02-22-2013, 03:41 PM
I have read this entire thread and there are so many misconceptions and falsehoods that I don't even know where to start...
1) The number of slot busters at Strawberry is as high as they have ever been. This is from a fairly recent email to a DWR biologist: ""There was an immediate positive response to the overall adult population due to the regulations imposed in 2003, and it appears that the population will remain at high levels through the next few years. More importantly, the age structure of the adult population has changed with more of the five- and six-year-old fish than we have ever seen in the past. As is shown in some of the following data, these larger (more predatory) cutthroat are very important in limiting chub population growth in Strawberry. Currently, about 20 percent of the cutthroat in the gillnet catches are over 20 inches, and just over five percent are over 22 inches. We have never had that many large fish in the history of this fishery."
2) The number of big/trophy trout will always be higher with fewer chubs. A rotenone treatment would allow this for two reasons: a) because fish growth of small fish would be much higher allowing more trout through the bottleneck allowing them to convert to an all-chub diet and b) because the complete eradication of chubs will not happen.
3) Trophy fish are almost always the result of fast growth and not age. The idea that those monster tiger trout are at least 8 years old is not necessarily true. Once a trout gets through that bottleneck and coverts to eating and preying on chubs, growth is really fast. So, a tiger trout may grow very slowly through its first 3-4 years and then in year 5 grow rapidly to monster sizes. It would take a tiger trout probably two summers to get to 20 inches in Scofield without high chub numbers.
The big thing a poisoning would do is it would then allow a lot of 20 inch tigers to then convert to a chub diet. The possibilities at that point are staggering...one of my favorite lakes saw splake exceed the ten pound mark in only a few years following a poisoning. Why would things be different at Schofield?
Consider this: The state record cutt was caught in the reservoir only 7 years after trout were first stocked. And, that 27 pound monster was caught before anglers introduced nongame fish...
4)....old age chubs in Strawberry are a good thing when it comes to fish-eating trout. That is the great thing about what is happening at Strawberry right now--with all the chub eaters in that reservoir enough chubs still survey to produce millions of offspring each year...those fish are then preyed upon by large fish. The same thing would happen in Schofield...the big difference would be the number of fish that could convert to that kind of diet.
5) The DWR has tried removing chubs from many reservoirs because it maximizes a lake's trout potential. Average fish sizes are always bigger when chubs are absent and fish growth is always higher. This not only makes for better fishing it also makes for more people fishing...
....consider lakes like Panguitch, Otter Creek, Piute, Minersville, Strawberry, and even Schofield as proof.
[signature]
1) The number of slot busters at Strawberry is as high as they have ever been. This is from a fairly recent email to a DWR biologist: ""There was an immediate positive response to the overall adult population due to the regulations imposed in 2003, and it appears that the population will remain at high levels through the next few years. More importantly, the age structure of the adult population has changed with more of the five- and six-year-old fish than we have ever seen in the past. As is shown in some of the following data, these larger (more predatory) cutthroat are very important in limiting chub population growth in Strawberry. Currently, about 20 percent of the cutthroat in the gillnet catches are over 20 inches, and just over five percent are over 22 inches. We have never had that many large fish in the history of this fishery."
2) The number of big/trophy trout will always be higher with fewer chubs. A rotenone treatment would allow this for two reasons: a) because fish growth of small fish would be much higher allowing more trout through the bottleneck allowing them to convert to an all-chub diet and b) because the complete eradication of chubs will not happen.
3) Trophy fish are almost always the result of fast growth and not age. The idea that those monster tiger trout are at least 8 years old is not necessarily true. Once a trout gets through that bottleneck and coverts to eating and preying on chubs, growth is really fast. So, a tiger trout may grow very slowly through its first 3-4 years and then in year 5 grow rapidly to monster sizes. It would take a tiger trout probably two summers to get to 20 inches in Scofield without high chub numbers.
The big thing a poisoning would do is it would then allow a lot of 20 inch tigers to then convert to a chub diet. The possibilities at that point are staggering...one of my favorite lakes saw splake exceed the ten pound mark in only a few years following a poisoning. Why would things be different at Schofield?
Consider this: The state record cutt was caught in the reservoir only 7 years after trout were first stocked. And, that 27 pound monster was caught before anglers introduced nongame fish...
4)....old age chubs in Strawberry are a good thing when it comes to fish-eating trout. That is the great thing about what is happening at Strawberry right now--with all the chub eaters in that reservoir enough chubs still survey to produce millions of offspring each year...those fish are then preyed upon by large fish. The same thing would happen in Schofield...the big difference would be the number of fish that could convert to that kind of diet.
5) The DWR has tried removing chubs from many reservoirs because it maximizes a lake's trout potential. Average fish sizes are always bigger when chubs are absent and fish growth is always higher. This not only makes for better fishing it also makes for more people fishing...
....consider lakes like Panguitch, Otter Creek, Piute, Minersville, Strawberry, and even Schofield as proof.
[signature]