Your credentials and responses as usual are exceptional.
I would like to see a bait rich environment (chubs) taken advantage of by planting some Walleye and Wipers to prosper from a bad situation. Nothing like a reservoir with too much bait to try something different than Rotenone. Money spent on planting the solution (Wipers-Walleye) simply seems like worth trying as opposed to more money being spent repeating what has been done many times at Scofield.
We’re 12 years into this failed experiment. They put Tiger Trout in Scofield in 2005 to try to control the chubs. It isn’t working. They added Bear Lake Cutthroat a couple of years later. The Tigers got big by eating the fingerling Rainbow Trout that the UDWR were planting. They quit planting fingerlings and the big Tigers disappeared. Now they’re going to experiment with sterile Walleyes. Walleyes were the reason that Scofield was poisoned the last time. And PBH and I agree that Wipers are probably not going to be an effective tool at 7,600’ elevation. The growing season isn’t long enough for small Wipers to get big enough to survive for 8 months of cold water and lowered metabolism. And if they do happen to get big enough to survive, they’ll do next to nothing from mid October until nearly the end of May each year. Look at the Wipers in Willard Bay. They don’t really turn on until the water warms up in the spring.
We KNOW what works. Rotenone and slot limits. Until they poison Scofield, what you see is what you’re gonna get. The OP noted that on a beautiful spring day that there wasn’t a boat in sight. There hasn’t been a decent report for Scofield for 3 years. And there won’t be for many more years if they don’t put rotenone in there and get a handle on the situation. I’m getting too old to expect the situation to get noticeably better before I’m too old to enjoy it. It’s starting to look like my children might not see Scofield as a decent fishery in their lifetimes. Anyone who has seen a fishery after a rotenone treatment knows that it can be rehabilitated in a matter of a few months, versus the 12 years we’ve wasted, and the many more years that it will take to finally decide to poison it.
I’ve heard some folks say that we don’t need another Rainbow Trout fishery. How 'bout we just have the one that we’ve always had. People can’t wait to hear about when the big 'bows start biting at Otter Creek Reservoir. They go out of their way to fish there. People go out of their way to avoid Scofield right now.
⫸<{{{{{⦇°>
Unless these sterile walleye, wipers etc are at least 13-17 " long when they are stocking them I can’t see what good they will do or how they will find any food with the chubs getting it all. I think the poisoning method was just too expensive and they are taking the cheap route. Poison it first and then stock the predators.
Im on the fence like many others yes rotenone will work but with the same management tactics it will work for 5 to 6 years. with a post poisoning predator base maybe it works indefinitely.
Walleye and certainly wipers may struggle with the short season but hopefully the muskie make the difference on the large chubs.
The part I dont understand is why were pike excluded? They can mow the big chubs stay active under the ice, and are known to thrive at high elevation. Is it that they can’t be made sterile?
I thought they were cheaper and easier to produce than the hybrid muskie.
All i can think of is the sterility angle.
Tiger Musky don’t seem to be able to put the hurt on Yellow Perch or Crappie in places like Pineview. What makes anyone think they would put the hurt on Utah Chubs at Scofield? And I have yet to see anything that makes me think they’ve got plans to put muskies in Scofield. Lots of folks around these parts seem to advocate them, but they haven’t shown any ability to reduce, or even control the number of forage wherever they’ve been planted. They seem to be an oddity, wherever they plant them.
And the last treatment at Scofield worked for nearly 20 years. We’re looking at 13 years that the current concept of predators controlling chub numbers failing.
⫸<{{{{{⦇°>
Scofield was treated in 1991 for the 4th-5th time, in 2000 the chubs were back, Tigers and other predatory fish were planted in 2005 in an attempt to curb the tide of the exploding chub population. This may have been the expected result from Rotenone treatment and the outcome was no different than any other treatment where the focus was to reintroduce Trout..
Scofield is relatively small and would be an exceptional place to try a different tactic to deal with excess bait. Chubs were eradicated at Starvation from Walleye, the Wipers and Tiger musky would certainly assist. Additional spawning species could be considered when the chubs are diminished.
Scofield was treated in 1991 for the 4th-5th time, in 2000 the chubs were back, Tigers and other predatory fish were planted in 2005 in an attempt to curb the tide of the exploding chub population.
Exactly. Tigers and other predatory fish were implemented too late.
This may have been the expected result from Rotenone treatment and the outcome was no different than any other treatment where the focus was to reintroduce Trout..
Panguitch Lake was treated in the spring of 2006. It was immediately re-stocked with cutthroat and tiger trout, followed by restrictive regulations. It has been 11 years since that treatment – AND NO CHUBS HAVE BEEN FOUND SINCE!
Past rotenone treatments at places like Scofield (1991) did not have the propper management plan in place for post-treatment success. Since that time (1991), managers have figured out that re-stocking with predatory fish immediately after the treatment is the only way to stay ahead of potential chub population comeback.
