jerktroller

Oh sorry. Feels like it was longer ago

Browns in keuka outlet cannot make their way into keuka lake but I’m sure a few end up in Seneca. My understanding was that browns and landlocks won’t be stocked in keuka for now but they could be again if bait bounces back. That info was from a meeting over a year ago so things may have changed

Wow that is a crazy amount of bait. I thought Seneca was loaded last year but it looks like this year there may be even more bait. I never thought I could go an entire morning and not catch at least one laker pulling copper but Seneca proved me wrong this year. I think this is a good problem. When things start to even out we could have fantastic fishing.

The water quality data on Keuka Lake from both Keuka College and DEC indicates that the amount of nutrients in the lake is about as low as it gets. I think that is why the lake is less productive and you may not see as many fish in general. I guess all I'm trying to say is we are just trying to blame one activity or another when it could just be natural population trends. I can find species that are doing well in every lake. Perch fishing on Keuka has been great and pike fishing on Seneca is improving. Five years from now those species could be down and the trout might be bouncing back. When you look at the watersheds for all the Finger Lakes there are things that I hate to see that aren't good for the lake but there are probably just as many or more improvements that I have seen over the last 40 years. Anyway, I'm all for anything that can be done to protect our watersheds but I feel like there is some overreaction right now.

Glad you said that. I thought I was losing it because every time I fished this year the water in Seneca was as green as I've seen it since the 80's. I think all that algae growth is fueling the bait population.

Ok so everyone says fishing is great on Cayuga and Seneca is terrible. No argument there but at the same time I keep hearing that Seneca is gin clear and Cayuga has color to the water. All that color comes from the nutrients and all the issues that were mentioned in the Hobart College video from an earlier post. So if the farms and wineries are so terrible then why is Seneca clear? And if it is so terrible to have turbid and colored water then why is fishing on Cayuga so good? I've been a diary keeper for a long time and if you look at the trends over the years there are a few things that lead to tough fishing - lamprey issues and plentiful bait. Right now we have both in Seneca. I'm not saying we shouldn't be concerned about the farms and the wineries but those things were all there 5 or so years ago when fishing was great in Seneca and not so good in Cayuga. They got the lamprey under control in Cayuga and fishing turned good. I bet if DEC gets the lamprey under control in Seneca the same thing will happen.

http://www.dec.ny.gov/outdoor/73518.html http://www.dec.ny.gov/outdoor/27875.html One for Region 7 and one for Region 8

What a great report. Glad to see it. As for the south end - we did well in lakers this morning in 100 ft pulling copper. Not much to report for rainbows or browns. Our methods wouldn't have caught any

Yep I'm sure lake trout have an effect on baitfish. Just look at Keuka. But if you think walleye are going to coexist just look at Hemlock. The lake trout numbers weren't that high and the lake was loaded with bait. Local club stocked walleye and a few years later every lake trout I caught was in bad shape and browns and rainbows were almost nonexistent. That would not be so bad if there were lots of walleye to catch but that didn't happen. The walleye stocking led to a few anglers catching an occasional walleye. That was my point about Cayuta. I wasn't comparing it to the deeper Finger Lakes I was just saying that Cayuta was loaded with walleye a few years back but very few people caught any. That is what happens in lakes where walleye are eating alewife (Conesus). Walleye stocking in these places just seems like a waste of time and money. The big Finger Lakes are as clear as they have been in years. Clear water is not exactly ideal for walleye.

Not enough food in some of these lakes to support trout so I don't think stocking walleye makes sense. You could stock every walleye the state has into Seneca and it would not make good fishing. Just look at Cayuta.

Why do we need to protect certain areas of the salmon river for spawning fish when there is a huge amount of natural reproduction happening under the current regulations. These things are affected more by flow, temperature, etc. not anglers

Have not been out yet this year but last two years Seneca seems to be loaded with bait. DEC folks at derby seemed to think bait was plentiful as well based on how fat most of the trout were in recent years. I notice that my catch rate for lakers goes down when they are well fed. Makes sense-they are not as hungry. I agree that as lake warms a little we will start to see more bait in shallow or at least I hope so. I'd be surprised if any bait sample of Seneca is based on one location. North end and south end can be completely different at times.

Just want to make a correction. DEC did not quit stocking trout and then resume stocking because everyone said there was a bunch of bait out there. They did reduce lake trout numbers a few years back because of bait concerns and gave some lake trout to Lake Ontario one year because of a shortage. I help boat stock trout on Seneca every year so I know Seneca has been getting stocked quite regularly. Stocking lists are available every year on the DEC website or at Bath Hatchery. Hard to have a meaningful conversation if we don't have our facts straight.

A whole lot of information being thrown around on this thread. What concerns me is that everyone has their own idea that they seem to have accepted as fact without proof, and I'm not talking about anecdotal information like me and my friends aren't catching as many or look at all the wineries spraying pesticides. It would be more productive to keep an open mind and search for any possible impacts. Our local lakes are always changing but it seems like there is this fear in recent years that water quality is terrible just because of a few algae blooms or small fish kills (both of which have been happening naturally for thousands of years). Just do some research on the types of farming practices and the types of pesticides used 30+ years ago and you will realize that we have made progress as far as that goes. Keep in mind that yellow perch are abundant in some very polluted lakes like Onondaga and Neatahwanta. The perch population has certainly changed. They are found in different depths during different times of the year and people seem to have all sorts of new techniques for catching them. Maybe there is another change going on and they are changing their behavior but I'm not convinced that the population has crashed. I still here from a lot of anglers who do quite well on Seneca so who knows. I know people don't want to wait around for a study but actually having someone sample the lake to try to figure out where we stand would at least answer a few questions.