Jump to content

Recommended Posts

2016 Overview for Discussions Regarding Salmon and Trout Stocking Levels in Lake Ontario

Lake Ontario supports a world class offshore boat and tributary fishery. Anglers in the New York waters and tributaries of Lake Ontario caught more than 234,000 trout and salmon including Chinook and coho salmon, rainbow trout, brown trout, lake trout and Atlantic salmon in 2015. One of the greatest strengths of the Lake Ontario sportfishery is its diversity; anglers can target other species when their preferred target isn’t “cooperating.† Chinook salmon is the most sought after species because it can grow to over 30 pounds and is a great fighting fish.  Lake Ontario produces the largest Chinook salmon in the Great Lakes, and fishing success for Chinook salmon has been at or near record-high levels since 2003. In 2007, New York’s lake and tributary fisheries supported over 2.6 million angler days generating an estimated $112 million in economic activity. New York State and the Province of Ontario stock more than 5.7 million trout and salmon annually to support recreational fisheries and restore native species. In addition, approximately 50% of the Chinook salmon in the lake are naturally reproduced or “wild†fish.

Managing Lake Ontario Fisheries - Lake Ontario fisheries are managed cooperatively by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) and the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (OMNRF). Under the framework of the Great Lakes Fishery Commission’s Joint Strategic Plan for Management of Great Lakes Fisheries, the DEC and OMNRF consulted extensively with the angling public in developing the 2013 Lake Ontario Fish Community Objectives (FCOs; http://www.glfc.org/lakecom/loc/LO-FCO-2013-Final.pdf). 

The FCOs provide overall management direction for both New York and Ontario, and are used to establish agency management policies. In response to angler’s input, the FCO goal for the offshore, open water zone is to “Maintain the offshore pelagic fish community, that is characterized by a diversity of trout and salmon species including Chinook Salmon, Coho Salmon, Rainbow Trout, Brown Trout, and Atlantic Salmon, in balance with prey-fish populations and lower trophic levels.† Further, the primary objective under this goal is to “maintain Chinook Salmon as the top offshore pelagic predator supporting trophy recreational lake and tributary fisheries through stocking.â€

Under the guidance of the FCOs, The Lake Ontario Committee, comprised of DEC and OMNRF fisheries managers, establishes lake-wide stocking targets. In recognition of the critical role a healthy alewife population plays in maintaining a high-quality Chinook fishery, the FCOs also acknowledge the need to “maintain abundance of top predators (stocked and wild) in balance with available prey fish.â€

Partner agencies including the U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, and the Great Lakes Fishery Commission are also involved in providing science support, controlling sea lamprey and raising fish for stocking.  Scientists from the aforementioned agencies, along with academics, are members of the Lake Ontario Technical Committee, which provides scientific advice to the Lake Ontario Committee.

Concerns Over the Future of the Alewife Population - The main prey fish in Lake Ontario is the non-native alewife, a type of herring native to the Atlantic Ocean. Fisheries Management agencies track the status of alewife through a long term bottom trawling program. In 2016, adult alewife numbers are significantly lower than in 2015, and will likely continue to decline over the next few years. Alewife, age-2 and older, are the preferred food for the top predator in the lake, Chinook salmon.

Alewife in the Great lakes are at the northern extreme of their tolerance for cold temperatures, and young alewife have difficulty surviving long, cold winters.  The severe winters of 2013/14 and 2014/15 negatively impacted survival of alewife produced in those years.  In 2016, the alewife produced in 2013 and 2014 should have dominated the adult alewife population at ages 3 and 2, respectively, however, these ages are poorly represented in the population.  Without sufficient young alewife to replace older alewife, the number of adults will decline in 2017 and beyond. 

DEC and OMNRF are concerned that without enough young alewife to replenish the adults that are eaten primarily by trout and salmon, there may not be sufficient prey to support the current, high-quality fishery in the future. While all of Lake Ontario’s trout and salmon feed to some extent on alewife, Chinook salmon feed almost exclusively on age 2 and older alewife and exert the greatest predation pressure on the adult alewife population.

