Sandy as a natural spawning creek?

[GAMBLER]

10 minutes ago, King Davy said:

 

We have a couple in LO. Hopefully we can focus efforts in the best places. Anything else is Pi$$ing in the wind.

Dave,

 

We agree!!!!   Lol.  

[King Davy]

I know Gambler. Ain’t it crazy. All the best captain.

[LongLine]

Davy - I don't think we're on the same page with life cycle terminology.  I.E. the difference between parr and yearlings.  I agree wild "little ones" typically need 1-2yrs resident time. Those are commonly called Fingerlings.  I.E. from fry to the size of one's finger.  They are less than 1 year old. (I believe stocking fingerlings is a reason the CDN experiment failed.)  

 

I understand "smolt" as ready to go to the "big water."

 

The stocking program for the lake requires yearlings. Adirondack hatchery raises them for at least a year.  Assuming hatch in December these fish are in the 14-16 month of life at stocking.  They are in the range of 6-8 inch long and called "spring yearlings."  DEC classifies them as "yearling smolts."  

 

DEC stocks at mouth of creek (not in pens) so they only get a "taste" of the creek/stream. I don't know whether they take off possibly never to return (being closer to the formally recognized smolt age) or do they stick around the mouth until full smolt age. (Exposed to predators and/or "unsuitable" creek conditions.)  Perhaps some of both. (?)

 

I also don't know if that 10% survival rate applies to yearlings or was calculated based on King Fingerlings.  I assumed it applies all.

 

[HB2]

KD seems to be the most knowledgeable on this . 

 

Even he says that Sandy probably isn't a good option . 

 

But you can't let it go , can you LL . 

You post all these studies and charts and graphs to support your position some not remotely  close to what Sandy is , as to how this will work if a bunch of time and money and crazy stuff happens . Watershed changes that won't happen , fish farms in the lake , reroute the canal flow  , etc ,etc.

 

Common sense says put the efforts in one stream with the ecosystem that has the best chance to succeed cat this on the South shore , which is most likely Irondequoit. That state backing Powder Mills by Brian is a great suggestion. Public private partnership . And probably most economical. A nice grant for improvements and funding to continue and some a little manpower to help run . 

Maybe some work-study stream improvement . A nice Eagle  project for a few Boy Scouts . 

 

But you dig your heels in on this . For some reason .  Have to impress us with your knowledge or something. 

 

For a guy who never set foot on the banks of Sandy , you sure have a lot to say . 

Edited yesterday at 08:24 AM by HB2

[LongLine]

HB - Thank you for your contributions to this site.  Your negativity and derogatory statements are hilarious, and we all need some humor nowdays.

 

Suggest you remove your thumb and hitchhike to Adirondack Hatchery and Tunison.  Even you may learn something about fish...but no....probably a total waste of time and money. for someone so against learning anything about the overall fishery (?)

 

You've almost convinced me that stocking anything in Sandy is a waste of money. (Recently got a few steelhead, but no Kings and no Browns - refer to above link.) Maybe improving the overall fishery in all management zones with limited resources isn't the way to go (?) Now you need to work on the decision makers at DEC, USF&WS, USGS, etc.(?) They probably need a laugh too.

 

Historically it's a "Put and Take" fishery. You obviously care only about "Take, Take, and Take more." Whereas some care about both in all the zones with an eye on improvement..

 

I'm not afraid of asking questions (note the "?" marks in my previous posts) oops...not knocking your reading comprehension skills. 

[GAMBLER]

16 hours ago, King Davy said:

I know Gambler. Ain’t it crazy. All the best captain.

Dave,

 

Isn't there room at the Powder Mill Hatchery now that they will not be stocking browns in Irondequoit creek from the Hatchery?  

[HB2]

Brian , you had a great idea IMO 

 

2 hours ago, LongLine said:

HB - Thank you for your contributions to this site.  Your negativity and derogatory statements are hilarious, and we all need some humor nowdays.

