LongLine

Sorry about that. Should be a second T, not a C. (Getting older I guess, that's quite a typo)

WAYPOINT CHINOOK SMALLMOUH BLOATER GOBY ATLANTIC

In all my years of fishing I've basically caught 3 sizes of fish:

Do you know your boat?

DOWNRIGGER OFFSHORE SHACKLE FREEBOARD TRANSOM HOOKED ON A REELING

GAMBLER LEGACY LONGLINE ROLMOPS SCHRECSTOFF SILVERFOX YANKEETROLLER A REEL CONVERSATION (Sorry if I misspelled anyone)

Here's another.

I think ifishy is somewhat on the right track. I'm glad to see some salmon tournaments say the first few fish caught count for the box. i.e. you can't throw back a 10 Lb'r in hopes of catching a 25 Lb'r.

Fall returns depend upon where the Kings were imprinted. i.e. stocked (pens being better than shore or barge stocking) Not on where the eggs came from. Way back when, the eggs came from Michigan with west coast genetics. Yet returns were observed on the SR. If returns of Kings are wanted all along the south shore, then there has to be more stocking sites along the south shore. However, nothing is going to change with sites until the Atlantic Salmon experiment is concluded and analyzed. I agree with Rolmops that preyfish availability and survival stress are playing a major role in the size issue. Even though the biomass of preyfish has increased, way back when the even larger alewife population consisted of a much greater percentage of large (fat) alewife than our current biomass. The current majority in the biomass is 1-3 yr olds. Back then 5, 6 & 7 yr olds were much more common. Back then the alewife diet was better as there was plenty of Diporeia for them. Today many are found with sea fleas in their stomachs. Our US west coasters have been trying to free up rivers for better salmon spawning grounds. (YAY! good move!) BUT in addition, the west coast Canadiens have enacted greatly reduced quotas on the commercial herring fishery (A large industry) in hopes of providing greater food supply for the Salmon. Our alewife biomass seems dependent upon weather. i.e. mild vs cold winters. DEC has been stocking Ciscos & Bloaters in hopes that our top predators will have an alternate food supply.

King eggs are larger than Brown Trout eggs. As such Kings require higher dissolved oxygen water content. Browns require 6 mg/L. Kings require 8-12 mg/L for development. Warm water cannot hold the dissolved oxygen that cold water can. The way to expose eggs to more oxygen is to increase the flow of water that they are exposed to. Caledonia pumps water at 5,000 g/min; the SR at 10,000 g/min. NOAA measures water flow. On Spring creek (4 places) the flow over the last month has been 19 to 40 ft3/sec. Pineville (SR) has been around 710 ft3/sec. Water at the dam on the SR was released this year to make sure returning adults would reach the hatchery. Although the instinct to reproduce is a driver to the run, not being able to breathe would stop the fish short. (Look on u-tube for "spawning salmon" and watch the gill flapping.) As to fish diseases: VHS and Thiamine deficiency are major concerns with raising Kings at the SR. VHS is a virus transmitted through fish urine and reproductive fluids. Along with treatment, continued flushing of holding pens reduces VHS concern. It disappears above 65F. (Hatcheries must discharge a lot of water. Availability of water allows for greater discharge.) Thiamine issue is a lack of vitamins. (B1) Furunculous is the concern at Caledonia. It's caused by a water borne bacteria that thrives in water where temperatures, dissolved oxygen and pH vary, overcrowding and stress. It can be transferred via fish and bird crap but also by sharing contaminated equipment. I.E. Dip a net in a contaminated tank then use that net in another tank and poof...the 2nd tank has it. (I remember seeing trout in Bass Pro that had those deadly lesions) Caledonia did initially raise Kings, but the Canadiens were also stocking substantial numbers of Kings. It was quickly realized that the SR was a much better choice for raising Kings. The stocking controversy on the west coast is with Pink Salmon. They've basically taken over many rivers in Alaska. (BTW a 6 Lb Pink was caught on the SR back in late August per the DEC newsletter.) Additionally, King Salmon size issue is not unique to Lake Ontario. It's a world wise issue. According to another DEC newsletter, a 35 Lb King-Coho hybrid was caught this year on the NY side. Initially thought to be a new world record, DEC counted something in its' guts and determined a hybrid.