It is important to note that this situation is not the same as the alewife population collapse in Lake Huron, or the continuing alewife decline in Lake Michigan. Reduced nutrients leading to less alewife food and fewer alewife, combined with too many predators, are thought to be key factors leading to predator-prey imbalance in the upper lakes. In Lake Ontario, for now, we have sufficient nutrients to support alewife and their food.  The current issue appears related to poor alewife reproduction in 2013 and 2014, combined with high predator demand for alewife.

Management Options for 2017 – The only effective solution to this issue is to reduce predator demand on alewife as soon as possible.  Given the rapid growth of Chinook salmon (from 0 to 30 pounds in 4 years) and their dependence on alewife, reducing Chinook salmon stocking provides the only practical solution for reducing predation on alewife in the short term. 

Ontario and New York State’s combined Chinook salmon stocking target is 2.3 million fish, however, a recent study has shown that we are effectively stocking more than 3 million Chinook salmon due the great success of the net pen program. Chinooks held in net pens by sportsmen’s groups for three to four weeks prior to release have been shown to survive twice as well as traditional “direct†stocked fish.  When we factor in the additional wild fish, the equivalent of 6 million Chinook salmon are added to the lake annually.

DEC is considering a 20% reduction in Chinook salmon stocking in 2017 (reduce from 1.76 million to 1.41 million fish), which amounts to a 10% overall reduction when wild Chinook salmon are included.  This action would reduce alewife consumption attributable to Chinook salmon by 7.5 million pounds over the period from 2018-2020.  Future increases in Chinook salmon would be considered when alewife population characteristics indicate good overall “health.†  

We are also considering a 20% reduction in 2017 lake trout stocking (New York reduction from 500,000 to 400,000 fish), however, this action will not provide short term reductions in alewife predation, as lake trout grow much slower than Chinook salmon, are not as dependent on alewife as a food source, but do live much longer than Chinook salmon.  The adult lake trout population is currently at levels favorable for natural reproduction.  A 20% reduction will not impact lake trout restoration efforts in the short term, however, stocking levels will be increased if the adult population size falls below target levels in the future.

DEC is proposing to maintain current stocking targets for rainbow trout, brown trout and coho salmon for 2017, is working cooperatively with the OMNRF to ensure consistent management actions on both sides of the lake. 

Potential Impacts to the Sportfishery – This stocking reduction is intended to protect the long-term viability of this economically important fishery. Given a 20% reduction in Chinook salmon stocking is actually 10% lake wide reduction (accounting for 50% wild Chinook salmon), the potential impact to the sportfishery is likely minor.

We experienced an unplanned stocking reduction in the past without negative impacts to the sportfishery.  Due to reduced Chinook salmon egg collections at the Salmon River Hatchery caused by low water and high water temperatures in 2007, DEC stocked only 799,000 Chinook salmon in the spring of 2008, a 42% reduction (NY/Ontario combined).  When these fish reached age 2 in 2010 and age 3 in 2011, they supported excellent Chinook salmon fishing quality.

As anglers experienced in 2014 and 2015, fishing success is much more likely to vary due to spatial distribution of alewife, water temperatures, weather patterns, and wind speed/direction.

Similar to the proposed Chinook salmon stocking reduction, reduced lake trout stocking will not likely impact lake trout angling success.

Future Management Actions - DEC and OMNRF remain committed to maintaining the ecological, recreational, and economic benefits of Lake Ontario’s sportfishery, and in particular, the Chinook salmon fishery.  Any future management actions will be based on the results of 2017 alewife population assessments, as well as changes in Chinook salmon growth.  In the event that further management actions are deemed necessary, the Department will consult with stakeholder groups and the public. 

Next steps – DEC will hold public meetings at the following times and locations:

Monday, September 19: 6:30 p.m. - 9:00 p.m. at the Cornell Cooperative Extension Building, 4487 Lake Avenue, Lockport, Niagara County. 

 

Tuesday, September 20: 6:30 p.m. - 9:00 p.m. at the Sandy Creek High School auditorium, 124 Salisbury Street, Oswego County. 