Scofield is relatively small and would be an exceptional place to try a different tactic to deal with excess bait. Chubs were eradicated at Starvation from Walleye, the Wipers and Tiger musky would certainly assist. Additional spawning species could be considered when the chubs are diminished.
I just don’t understand why you want to wait and see. Sure, walleye might knock the chubs back – but how long will it take? 5 years (or more)? If that is the case, then (again) why wait?
Scofield could be poisoned in a spring, restocked a couple weeks later, and anglers could be back on the water fishing for catchable rainbows that fall. Walleye anglers could be catching walleye the following spring (1 year from treatment). Nice walleye would be showing up in 2 years. That’s 3 years faster than the best possible guess with current “wait and see” plan.
You guys are crazy.
The Walleye in Starvation were able to spawn and reproduce. They also provided forage for their own species. There’s no indication that the Wipers will even survive at 7,600’ elevation. It is unlikely that the UDWR will put Tiger Musky in Scofield without any way to prevent them from escaping downstream. The UDWR puts them in Joe’s Valley under very strict guidelines. There are structures in place to prevent them from escaping. Those measures can’t be, and won’t be put in at Scofield. If the Tiger Muskie escape Joe’s Valley the DWR will be forced to stop planting them, and the limit will be removed for Tiger Musky in Joe’s Valley. And it took almost 30 years of totally unrestrained reproduction of Walleyes to eliminate the chubs in Starvation. We’ve wasted 17 years since the chubs were discovered in Scofield. We’ve wasted 12 years with the current plan. Wipers will be a waste.
Panguitch and Strawberry are much better examples of what can happen after a treatment AND slot limits and predators.
Do any of you who advocate staying with the current plan of using predators to control the chubs ever fish Scofield? I doubt it. Right now, no one is fishing there.
Very sad situation. I drove by Scofield on Friday - Not a boat in sight.
Totally mismanaged fishery.
TOTALLY MISMANAGED FISHERY
And the current management plan is to use predators to do in 20 or so years what could be accomplished in 2.
I just don’t understand why you want to wait and see. Sure, walleye might knock the chubs back – but how long will it take? 5 years (or more)? If that is the case, then (again) why wait?
So Mr. Hart can have a feather in his cap for not using rotenone. Nothing else can explain it. There is no other reason to go against what has been proven effective at Strawberry and Panguitch.
⫸<{{{{{⦇°>
I just don’t understand why you want to wait and see. Sure, walleye might knock the chubs back – but how long will it take? 5 years (or more)? If that is the case, then (again) why wait?
So Mr. Hart can have a feather in his cap for not using rotenone. Nothing else can explain it. There is no other reason to go against what has been proven effective at Strawberry and Panguitch.
Considering that the DWR will now plant largemouth bass in Minersville just because some Beaver County politician demanded it, is it possible that the main reason that they won’t rotenone Scofield now is because some Carbon county commissioner or other politician has decreed that he is against it?
I can see your point.
I guess maybe it’s possible that in each scenario maybe the DWR is trying to make a point that allowing the public to participate in the management of our fisheries isn’t always the best route to take.
Let’s just hope we learn our lesson.
One thing is for sure, when I think I am getting worked up about a topic, I will remember this thread and perhaps let myself loose to “express my educated opinion” a bit more freely. LOL
This one is a hot topic, mostly for the varied and heated opinions.
I concur, and yes, I have one of those Biology degrees, and experience working with several state and federal fisheries managers, plus a couple of engineering degrees, Scofield has been mismanaged.
Wipers in Scofield are a joke. White bass and striped bass, the parent strains, need a specific water temperature profile and a lake at that latitude and elevation will never meet the needs. Put them in Willard, but … must be politics.
Sterile Walleye could do the job and if overplanted will do it in much less time then 10+ years. Sterile Walleye grow much faster than fertile walleye and they consume a lot of fat lazy fish like chubs. It took Starvation so long because the fish had to populate up from a very limited number to a critical population and then the growth of the population to where they started to impact the population of chubs. I am sure the Small Mouth Bass in Starvation helped a lot, they love those fat lazy fish as well. Sterile Walleye have a limited life span so after two or three years of stocking the fish could be allowed to die off (taking several years) leaving the lake more trout friendly.
Tiger Muskie, also a sterile fish, could also help do the job, if over stalked. Again, they grow fast, love chubs, and grow much faster than pike and Muskies up to 48", but Scofield is not the kind of habitat that I see as a great lake for them. Still, as a secondary sterile predator that will die off once stalking is ceased, they will help.
Adding tiger trout, also sterile, placing slot limits on Cutts, etc., would take care of most of the small chubs coming on.