Issues being brought up in this thread (as I read it) are: (1) "Dismal" fall returns (2) Potentially raising Kings at Caledonia and (3) Stock Kings at more locations, especially from the "Sandy guys." Additionally, increasing numbers of Kings is not a concern. (perhaps that should be the concern) (1) The run was abnormally late this year due to warm water and low flows caused by the drought conditions. They restricted fishing on the SR and increased flow to get broodstock to run. Shore fishing on the Genny improved in the last 2 1/2 weeks as many were caught on the pierheads and in the Marina pond. Hopefully history won't repeat itself from 2007 when warm water caused the major eye-up condition at the hatchery. (2) Caledonia could raise Kings but only with a MAJOR influx of money. It doesn't have the water. (amount, consistent temperature, flow) Additionally, logistics, staffing, expertise, and facilities would get very "interesting" and costly. As increasing stocking number is prohibitive, production at the SR would have to be reduced. (Which is not ludicrous, it's totally asinine!) Also, where would Caledonia fish be stocked? Looking at the DEC stocking reports (I only went back to 2008) Caledonia has sporadically produced a very small percentage of Browns for Lake Ontario. None recently and no Kings. Browns come from Rome. (furunculus resistant) (3) Stocking sites were chosen by looking at survivability and improving the tributary fishery within the 4 zones. The Genny is within easy reach from Sandy, Braddocks and I-bay. In April 2017, 65k Kings were pen reared at Sandy but had to be released after only 6 days due to water temperature. (An additional 12k were direct stocked which fed birds.) I'm sure water temperatures at Sandy played a major factor for the Atlantic stocking there as well as trying to establish a summer fishery in the creek. One has to go pretty deep to catch a Salmon there during the summer, just like the rest of the East/West Central zones does. "LIKE IT USED TO BE"...ahh yes: when oil had to be added to gas; when Diphoreia was abundant; before Quaggas covered the lake bottom and sea fleas in the pelagic zones; when fish were contaminated with mercury and PCBs; when alewives covered the shores; before pen rearing and fish were shore stocked every few miles feeding cormorants; when VHS was an issue; when Occidental was polluting the Niagara and Kodak the Genny; when lakeshore homes put raw sewage into the water; when fall snaggers proliferated stream banks; before the Lakes' thermal regime changed. AND IMPORTANTLY: when the Canadiens were significantly stocking Kings and we put in over 2 million. I agree that the broodstock needs more protection, but remember, DEC did close certain sections this year to that end. What was the egg take this year?

It's that time of year.

Caledonia produces 90% of the 10 inch Brown Trout stocked across all of NYS from its' on-premises protected broodstock. Altmar produces all the Kings for Lake Ontario from brood stock returning to the SR. If a virus hit SR lake guys would get hurt. If a virus hit Caledonia, a lot more streams would get hurt. (If a comet hit the SR, we wouldn't have to worry, because we wouldn't be here either.) Raising Browns doesn't require the clean cold water that Kings do. Look at the conditions where Browns vs Kings can thrive. Browns can tolerate warmer and "dirtier" water than Kings can. Look online at the outdoor and uncovered raceways at Caledonia. Caledonia get water via gravity from Spring Creek at 5K gallons per minute. Altmar gets water from the SR and pumps from wells at 10k gallons per minute. That well water is cold and more consistent than the creek water which fluctuates. King eggs (6-10mm) are larger than Brown eggs. (4-5 mm) As such the King eggs require more dissolved oxygen in the water for successful development and growth. Dissolved oxygen is regulated by temperature and exposure governed by water flow. The stocking number is dictated by the international agreement. If Kings were raised at Caledonia, then Altmar numbers would have to be reduced. Makes no sense to reduce the numbers from the most capable King hatchery to raise at another hatchery that is not as capable as Altmar is. It takes a lot more than just throwing some eggs in a tank to raise kings. It would take a lot more than the few million that the state is going to put into the hatchery system to bring Caledonia "up to snuff." Additional staff would be required to raise, monitor and logistically support them. Chances of human error would double with a second hatchery. Moving Browns out of Caledonia would create the same "stress" to other hatcheries that are not as capable as Caledonia is with Browns. If we want more Kings then we need to lobby the "powers that be" to raise more Kings at Altmar, which they are fully capable of and to change the stocking policy. BTW, I know 1st hand that a lot of big kings are being caught in the marina pond.

Brian, Thanx for the job you do. Do you have any comparative information on the condition of age 1 alewife from the US side trawls vs the CN trawls? The report shows the condition of 6.5" fish as a weight but that is for the overall lake.

Is there a chemical difference between waters on both shores? Are there more quaggas on south shore? Is there more plankton along the North shore? More algae? Does the North shore have the temperature swings that the south shore has? Was there an alewife dieoff on the north shore like the south shore had? was it as drastic? Do east winds affect the North shore as much as they do on the South shore?

From what I've found is that ocean farming of Atlantics is really big business in Chile. They export them all over the world. (Chances are good that salmon in our grocery stores came from Chile.) They enacted strict regulations on farming after the King "fiascos." They do not have natural runs of Atlantics, and they have no Pinks, Chum or Sockeye.