 

Tuesday, September 27: 6:30 p.m. - 9:00 p.m. at the Town of Greece Town Hall, 1 Vince Tofany Blvd., Monroe County. 

 

DEC staff will present information, and the audience will have ample time to ask questions and provide input on potential management actions. Those who cannot attend a meeting can provide comments at [email protected]

A final decision will be announced in mid-October, 2016.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Lake Ontario United mobile app

Link to post
Share on other sites

We will see.

 

I'd like to give them the benefit of the doubt and hope that they are being proactive as opposed to being reactive in the future. If a reduction means I catch 4 kings for every 5 kings that I caught in the previous years, then that's fine by me (for the short term).

 

If the reduction in stocking means a short term sacrifice to ensure the fishery is here long term, then I'm all for it. If it's an underhanded attempt to get rid of the Kings, then that would be unfortunate, and I'd obviously oppose it. 

 

That being said I marked a ton of bait off the bar the last few weeks, but that doesn't mean anything because I don't have year over year hard data to compare.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel the lake trout can stomach some serious alewifes. So with that reduction in stocking, Will definitely help salmon prosper. We lost a lot of adult alewifes (2 to 3 year old) during those bad winters 2 and 3 years ago.

This past winter was warm. So???? I'm sure it helped the survival rate of the adult alewifes. I guess we just wait and see what happens.

As they said 50/50 natural and stocked.

I believe it just might be a up and down process. For years to come.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Lake Ontario United mobile app

Link to post
Share on other sites

The reduction of lakers and kings are like night and day, the Kings only live 4 years, where the lakers are here for 20+ years, I'd say cut the lakers by 30% and maybe go 5% on the Kings. If the pen rearing prodjects produce much better, then the guys who do the pens could easily make up the difference. Pray for a mild winter for the sake of the alewives!!, hope they take up gobies as there main appetizer, so they eat less alewives. LOL. This will prove interesting to say the least.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to play devil's advocate. My way of thinking is that if you need to make an immediate impact, you alter the variable with the fastest turnover. Let's stretch the facts to make a point. If Kings only lived for one year, then any reduction in stocking would obviously make an immediate impact on their prey, right? But for long lived species, reductions get diluted by the existing pool of eating machines that you can't easily control. So, if we have an immediate rather than long term problem such as DEC suggests, kings are the logical target.

 

Doesn't mean I like it...but I find it hard to argue with their reasoning. Like you, I'm hoping for a best case scenario and a good spawn this spring. We were lucky enough to be graced with good king fishing for a long period this summer, but many other ports didn't apparently fare as well. And when they were gone, they were gone. I think there's some merit to the idea that the populations themselves have become more stratified, which makes keeping track of numbers that much harder...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm feeling both sides of the fence on this one.

Salmon grow fast and eat alot.

Lakers grow slower and eat alot.

Salmon actually live about 5 years, from fry to die, (In the great Lakes anyway). longer out at sea. Up to 8 years.

IMO, Dec is doing it right.

They are reducing both salmon and LT. We probably won't see a dramatic impact on LT. Salmon, well, different story. That will be a up and down game until the natural spawning produces larger percentage. I believe 2017/2018. Will be big years for salmon. Then a bad year 2019. At least that's what my crystal ball is saying. But it's not always right.

Anyway, let's see what happens. I'm not afraid of a steelhead program. I'll do what I have to do to keep fishing.

Lakers I just can't stand them. It's never any fun. Really it's not. If you caught 1 you've caught a hundred. Boring dead weights that u are reeling up from bottom, (rigger ball). I know some charters depends on them. I understand that. Clients need something.

But for me I will troll for days waiting on a salmon. IMO.

I agree with both sides of the fence. Pap, you got great points that agree with. Gator. Honestly, Your right. Salmon would be the logical target.

Happy Fishing, See you out there.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Lake Ontario United mobile app

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is my thoughts .