Assuming, and I should say that in capital letters, so ASSUMING, they follow the above plan, in three years you would see excellent walleye fishing, limited tiger Muskie fishing, improving trout fishing. In 5 years, you would see good walleye fishing (assumes fisherman are taking limits and thinning them down), good Tiger Muskie fishing, good trout fishing. I would then start to introduce rainbows into the mix.
In 8 years, assuming they stopped stocking Walleye after two or three years, you would see fair walleye, but big walleye. You would see good Tiger Muskie fishing for increased sized fish. You would see good-to-excellent trout fishing. From that point on, adding a few sterile walleye and Tiger Muskie and Tiger Trout, mixed to taste, along with Cutts and Bows would leave Scofield as a destination fishery again, and for a long time.
The question is, can you accomplish the same with Rotenone? Yes, you can!
Would it be faster? Yes, at least for the trout. You would lose out on years of Walleye, Tiger Muskie, and perhaps Tiger Trout fishing, but if trout is all you want, then you could have a Strawberry Like fishery for smaller (relative) fish in 2/3 years, for good fish in 3/5 years, and in 8 years you would start to get some slot buster Cutts.
From a financial perspective, Rotenone and its application is expensive. Fish stocking is much less so. From a diversity of fisheries point of view, I can see the stocking of predators now and allowing them to do the job. But, if our goal is to fix it fast, fix it now, then Rotenone is the best option.
I started a maelstrom in a previous thread when I pointed out that there is a rising, and unfounded, movement against Rotenone. All it takes is one group to file a law suit against the State and it will take so long to get approval ‘you will wish you had gone with the predator option’. Still, this is Utah, and perhaps, maybe, if we are lucky, it will be a few more years before the unscientific, acting as though they are supported by science, will control the courts like they do in so many regions of this country.
One thing I want to point out is that I am not taking sides on this, just trying to point out that there is some validity to both sides. If managed properly from this point on, either extreme I have pointed out above will work.
I do understand on thing for sure. Scofield has gone far too long at the status quo. It is inexcusable that such a valuable resource has been allowed to be a black mark on the fisheries management record of the State.
I just hope that the animosity shown in the above post in this thread do no so divide our support for the fisheries management that nothing happens. I believe I have pointed out that the time frames for success are not that far off on either option, just that the diversity of fish changes during the life of the program.
Good fishing, and may we get something productive done at Scofield.
[fishin]
The state of Scofield is a joke, and has been for the last decade. I have complete the surveys the DWR has put out, and even talked to them up at the lake. Year after year, planting fish stick sized cutts were going nowhere. it was a great place to fish. even after he last poisoning. you cant expect people to give it time. another 5-10 years to see if this will work? lets not waste more time and money. nobody wants to fish there as it is now. and now expect people to hang out wait for this to work. just poison the place and let the change start now. and then manage it properly. good thing we have other good fisheries to goto.
I don’t buy the argument that poisoning is too expensive or too hard to get. It is interesting to note that chemical treatment is a viable plan for a host of other reservoirs: Panguitch lake, Piute Reservior, Red Fleet, and Pelican Lake to name a few. It just makes me wonder what the real reason is for not treating Scofield.
One thing is for sure, we may never know the motives or reasons behind the decisions made.
Worse yet, if the reasons are as stated, no one will believe it. If the reasons are NOT AS STATED, no one would believe it when they are reveled.
The truth is that if we don’t “forgive, but NOT forget”, and support the managers at this time, then nothing will ever get done.
Now, I am a recent return citizen to Utah, call me a Salmon that has been out to sea for several decades, so having seen even worse management in other states I suppose it is easier for me to give them some credit.
As for surveys, how arrogant to believe that just because someone filled out survey that their opinion supersedes all the other surveys and supersedes current science and political conditions.
Come on guys, and gals, we had better start to support them or they will become a enemy. Once they become the enemy, your chances of making a positive impact will disappear.
One other idea. For those that are so motivated to post their ideas on this site, offer to be on one of the committees. If the same passion is transferred to making positive changes, then Utah can only benefit.
Come on guys, and gals, we had better start to support them or they will become a enemy. Once they become the enemy, your chances of making a positive impact will disappear.
If they’re willing to let Scofield rot for the 12 to 17 years that they already have, only to allow it to rot for another 15 to 20, they are the enemy.
They’ve asked for input at other venues as well. They recommended rotenone themselves. They’re allowing the State Park to suffer from no one using the boat ramps, or camping. They seem to be able to get rotenone for Yuba and Red Fleet and Pelican Lake. They’ve secured permits and submitted EIS documents to get those projects completed. If there is a politician who is obstructing the process they should be up front about it, and allow the voters a chance to address the issue at the voting booth. Sorry. They’ve run out of excuses.
⫸<{{{{{⦇°>
Anglinarcher nice informative post. Thank you.