several distinct subtypes, 1. Bear lake/river, 2. Main basin; Weber river south to the Sevier drainage, 3. West Desert; Snake range and Deep Creek range, and 4. Southern basin; Sevier drainage south.
A ruling declaring the subtypes distinct could make one of these smaller groups "eligible" for endangered status. It also would take parts of the Bonnies range "out" of play for stricter control too so it wouldn't be a total "win" for the environmentalists. For instance, if the Bear Lake subtype were declared distinct, much of northern Utah and Strawberry would be "free" of the stricter regulations since this subtype is relatively abundant. If you want to read more on this, (biology majors, those with time to kill, insomniacs) you can read more about this on this link. It does have some good info.
www.wildlife.utah.gov/pdf/cacs7.pdf
Yep, I should have watched TV tonight.
[signature]
Posts: 1,428
Threads: 19
Joined: Sep 2003
Reputation:
15
Highcountry, you are correct in saying the East Fork is occasionally stocked with browns and the upper sections of the north fork has trout, but these sections of river do NOT have populations of endangered fish, and trout stocked specifically in the East Fork will not make it to the Virgin River near St. George and the virgin river chubs. Trout are not stocked in the river in any real proximity to the endangered fish.
Cutts are more difficult to raise in hatcheries than are rainbows...the difference is not significant, though. The major reason why rainbows are stocked so extensively is the fact that they are cheaper and easier to raise and also because they provide such a good return in the creel.
[signature]
Posts: 2,320
Threads: 0
Joined: Oct 2002
Reputation:
0
As I sat in the Blue ribbon meeting I was thinking the same things as you guys were mentioning: The hatcheries could solve this problem in a rather quick fashion. But maybe it takes a little litagation to get the ball rolling. I also came away feeling the DWR is doing every thing they can to help the fisherman. Here is a big Thumbs up to Utah DWR, And Wyoming DWR they are also joining in the battle. Idaho DWR is sticking there head in the sand.
[signature]
Posts: 3,088
Threads: 22
Joined: Jul 2003
Reputation:
13
[reply]
Does anyone have any info? PBH?[/reply]
I have lots, and lots of information.....but for starters, you can read this recent thread from UOTF:
http://www.utahonthefly.com/forums/showt...hp?t=10264
these groups are NOT interested in "saving" a species. They are interested in litigation. If they truly wanted to help "save" a species, they would discontinue the thousands of lawsuits they put out, and they would actually go out in the field and help "save" the species. Litigation, litigation, litigation. That's what they want -- not saved species.
[signature]
Posts: 224
Threads: 0
Joined: Jan 2005
Reputation:
0
[#385000]Besides the litigation don't forget the other motivation behind these kinds of lawsuits. There are groups out there like PETA *rolls eyes* who aren't so much concerned about the Bonneville Cutts as they are about finding ways to keep people from fishing. PETA and other groups would love to see as many fisheries as possible closed. They are worried we are hurting these poor fish! Don't hurt the cute fluffy fish!!! Fish have feelings too!!! Blah blah blah. [ ][/#385000]
[signature]
|