If you keep pushing the natural reproduction card, it will justify the reduced stocking . Reducing the stocking means cutting costs . Now by mo means am I educated enough on the system but I think it's difficult to say there is that much NR without proof to back this up . Without the fin clip or the nose chip study being calculated , other then he said , she said , it's just a guesstimate and not proof from physical data .

Now my question is , where are all these " extra " salmon ? We didn't see them in the tribs ( well at leas myself ) and if I recall , folks here were saying last season on the lake was terrible aside from 2 year old salmon . Well others might have had a good season this year but myself , I am truly disgusted at the fishing this season . Should I blame the fishery ? Well in part I can only blame myself but in reading through the forums " how was your season , slowest ever " it seems I'm not alone .

As many say , it's the alewives that suffered over the 2013-14 harsh winters . In the history of the lake , it's 2 seasons and a ( guesstimate NR ) that are just now causing these issues ? Honestly I think it has started way before now , this is just a way of pushing the NR and reduce stocking levels .

Weren't the steelhead suffering from feeding primarily on alewives ? What happened there that it just went away or less publicity ?

Sorry folks , I think there is going to be an all time low in the fishery for quite a few upcoming years .

If there are so " many " salmon now , I hate to see what less will bring if the game changer is NR .

The only way this could possibly reverse is if the salmon reach an all time low and the alewives an all time high , then it may be reconsidered to increase the stocking levels . I fear we are in for 6-8 years ove tough fishing ahead for salmon .

On that note , maybe the lake trout may take the brunt of the harvest which is what I'm reading folks say needs to happen anyway .

Good luck at the meetings and happy fishing

Rich

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to play devil's advocate. My way of thinking is that if you need to make an immediate impact, you alter the variable with the fastest turnover. Let's stretch the facts to make a point. If Kings only lived for one year, then any reduction in stocking would obviously make an immediate impact on their prey, right? But for long lived species, reductions get diluted by the existing pool of eating machines that you can't easily control. So, if we have an immediate rather than long term problem such as DEC suggests, kings are the logical target.

 

Doesn't mean I like it...but I find it hard to argue with their reasoning. Like you, I'm hoping for a best case scenario and a good spawn this spring. We were lucky enough to be graced with good king fishing for a long period this summer, but many other ports didn't apparently fare as well. And when they were gone, they were gone. I think there's some merit to the idea that the populations themselves have become more stratified, which makes keeping track of numbers that much harder...

If you want fish out of the system, raise creel limits.  Raising the creel limit on Lakers would decrease the adult population and would have immediate results. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

2016 Overview for Discussions Regarding Salmon and Trout Stocking Levels in Lake Ontario

Lake Ontario supports a world class offshore boat and tributary fishery. Anglers in the New York waters and tributaries of Lake Ontario caught more than 234,000 trout and salmon including Chinook and coho salmon, rainbow trout, brown trout, lake trout and Atlantic salmon in 2015. One of the greatest strengths of the Lake Ontario sportfishery is its diversity; anglers can target other species when their preferred target isn’t “cooperating.† Chinook salmon is the most sought after species because it can grow to over 30 pounds and is a great fighting fish.  Lake Ontario produces the largest Chinook salmon in the Great Lakes, and fishing success for Chinook salmon has been at or near record-high levels since 2003. In 2007, New York’s lake and tributary fisheries supported over 2.6 million angler days generating an estimated $112 million in economic activity. New York State and the Province of Ontario stock more than 5.7 million trout and salmon annually to support recreational fisheries and restore native species. In addition, approximately 50% of the Chinook salmon in the lake are naturally reproduced or “wild†fish.

Managing Lake Ontario Fisheries - Lake Ontario fisheries are managed cooperatively by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) and the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (OMNRF). Under the framework of the Great Lakes Fishery Commission’s Joint Strategic Plan for Management of Great Lakes Fisheries, the DEC and OMNRF consulted extensively with the angling public in developing the 2013 Lake Ontario Fish Community Objectives (FCOs; http://www.glfc.org/lakecom/loc/LO-FCO-2013-Final.pdf). 