Ocean run Kings get much bigger than fresh water bred. Lake Ontario Kings came from the Green River near Seattle Washington I.E. Puget Sound. Literature indicates that all west coast salmon are now smaller and less abundant than they were 50 years ago. Ocean run large Kings (80-90 Lbs) have been caught recently (2019) in Chile, South America. Looking up the history of Kings in Chile (where they lack other salmon) revealed that they unsuccessfully river stocked a couple rivers with Kings in the 70's. In the early 80's entrepreneurs successfully "ocean ranched" brood stock Kings from Washington State. They turned to ocean net pens and the 90"s had many pen failures with major King escape. They were considered a harmful invasive as they took over rivers to the demise of natural inhabitants. The Kings spawned in hundreds of Chilean rivers and their range is expanding. Ocean run Kings predominantly feed on Herring. Ours prefer Alewife. They are basically the same. Difference being the Alewife can live in freshwater. West coast states have enacted strict regulations on salmon fishing with some closing fishing seasons. So have the west coast Canadiens. But the CNs have also detected a decline in Herring populations and have enacted higher restrictions on commercial fishing for them. (Harvested for feed and oil) Chile has proposed regulations on Herring harvest but has not enacted them yet. All five groups have the same genetic background. IMO, food seems the driving force. Larger schools of alewife on North shore. Superior fish eating Cisco. West coast fish struggling and Chilean fish gorging themselves. Food abundance appears a stressor that triggers "survival mode" which in turn triggers growth, gut function and reproduction size and age. Questions for all the genetics guys: Can the genetics "thing" as described in Yank's video be reversed? If the 2yr old mixed with 3 yr olds results in more 2 yr old spawners, why doesn't it also result in more 2 yr olds becoming 3 yr olds spawners? Additionally, what would happen genetically if some larger Garnaraska fish contributed to the egg collection effort on the SR?

Brian - Depends on what the definition of a "kid" is. I agree that a 5'6" "kid" on a pro team is not a good choice but that same "kid" for pop-warner would probably be a great choice. Previous annual reports seem to indicate that King salmon grow more (%) between 1 & 2 yrs old than they do between 2 & 3 yrs old. There is a lot of literature out there that indicates Nat Repro fish are smaller than stocked fish and that they run sooner. It's logical that many generations of inter-breeding have lead to smaller length fish which has reduced the weight potential and differences which the tournaments are seeing. Going strictly by tournament weight could be misleading as that data doesn't give a complete picture Based on west coast literature, the larger the eggs, the bigger the kings will be as the fry is large and hence, they would have a head start on growth. The stockers record the quantity of fish along with the weight per pound of those put into pens. The number per pound is an indication of their size. A year with lower No./Lb (bigger fish) should have a head start on growth over those with a higher No./Lb. The numbers look like this: The 2023 pen fish were much larger than other years. Initial size doesn't appear to be a factor. Although Preyfish abundance is up over last couple years however numbers for years before random sampling & all lake sampling could be suspect. Also, there's variation in last few years. Genetics is interesting. If you look at Yank's data in other thread, there's a big difference between 2005 and 2025 BUT look at it in 4-year groupings. Look at group 2025, 2024, 2023 and 2022...They're practically the same. Look at group 2021, 2020, 2019 and 2018...they're practically the same but the 2nd group is different than the 1st grouping. And so on down the list. Genetics doesn't explain why all the fish seem affected. (Does it run in 4 year cycles?) If genes can turn on/off why aren't there big fish as well as small fish? Conditions change every year. Mild winter, cold winter, wet year/dry year. Early spring/late spring. High water/low water. Different times in pens. Nat Repo seems different each year. Fish on CN side bigger. etc. I'd like to see more about Chinooks. Literature from west coast generally shows big differences between the different species of salmon. (Yeah, I know...too many questions)

Which is bigger? A basketball center that is 6'10" tall and 240 Lbs or a football lineman that is 6"0" and 300 Lbs? The weight of each was determined by their diet but their height was a matter of genetics. The basketball center could go well over 300 Lbs with a different diet but the football player will not grow 10" taller. Back in the 60's when the beer company gave fish awards, one had to give a length and a girth as well as weight in order to win an award. Today we only go by weight to win a tournament. The DEC data for 2022 said the average length of a 3 Yr old female was 36.9" and in the 2023 report they said the average length of the same 3 yr old female was 33.8". Quite a difference! However, the 3 yr old males were the same for both years at 35.8". They however do a lot of fancy logarithmic regression analysis to calculate the wet weight of 36" fish and report that as a 3 yr old fish. The 2024 summary says the 3 yr old Chinook was 19 Lbs. The full 2024 report still hasn't been published so the jury is still out on that one. For years there was opposition to adding random sampling to the preyfish assessment but when they finally did and added some whole lake trawls the results were different than anticipated. I'd be all in favor of the tournaments recording not only weights of fish but length and girth also. That lineman obviously has a greater girth than the basketball player.

yay!

heh, heh, heh...probably true. So more alewife on CN side...is that why the CN fish are bigger than US fish? Do US fish stray over there for more abundant prey? More CN alewives because the bottom structure is so much different over there? Is there a chemical difference in the water? (Anecdotally, Toronto is a pretty good polluter. MODIS generally shows green water along US shore but rare on CN side.) More stable water on CN side? I.E. not as serious upwellings?