Utah Lake Question about June Sucker

Utah Fishing Reports & Discussion Utah Fishing General
1

Hi all, I’m writing a paper about the June Sucker Recovery Act in Utah Lake for my college writing 2010 class. I’m wrapping up that paper and am almost finished. Anyway I was specifically looking for TubeDude but i’m a forum noob and don’t know how to search for some1s profile on here. So if anyone could link me his profile that’d be great appreciated. If not, It’d be awesome if someone could answer these couple of questions( it sounds like a survey lol).

1)So there’s a theory about how Carp destroy vegetation(eliminating food and shelter)

A) Given this, Why are Wall Eye, White Bass, Utah Suckers, and Catfish able to reproduce and increase in numbers despite so many Carp being around to much up their eggs or fish when they’re hatched?

B)Why can’t the June Suckers?

Random Thoughts: I think some will say there’s so few but of June Suckers that there isn’t enough eggs but there’s several things that don’t make sense. A) even less eggs means a less probability for Carp or whatever to find/eat these eggs or fish, and more likely to find other species. B) If there anything like Utah Suckers, they have a $hit load of eggs inside them. C) We’ve actually released overal 8,500 June Suckers into Utah Lake in addition the the 100 or so native ones(that’s not tons but it’s a decent amount) and despite this we haven’t ever caught one smaller than the planting size(source= University of Utah scholarly peer reviewed database).

  1. Let’s say the carp removal actually went well and numbers were greatly reduced.

A)Would June Suckers be able to compete with the Catfish, Wall Eye, White Bass, and other species?

B) Or would they fall to predation of these species just like it’s theorized they do to Carp?

  1. If they weren’t able to coexist with these species(Wall eye, white bass, cat fish, Utah Suckers, etc).

A) would you be willing to have these fish removed from Utah Lake so they would be pretty much the only species of fish in the lake (so you could never fish UT lake for catfish, bass,walleye, etc. anymore)?

B)or would you Prefer to have June Suckers taken out of Utah Lake, put in an entirely separate Lake with no other species of fish so you could still fish for what you do currently?

C) Also do you think this separate lake with only June suckers would be a good recovery plan where they could breed, regrow in numbers and eventually we could restock them into Utah Lake?

2

**:sunglasses:I’m a “sucker” for a polite request for info.

I am attaching a few PDF files on writeups I have picked off various websites. Hope they help. You might also go to the main website for the JUNE SUCKER RECOVERY PROGRAM. And you can also contact Jackie Watson, the main biologist for the program at ****801-491-5658

Let’s address some questions:

  1. Carp are herbivorous (plant eaters). They eat all manner of vegetation…and root out and destroy weed beds just to get at all the goodies. This vegetation is vital to the lake for oxygenation, shelter for fish fry, homes for aquatic insects and other invertebrates and a host of other benefits.

A) Timing and numbers. Carp definitely raid nests (of nest-building species) and eat the young of all species…including their own. No class. But when other species are all spawning in great numbers around the entire lake it is a numerical impossibility for the carp to destroy them all…thankfully. And enough survive to become large enough to eat baby carp in time. What goes around, comes around…or whatever.

B) Same answer. Numbers. There are only a few hundred June suckers left. Most are captured and spawned artificially…so that they have at least a fighting chance…with less predation by carp or other nest raiders. Their spawning area has historically been only in the lower Provo River. But it is being expanded to Hobble Creek…and a select few small lakes on an experimental basis.

Random: DWR aids in the spawning and rearing of the Junies…to help their cause. But once the fingerling suckerettes are released into the lower Provo…or out in the main lake…most of them go into the walleye feeding program. For several days or weeks after the annual release of the young suckers almost all walleyes caught in the vacinity contain multiple junior Junies. They are tender and tasty…and predators love them. White bass, cats, largemouths and even larger crappie also munch them. But some of them are making it. More and more are turning up at the spawning beds and in the carp nets.

  1. Good luck with the reduction. Like draining the Great Lakes with a teaspoon.

A) Compete is not an operative word. Try “survive”. The answer is maybe…maybe not. The lake is full of hungry and efficient predators that prefer soft-rayed succulent morsels like small June suckers. And Utah Lake does not have any remaining natural population of chubs or other similar minnow fodder…for good reason. They all been et.

B. Carp do not eat the suckers as much as they destroy habitat and food producing areas needed by the suckers for recruitment and feeding.

  1. A) Shirley…you jest. You leave my predators alone. Let the Junies survive as best they can without killing off my good fishin’ species.

B. It will never be an all or nothing thing. And the June Sucker Recovery Program is not just about suckers. It is about restoring the entire lake to some semblance of cleanliness and esthetic enjoys. The best thing that can happen is that the Junies make a big comeback. At the very least we should end up with a much better lake ecology.

C. Some of the annual take of Junie eggs are reared and then released into other potentially viable waters. There are at least a couple of such waters in which they are being tested to see if they will survive and spawn outside of Utah Lake. It would be NFN (nice for nice) if remote breeding programs proved successful. But I suspect that it will only enhance the walleye feeding program.