The FCOs provide overall management direction for both New York and Ontario, and are used to establish agency management policies. In response to angler’s input, the FCO goal for the offshore, open water zone is to “Maintain the offshore pelagic fish community, that is characterized by a diversity of trout and salmon species including Chinook Salmon, Coho Salmon, Rainbow Trout, Brown Trout, and Atlantic Salmon, in balance with prey-fish populations and lower trophic levels.† Further, the primary objective under this goal is to “maintain Chinook Salmon as the top offshore pelagic predator supporting trophy recreational lake and tributary fisheries through stocking.â€

Under the guidance of the FCOs, The Lake Ontario Committee, comprised of DEC and OMNRF fisheries managers, establishes lake-wide stocking targets. In recognition of the critical role a healthy alewife population plays in maintaining a high-quality Chinook fishery, the FCOs also acknowledge the need to “maintain abundance of top predators (stocked and wild) in balance with available prey fish.â€

Partner agencies including the U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, and the Great Lakes Fishery Commission are also involved in providing science support, controlling sea lamprey and raising fish for stocking.  Scientists from the aforementioned agencies, along with academics, are members of the Lake Ontario Technical Committee, which provides scientific advice to the Lake Ontario Committee.

Concerns Over the Future of the Alewife Population - The main prey fish in Lake Ontario is the non-native alewife, a type of herring native to the Atlantic Ocean. Fisheries Management agencies track the status of alewife through a long term bottom trawling program. In 2016, adult alewife numbers are significantly lower than in 2015, and will likely continue to decline over the next few years. Alewife, age-2 and older, are the preferred food for the top predator in the lake, Chinook salmon.

Alewife in the Great lakes are at the northern extreme of their tolerance for cold temperatures, and young alewife have difficulty surviving long, cold winters.  The severe winters of 2013/14 and 2014/15 negatively impacted survival of alewife produced in those years.  In 2016, the alewife produced in 2013 and 2014 should have dominated the adult alewife population at ages 3 and 2, respectively, however, these ages are poorly represented in the population.  Without sufficient young alewife to replace older alewife, the number of adults will decline in 2017 and beyond. 

DEC and OMNRF are concerned that without enough young alewife to replenish the adults that are eaten primarily by trout and salmon, there may not be sufficient prey to support the current, high-quality fishery in the future. While all of Lake Ontario’s trout and salmon feed to some extent on alewife, Chinook salmon feed almost exclusively on age 2 and older alewife and exert the greatest predation pressure on the adult alewife population.

It is important to note that this situation is not the same as the alewife population collapse in Lake Huron, or the continuing alewife decline in Lake Michigan. Reduced nutrients leading to less alewife food and fewer alewife, combined with too many predators, are thought to be key factors leading to predator-prey imbalance in the upper lakes. In Lake Ontario, for now, we have sufficient nutrients to support alewife and their food.  The current issue appears related to poor alewife reproduction in 2013 and 2014, combined with high predator demand for alewife.

Management Options for 2017 – The only effective solution to this issue is to reduce predator demand on alewife as soon as possible.  Given the rapid growth of Chinook salmon (from 0 to 30 pounds in 4 years) and their dependence on alewife, reducing Chinook salmon stocking provides the only practical solution for reducing predation on alewife in the short term. 

Ontario and New York State’s combined Chinook salmon stocking target is 2.3 million fish, however, a recent study has shown that we are effectively stocking more than 3 million Chinook salmon due the great success of the net pen program. Chinooks held in net pens by sportsmen’s groups for three to four weeks prior to release have been shown to survive twice as well as traditional “direct†stocked fish.  When we factor in the additional wild fish, the equivalent of 6 million Chinook salmon are added to the lake annually.