 

Suggest you remove your thumb and hitchhike to Adirondack Hatchery and Tunison.  Even you may learn something about fish...but no....probably a total waste of time and money. for someone so against learning anything about the overall fishery (?)

 

You've almost convinced me that stocking anything in Sandy is a waste of money. (Recently got a few steelhead, but no Kings and no Browns - refer to above link.) Maybe improving the overall fishery in all management zones with limited resources isn't the way to go (?) Now you need to work on the decision makers at DEC, USF&WS, USGS, etc.(?) They probably need a laugh too.

 

Historically it's a "Put and Take" fishery. You obviously care only about "Take, Take, and Take more." Whereas some care about both in all the zones with an eye on improvement..

 

I'm not afraid of asking questions (note the "?" marks in my previous posts) oops...not knocking your reading comprehension skills. 

 

I expected as much . 

[King Davy]

Brian while DEC isn’t stocking Irondequoit, power mill which you know is private will maintain their stocking program for the creek. DEC agreed to not try and stifle that because they do so many things for kids and families but they still release 1000’s of fish. So that program continues.

 

LL the timing of delivering steelhead to the pens is pretty crucial. I can tell you as I’m sure other who have helped in various stages of this project (me on and off since 1998) that you can actually witness a steelhead imprint. After a few weeks they lose their par marking and become completely silver. It’s at that stage they are likely imprinting  to the water they are currently in. 
 

we stock yearlings simply because hatchery’s don’t have the carrying capacity to hold fish longer due to the fact the next brood stock is due six months later. A yearling Atlantic salmon in the wild doesn’t go to sea. They live usually for two solid years and many times longer in a river before going out to sea. I catch those fish in Canadian rivers. If we have a river like Irondequoit where they can survive summers they may do the same and leave when they are ready. Stocking them in mouths of rivers that they couldn’t survive in for two to three years is the only way in LO you can get them in the system to hopefully grow big in the big lake. 
 

Canada stocked fry for years and said the program was a failure. My Buddy Peter Addison who is now in charge of most of the hatcheries in Ontario Canada used to dive with scuba gear off the Ganny and Duffins Wilmont looking for smolts or young salmon that survived par stage and entered the lake. You can imagine fry turned out to be bait and the program failed. Now they raise salmon to yearling stage and stock them both up the rivers in natel areas and have tried river mouth plantings. I know the Ganny gets a notable return.

 

in my humble opinion we need to rein in all the different ways we do this. Pick a viable scientific process to see if we can find “A” river that could maintain a true Atlantic salmon life cycle. The word Grilse is the term for a salmon that has returned from one or two years at sea. But that fish is likely three to five years old.

[Sk8man]

 

One of the questions in my mind that I have had for years is this: We operate under the assumption that the Atlantics aren't making it in lake Ontario because we don't see many adults caught in relation to the number stocked, and we also believe that the Atlantics do not go to sea like those in the distant past. What if many are in fact heading to the St. Lawrence and down the Hudson to the Atlantic?

And.....possibly not making it back to spawn or using another stream closer to the Atlantic to spawn. I know it seems a little far out but still a question in my mind....

[chinook35]

4 hours ago, Sk8man said:

 

One of the questions in my mind that I have had for years is this: We operate under the assumption that the Atlantics aren't making it in lake Ontario because we don't see many adults caught in relation to the number stocked, and we also believe that the Atlantics do not go to sea like those in the distant past. What if many are in fact heading to the St. Lawrence and down the Hudson to the Atlantic?

And.....possibly not making it back to spawn or using another stream closer to the Atlantic to spawn. I know it seems a little far out but still a question in my mind....

No, salmon cannot naturally run from the St. Lawrence River through the Hudson River because there is no direct, continuous natural flowing waterway connecting the two river systems. [1]

Atlantic salmon do not currently run the Hudson River.