Am I being negative? On some issues and aspects of the program…YES. I hate to see any species disappear from our planet. Far too many have gone that way already. But I am also over-realistic. I can’t understand dumping bazillions of dollars into a program to save a %$#@&% (non-essential) fish when we have far greater problems with our people and our economy. And as an angler, I’m afraid my sentiments are with the species that provide good sport and good eating. The suckers helped save the early pioneers but that was in the days before Starbucks, Maveriks and McDonalds. Oh yeah, Papa Murphy Pizza too. Would I miss the Junies? Call me maybe.
**

3

Writing 2010 huh? Cool. I’ve taught that class at the U before. I know you have faith in the venerable TD, and for sure he has a vast store of empirical knowledge, but what you want to do is to make sure that most of your research information comes from academic sources. Thus, websites like this and ordinary anglers can give you background about your topic but when you present any of that information in your actual paper it has to be cited from a peer reviewed, scholarly journal or book published by an academic researcher. I think the links that TD gives you are a good starting point. What you want to do is take a close look at the bibliography of those articles and that will give you additional sources to read. Be sure to take a stance! Argue for a certain position and use evidence to back it up. That will immediately separate the A papers from the run of the mill spewing a bunch of information type papers. You can tell the grade of the paper after the first paragraph usually.

But yes, most of us anglers do not want the endemic june sucker to take precedence over our precious white bass, walleyes, crappies, bluegills, and largemouths. Try to save it if they must but not at the cost of destroying the best lake in Utah lol. No I wouldn’t cry if the suckers disappeared but i sure would if the white bass did. haha

4

“the venerable TD, and for sure he has a vast store of empirical knowledge”

More like half vast.

5

Writing 2010 huh? Cool. I’ve taught that class at the U before. I know you have faith in the venerable TD, and for sure he has a vast store of empirical knowledge, but what you want to do is to make sure that most of your research information comes from academic sources. Thus, websites like this and ordinary anglers can give you background about your topic but when you present any of that information in your actual paper it has to be cited from a peer reviewed, scholarly journal or book published by an academic researcher. I think the links that TD gives you are a good starting point. What you want to do is take a close look at the bibliography of those articles and that will give you additional sources to read. Be sure to take a stance! Argue for a certain position and use evidence to back it up. That will immediately separate the A papers from the run of the mill spewing a bunch of information type papers. You can tell the grade of the paper after the first paragraph usually.

But yes, most of us anglers do not want the endemic june sucker to take precedence over our precious white bass, walleyes, crappies, bluegills, and largemouths. Try to save it if they must but not at the cost of destroying the best lake in Utah lol. No I wouldn’t cry if the suckers disappeared but i sure would if the white bass did. haha

Yeah believe it not in High School my absolute least favorite class was english. I thought I was going to dread it in college but thank god it’s writing 2010 and doesn’t include the stuff like Shakespeare that I despised in high school. So it’s actually been my favorite class so far. For our Argument 1 paper I argued that smoking cigarettes should be make illegal and for Argument 2 it had to be more Utah Related so I chose this topic to argue about(I’m against the plan personally). Also, yes my sources are peer reviewed/scholarly but honestly from all my reading/research I thought of all of these points and am using them to strengthen my argument.

Basically I wasn’t able to find this exact information in all of the scholarly sources and because of that these questions arised. Information on the June Sucker itself isn’t hard to come across in the U’s database isn’t hard to come by BUT I’m arguing about the June Sucker Recovery Act and not giving a research report on every detail about the June Sucker, so I have to include only relevant information. If you or anyone else here would like to proof read///offer feed back on my paper it’s be greatly appreciated. If anyone is interested about offering feedback, please PM me your email address, thanks.

6

Thanks TubeDude, those really helped a lot. See, like explained before I’m almost done with the paper from all sorts of information i’ve gathered from various sources and now I’m just doing fine details. See, i’m purposely against the plan for too many reasons to explain without literally referencing you to my paper lol. Anyway, these questions came to mind from all the stuff I’ve learned/read. Especially the question about whether une Suckers can coexist successfully without carp but all other species of fish present is a legit point. Because it really brings out the conflict of A) are we going to get rid of all Utah Lake Species other than the June Sucker and obviously ruin the past good fishing for these species? B)Do our best with the June Sucker but don’t let it interfere/ruin fishing of other species(like you said). or C) Give up on the plan entirely and/or create a separate lake only for June Suckers.

7

One thing to keep in mind with peer reviewed articles is that there is usually a lag phase between “when things happen” and when they get published. Many of the things happening in the recovery program have been recent and probably don’t have any scholarly papers written yet. For instance, I heard that there has been some successful June sucker spawning in Hobble Creek the past 2 years. It may be a while before you can cite that in published form. It was previously suggested to you that you contact the DWR’s Jackie Watson. She would know the latest data and know the most recent “citeable”
papers.