DEC is considering a 20% reduction in Chinook salmon stocking in 2017 (reduce from 1.76 million to 1.41 million fish), which amounts to a 10% overall reduction when wild Chinook salmon are included.  This action would reduce alewife consumption attributable to Chinook salmon by 7.5 million pounds over the period from 2018-2020.  Future increases in Chinook salmon would be considered when alewife population characteristics indicate good overall “health.†  

We are also considering a 20% reduction in 2017 lake trout stocking (New York reduction from 500,000 to 400,000 fish), however, this action will not provide short term reductions in alewife predation, as lake trout grow much slower than Chinook salmon, are not as dependent on alewife as a food source, but do live much longer than Chinook salmon.  The adult lake trout population is currently at levels favorable for natural reproduction.  A 20% reduction will not impact lake trout restoration efforts in the short term, however, stocking levels will be increased if the adult population size falls below target levels in the future.

DEC is proposing to maintain current stocking targets for rainbow trout, brown trout and coho salmon for 2017, is working cooperatively with the OMNRF to ensure consistent management actions on both sides of the lake. 

Potential Impacts to the Sportfishery – This stocking reduction is intended to protect the long-term viability of this economically important fishery. Given a 20% reduction in Chinook salmon stocking is actually 10% lake wide reduction (accounting for 50% wild Chinook salmon), the potential impact to the sportfishery is likely minor.

We experienced an unplanned stocking reduction in the past without negative impacts to the sportfishery.  Due to reduced Chinook salmon egg collections at the Salmon River Hatchery caused by low water and high water temperatures in 2007, DEC stocked only 799,000 Chinook salmon in the spring of 2008, a 42% reduction (NY/Ontario combined).  When these fish reached age 2 in 2010 and age 3 in 2011, they supported excellent Chinook salmon fishing quality.

As anglers experienced in 2014 and 2015, fishing success is much more likely to vary due to spatial distribution of alewife, water temperatures, weather patterns, and wind speed/direction.

Similar to the proposed Chinook salmon stocking reduction, reduced lake trout stocking will not likely impact lake trout angling success.

Future Management Actions - DEC and OMNRF remain committed to maintaining the ecological, recreational, and economic benefits of Lake Ontario’s sportfishery, and in particular, the Chinook salmon fishery.  Any future management actions will be based on the results of 2017 alewife population assessments, as well as changes in Chinook salmon growth.  In the event that further management actions are deemed necessary, the Department will consult with stakeholder groups and the public. 

Next steps – DEC will hold public meetings at the following times and locations:

Monday, September 19: 6:30 p.m. - 9:00 p.m. at the Cornell Cooperative Extension Building, 4487 Lake Avenue, Lockport, Niagara County. 

 

Tuesday, September 20: 6:30 p.m. - 9:00 p.m. at the Sandy Creek High School auditorium, 124 Salisbury Street, Oswego County. 

 

Tuesday, September 27: 6:30 p.m. - 9:00 p.m. at the Town of Greece Town Hall, 1 Vince Tofany Blvd., Monroe County. 

 

DEC staff will present information, and the audience will have ample time to ask questions and provide input on potential management actions. Those who cannot attend a meeting can provide comments at [email protected]

A final decision will be announced in mid-October, 2016.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Lake Ontario United mobile app

This is already being discussed here:

http://www.lakeontariounited.com/fishing-hunting/topic/61073-overview-for-discussions-regarding-2017-salmon-and-trout-stocking-levels-in-lake-ontario/

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gambler, "interesting point".

Rich s.

I feel your frustration, I agree with some of your valid points. I don't feel DEC is tring to eliminate stocking of salmon. Yes it would be great if lake Ontario flourished with natural king salmon. This lake just does not support a 100% natural return. It never will. We took that away so we could have homes on the lake, (dams/locks to prevent flouding,waterlevel control). And yes 50/50 is a estimate by dec. All this info is collected from many different ways. 1 being, that floating tracker bass boat waiting for u as u enter port. We all know who they are. They collect info from us captains. They collect samples from our daily catch. Record if natural or pen. So I do somewhat believe the estimate is close.

Who wouldn't want a 100% natural spawn. It would be sick fishing if that happened. If, and a big if, a high percentage of the natural fry, survived to adult age.

Anyway won't happen, DEC knows this. We do mark a lot of bait fish. Who's to say what kind.