Edited 6 hours ago by chinook35

[rolmops]

The one big thing that seems to be ignored in this discussion is the Oswego river with its connection to upstream lakes. Currently, the river is shut off for fish going upstream, because of a by now useless dam. Is there a connection between the demise on Atlantic salmon and the damming of the Oswego river and if so, why not remove that ugly big concrete dam and whatever other artificial obstructions in the Oswego river?

[LongLine]

Chin, sk8 - St Lawrence flows directly to Atlantic Ocean.  
___________

I've never known a researcher that didn't want more data. Policy makers often use the "best available data, " to guide decisions and sometimes unknowns affect the outcomes. (In all professions not just fishery science.)

 

AS do require lengthy resident time but all those studies (that I'm aware of) reference ability/size required to transition to saltwater environment. I.E. salinity and food source.  The lake obviously not saltwater and the "bug hatch" every year out to 150FOW is often very fierce. Yearlings(+) stand a better chance than fingerlings. CDNs proved that.  Is it enough growth...I don't know but bigger is better.  Some lake catches (although not as great as some would like) have been reported. (Many more than 5-6 years ago)

 

Policy makers often consider carrying capacity of the water. (Pred-Prey balance is the basis for lake stocking numbers) AS and BT can/do inhabit the same water as BT readily adapt and are very "hardy."   DEC ceased stocking BT there this year however Powder Mill continues to stock within the park limits. BT stocking consisted of approx. 10,000 each for both 2024 and 2025 in the creek (combined Apr 1st & May 1st for both years) and Nat Repro has been documented there.  "Kids of all ages" have a very good chance to catch BTs there.

 

What would happen to that fishery with 15-30,000 AS stocked in the spring? I don't know, but IMO risking disruption to that fishery, after so much time, effort and the "kids of all ages" opportunity is foolhardy. 
 

[chinook35]

22 minutes ago, LongLine said:

Chin, sk8 - St Lawrence flows directly to Atlantic Ocean.  
___________

I've never known a researcher that didn't want more data. Policy makers often use the "best available data, " to guide decisions and sometimes unknowns affect the outcomes. (In all professions not just fishery science.)

 

AS do require lengthy resident time but all those studies (that I'm aware of) reference ability/size required to transition to saltwater environment. I.E. salinity and food source.  The lake obviously not saltwater and the "bug hatch" every year out to 150FOW is often very fierce. Yearlings(+) stand a better chance than fingerlings. CDNs proved that.  Is it enough growth...I don't know but bigger is better.  Some lake catches (although not as great as some would like) have been reported. (Many more than 5-6 years ago)

 

Policy makers often consider carrying capacity of the water. (Pred-Prey balance is the basis for lake stocking numbers) AS and BT can/do inhabit the same water as BT readily adapt and are very "hardy."   DEC ceased stocking BT there this year however Powder Mill continues to stock within the park limits. BT stocking consisted of approx. 10,000 each for both 2024 and 2025 in the creek (combined Apr 1st & May 1st for both years) and Nat Repro has been documented there.  "Kids of all ages" have a very good chance to catch BTs there.

 

What would happen to that fishery with 15-30,000 AS stocked in the spring? I don't know, but IMO risking disruption to that fishery, after so much time, effort and the "kids of all ages" opportunity is foolhardy. 
 

Thanks for correcting me LL

iI always thought the St Lawrence River emptied into the Gulf of St Lawrence and that emptied into the Atlantic through the Cabot strait  Guess I need more geography class   You seem to be the expert 

[rolmops]

2 hours ago, chinook35 said:

Thanks for correcting me LL

iI always thought the St Lawrence River emptied into the Gulf of St Lawrence and that emptied into the Atlantic through the Cabot strait  Guess I need more geography class   You seem to be the expert 

 

2 hours ago, chinook35 said:

Thanks for correcting me LL

iI always thought the St Lawrence River emptied into the Gulf of St Lawrence and that emptied into the Atlantic through the Cabot strait  Guess I need more geography class   You seem to be the expert 

I’m afraid of what will happen when cabin fever hits.