One more thing on your #3. At the outset of the program, a biologist got up in the UL fish forum meeting and talked about what is called a food web analysis. His findings indicated that there were three main “food webs” in the lake. One was fairly complex and had the bullheads, panfish, perch, bass, with walleyes as the apex. The speaker felt that the June sucker was not part of that web and all of those species (yes, including the walleye) were **not **a significant threat to June suckers. Another web was the white bass web that basically is WB themselves, along with some lower invertebrates. As TD has repeatedly noted here, white bass depend significantly on cannibalism to sustain themselves. The speaker felt that June suckers did have some threat from WB, but that eradication of WB is extremely unlikely to be successful. Catfish and to some extent carp, have a separate web. Carp are threats to both of the first 2 food webs and contribute little. Anyway, the bottom line of that is that it is unlikely that they will need to try and “kill off” other game species in the June sucker recovery effort, despite the fears of some anglers that it will be “next”.

Good luck on your paper, even though I disagree with your position.

8

So, regarding the Junie! We are spending millions of dollars to “recover” a fish that is really a Hybrid. There are no true June Suckers left. We are preserving their “genetic material”. This is how deranged that the ecofreaks have become. As I have stated in other posts, I appreciate what is being done for my favorite pond close to home ( Lake Powell is my favorite period), but Utah Lake is the best close to home. But is it worth the cost ??? As we get closer and closer to the ‘completion’ of hte project and the numbers of fish do not show up to warrent “success” the demands of the ecofreaks will increase to the point that they will want things that are going to be outrageous. The Provo River Delta portion of the project is an example of demands that will have negative impacts on people, loss of hte lower river, loss of water rights, loss of property, etc. So, again, I am just not sure that all this is worth the cost. We allow the ecofreaks to set policy that injures and retards growth, ie: Oil and gas production, water rights, electricity production etc, etc. Things cost more and are less available due to all the restrictions put on us by the ecofreaks.

Some of the biggest boondoggles are yet to come, more flushes at Glen Canyon, recovering the Colorado Pike Minnow, Virgin River Darter, etc, etc. We put our economy and country at risk due to these things.

NOT SMART !!!

9

therapist – as an angler, what negative affects come from June sucker recovery?

anglers should be all for it. Every cent of money poured into that program benefits the sport fishery in Utah Lake.

10

They’re not a hybrid. They can be hybridized with Utah Suckers. They’re a sub species of Utah Suckers.

11

Those horrible “eco-freaks”. They’ll ruin all of our fun, won’t they? I swear that your dislike of the greenies borders on the paranoia range, but for arguments sake, how **do **we keep them at bay? The DWR and the June sucker program itself provides the answer. We do it by being proactive in our programs. When the Center for Biologic Diversity tried to get the Bonneville cutt listed as threatened a couple years ago, they lost miserably in court. Why?? Because the DWR had been working on recovering the Bonnevilles through much of their native range **prior **to the court action. They already had the Bonnies “saved” and re-established with multiple reservoir populations, so the CBD’s arguments were rendered ridiculous and the court action quickly tossed out.

A similar argument could be made about the Junies in Utah lake. The DWR and the agencies are having slow but palpable success and there is an increasing population, mainly due to the stocking efforts and habitat improvement, and if the CBD or some other troublemaking organization tries to butt in with stupid court action, they will likely fail. Not to mention as PBH and myself have said for years, **every **action the JSRIP program has done and has plans to do in the future improves the sport fishing and cleans up the lake. Win-win!

However, what would happen if the DWR and the UL water users in charge of the JSRIP decided to listen to most of you fellers on BFT and bag the program? Well, first off, you can bet that those nasty “eco-freaks” will be busting their tails to the courthouse to sue. They may even win and what could that mean? Almost certainly, it would mean loss of **local **control. It also might mean more Federal sanctions and maybe a small part of what you folks are afraid of such as the loss of sport fishing opportunities could be seen. It would not likely be helpful to either me as a UL angler or as a Utah county resident to see such scenarios play out. But the odds of such things happening are about nil if the JSRIP program continues plugging along, so I say keep up the good work!

12

Not a fan of the Provo Delta project! I like the provo mouth the way it is. I know what patterns the eyes and whities follow and basically it would ruin 90% of my white bass fishing to re route that river. They built that “new” dike to prevent siltation of the harbor, haven’t caught white bass in significant numbers in the state park harbor since. By significant I mean over 300 in an outing. Who cares about 30 or so white bass that still wander in here and there. No numbers, no fun lol. Don’t call them ecofreaks, that’s gonna piss people off. They’re called preservationists LOL. The june sucker has “intrinsic value” it’s valuable to suck up the plankton and do it’s natural thing LOL. Whatever! In reality, we have altered the natural environment since the beginning of humankind, and we will continue to alter it. Why not let the wonderful sport fishery remain and let the phrag flourish as nursery cover?