We have like 7 different bait fish out there. Ranging from gobys to alewifes. Salmon feast on 2 year old alewifes. I guess they would rather die than eat anything else.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Lake Ontario United mobile app

Link to post
Share on other sites
We got same email, same time. Many conversations for this issue.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Lake Ontario United mobile app

Link to post
Share on other sites

What happened to the talk about, the size of the salmon dictates a lot about the forage. The salmon caught this year seem well feed, and good numbers of 20-30lb Kings. More so than most years The fish seem well feed. Is every one hammerin em, no this isn't 1987. To me the numbers are not there, are they surviving??? Is the bait gone, are the lakers eating all the freshly planted salmon??? What's the survival rate with dec. current stockings. You all must have for got when the comerants would decimate the barge stocked Browns. Why is the brown Trout fishery holding , and kings can't???? Where have all these supposed salmon gone, so many questions un answered. Is the state broke and this is the excuse??? This is New York state

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you want fish out of the system, raise creel limits.  Raising the creel limit on Lakers would decrease the adult population and would have immediate results. 

who keeps lake trout if it wasn't for money . want more lake trout out of the system just miss treat them be for release 

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's is not what we want. That gives sportsmen a bad name. If people see dead lakers floating all over and washing up on the beach, that looks bad. Sportsmen already get a bad name from slobs that litter on the banks of tribs, ponds and lakes. Also the US Fish and Wildlife Service and the DEC would not think too highly of this. It is bad enough guys are not handling them properly and there are floaters all over somedays.

Sent from my iPhone using Lake Ontario United

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's is not what we want. That gives sportsmen a bad name. If people see dead lakers floating all over and washing up on the beach, that looks bad. Sportsmen already get a bad name from slobs that litter on the banks of tribs, ponds and lakes. Also the US Fish and Wildlife Service and the DEC would not think too highly of this. It is bad enough guys are not handling them properly and there are floaters all over somedays.

Sent from my iPhone using Lake Ontario United

X2

Sent from my SM-N900V using Lake Ontario United mobile app

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's is not what we want. That gives sportsmen a bad name. If people see dead lakers floating all over and washing up on the beach, that looks bad. Sportsmen already get a bad name from slobs that litter on the banks of tribs, ponds and lakes. Also the US Fish and Wildlife Service and the DEC would not think too highly of this. It is bad enough guys are not handling them properly and there are floaters all over somedays.

Sent from my iPhone using Lake Ontario United

Could not agree more

Sent from my iPhone using Lake Ontario United

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok,I hope to attend the Lockport meeting as I am at Golden State Park and hope to extend my stay for that purpose. I'm just a googan but My idea.

They can't raise and stock ale wives because they stated the lake may suffer nutrient depletion as the other lakes have. So they know the root problem. Lack of nutrients, according to the article. So seems to me if the proper nutrition was added to the water the ale wives would thrive. Perhaps a mussel reproduction inhibitor could be added. Now that's science! What did I miss? Hopefully not the meeting.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok,I hope to attend the Lockport meeting as I am at Golden State Park and hope to extend my stay for that purpose. I'm just a googan but My idea.

They can't raise and stock ale wives because they stated the lake may suffer nutrient depletion as the other lakes have. So they know the root problem. Lack of nutrients, according to the article. So seems to me if the proper nutrition was added to the water the ale wives would thrive. Perhaps a mussel reproduction inhibitor could be added. Now that's science! What did I miss? Hopefully not the meeting.

The article states, "it's not lack of nutrients". It's alewifes are at their max northern limit in the great lakes. Any further north, they would just not survive. So every hard winter kills off alewifes. That's what I got out of it anyway.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Lake Ontario United mobile app

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have seen very clear video of fish and matts of mussels in 110 Fow . Is the lake clearer then in the past ?

By far cleaner, almost 50% cleaner than 30 years ago. That's why people think the fishing is no good.

Some get set in their ways.

A very must to adapt with the lake changes. Clearer water, equals sharper fishing skills. Long leads, copper, fluorocarbon,etc. As well as location and timing. Get them away from the boat.

Sent from my SM-N900V using Lake Ontario United mobile app

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...