Sk8man

I know most of us may run multiple dedicated (e.g. 3,5,7,10 etc. colors) and may run them from boards much of the time so we use them from backing, it can make sense if not running from boards to choose a couple 10 colors and then they can be just run at the various lengths up to ten as needed. I know they may run a little differently than from the backing but it does cut down on the number of rods carried.

At best any determination of species observed on a fishfinder is a "guesstimate" for starters. It is always tempting to interpret all the marks seen as trout and salmon. In point of fact whether fishing Lake Ontario or the Finger Lakes there are various species detected by fishfinders. Secondly, the "guesstimate" regarding species is usually made by noting the positioning of the mark in the water column often with reference to the water temperature noted. Again, multi-species (e.g. suspended bass) can and do inhabit these regions. Fish finders vary greatly in the cone angle of the particular transducer which largely determines what is seen while trolling - the wider the cone angle the more volume of water covered by it and the further out from the boat the information is detected to a point. What I am getting at is that there are a lot of variables involved in making an inference about the particular species of fish detected or even what they may be doing there. Rainbows are "roamers" and may be found in various positions in the water column and for a variety of reasons. Fish or trout in general may be well outside of the cone angle much of the time while trolling, and fish marked on the screen may or may not be the ones that hit the lures while trolling. Seeing the marks on a fishfinder and "connecting the dots" should always be considered an inference regardless of species targeted. Just as an example, while trolling Seth Green rigs on Seneca I have caught a bullhead estimated to be 80 ft down over more than 300 ft of water. I thought for sure when it hit that it would be a small laker The question remains: What the heck was he doing there?

Thanks for the good news Vince

The one thing I would mention here is that the Seeforellen strain (grow to huge size) of browns was tried in Owasco and Seneca Lakes in the past and they didn't fare well. I know Lake O is a different environment but I don't think that pinning our hopes on them should be a primary strategy.

Ifishy - Thanks for the insights. I attended a talk given by a faculty member of a college near here discussing some of the things going on in the Finger Lakes and the actual estrogen aspect was discussed along with a number of other similar structured chemicals such as those used in plastics and the potential impacts on the fisheries. It was also mentioned that they have found traces of things like Viagara, amphetamines, and a host of other chemicals that don't belong in the water. Many of these things are not routinely filtered out by conventional water treatment either so there are residual amounts in our drinking water also.They are monitoring some of the Finger Lakes tributaries looking for potential sources too. The fact that Lake O is at the bottom of the Great Lakes may make it something of a "reservoir" for some of this too but it is probably fortunate also that it may cycle through via the pathway to the sea further diluting the contaminants.

The truly interesting thing to me is the rapidity of the supposed changes. Usually significant genetic changes and adaptation have been thought to occur in much slower intervals as in thousands or millions of years.....this certainly suggests otherwise, and does it mean that there may be "forms" of genetic adaptation (e.g. short term and long term)? I'll leave it to the scientists but scratching my head nonetheless.

Check your PMs

Just a little something to keep in mind for the adventurous folks ready to be the first out of the gate. It is possible to get out the channel do some fishing and then the big ice floes come out the channel from the bay and you might not be able to get back in to the launch so be careful if you do it.

Very good advice. You younger dudes are the future of this sport that the rest of us love so much. It looks as though you have the fish handling/release down and the fishing techniques so it pays to keep in mind that a varied audience will be viewing the video and safety comes first when out there and it is important to always role model for the folks even much younger than yourselves. Nice job on the video and thanks for sharing.

Not sure about Region 7 Justin. I have talked with Region 8 personnel over the years and they said that the data is important to the management of the fishery. Here is the opening statement of the Seneca report for example (I do the diaries for Seneca, Keuka and Canandaigua). "Thank you for returning your 2018 angler diary. This is the 46th anniversary of our volunteer angler diary program on Seneca Lake. Data provided by you has been important to our efforts to manage the salmon and trout fisheries in Seneca Lake". I imagine it is only one piece of the data picture though.

The 2018 DEC Angler Diary results came in yesterday's mail. Basically they said that the number of diary cooperators is at an all-time low (34 vs the high of 152 in 1994). Number of trips is down greatly (not surprising) and they indicate that the alewife surplus (from 2016 year class) combined with lamprey [predation seem to be the major culprits in poor catch rate. It would seem that in order to better figure out what is going on some more data could certainly be helpful. They note that people are now fishing the other lakes rather than Seneca which may be understandable but for folks that do fish the lake or get out there occasionally even it would be helpful to collect diary data so that we can hopefully see whether things start to change or improve as we go along. So I would encourage people fishing out there even once in awhile report data to the DEC.It is only a minor PIA to do it. It was indicated that another lamprey treatment is intended for 2021. Similar statement for Canandaigua Lake.on opening statement of the report.