Posted by ADKBass on 2002 PM:
Reclamation of Species
I just read an
interesting article in the Post Star (3-31-02) called "New York Using
Poison to Help Fishing Industry". (sorry can't locate internet version)
Essentially, it's an indepth article on the fact that, since 1948, the state
DEC has been using rotenone (a chemical made from the roots of tropical plants)
to kill non-native species, like perch and bluegill, to re-establish trout --
specifically brook trout.
They pour in the chemical in the fall, the fish die within a few hours, then in
the spring the lake or pond is restocked with strains of brook trout native to
the park.
The goal is to eliminate non-native fish species that are competing with the
brook trout so that the trout can again make the lake habitable. This has been
done in more than 150 lakes and ponds.
What's your opinion?
__________________
"Time spent fishing does not count against our allotted time on this
earth." Joe V. - The Troll
Posted by JOHN G on 2002 PM:
well, for what ever reasons, they like certain lakes to be trophy or special trout lakes and I guess they are looking for the best possible trout evvironment.....It would become an issue if they decided to do that to one of your favorite waters that is for sure!!! JOHN G
Posted by patx on 2002 PM:
Well, considering that a
bass is nothing more than an overgrown sunfish, or bluegill, I cant imagine
that being very productive for our cause. Does anyone know if this method of
"ethnic cleansing" is still being used today? I cant imagine it, but
then again, the geniuses in Albany (DEC, DEP) might be taking the path of least
resistance and are continuing to use antiquated practices like
"POISON" to achieve "Trophy Trout" waters.
F'ing ponderous.......
Pat Xiques
Posted by Pete L on 2002 PM:
John - Hope thier not looking at wampus !!!!
__________________
Pete LaFemina
There is a very fine line between "hobby" and
"mental illness."
Posted by Paulie D on 2002 PM:
Here in Ct there are
several Trophy Trout Lakes which are mangaged by the DEP. I
am not aware of this practice you speak of in NY and have to figure that CT
does not have the $ or time to do the same here. What I can tell you is that
Candlewood and East Twin are Trophy trout lakes up this way and my guess is
that due to stocking and forage (the alewife population) these lakes pretty
much have developed over the years to this status. Many springtime TXs will
land a Big Brown trout in lieu of a Black Bass in many instances just by
fishing a Jerkbait in 8-10 ft. A TXs anglers nightmare is to see the Rec angler
from shore land the 4lb smallie on a live alewife while your yanking your Lucky
Craft hooks out of 5lb Brown Trout. Dont laugh it happens more than you think!
ciao
paulie
Posted by wnybassman on 2002 PM:
Could this explain why some Adirondack lakes are "dead"? Could it be experiments gone horribly wrong?
__________________
Bassman's Thread of the Web - A
Look at WNY's Bass Fishing
- Protection
and organization of your rods
"Perhaps God gave the answers, to those with nothing to say" -
Savatage
Posted by mikeD in NYC on 2002 PM:
killing perch and
bluegill
Posted by GANGGREEN on 2002 AM:
Pat, I think that this is still occuring.
I'm hesitant to do this
because I don't want all of you to think that I'm a total shill for the NYDEC
(I assure you that I'm not) but I think that I'll play devil's advocate on this
one.
While I'm not a huge fan of killing perfectly healthy panfish (they're so delicious
and kind of pretty too) or ripping out perfectly good dams, I can see the logic
behind doing it. Our warm water fisheries are in pretty good shape all across
the continent. I don't think that it would be too much of a stretch to say that
fishing for many warmwater species may be better now than it ever has been. The
same can't be said for the cold water species and fisheries.
This is kind of the environmental project of the day. Fisheries teams are
trying to restore native coldwater species all across the continent, atlantic
salmon in the northeast, coaster brookies in the great lakes, pacific salmon in
the northwest and cutthroat and rainbow trout in the western US.
Consider for a moment that many of these species have been hurt by
"progress". For the most part, the dams that have hurt the atlantic
and pacific salmon and many other species of trout weren't built to provide
recreation. They were either flood control projects or were built to provide
water or electricity to an ever growing population. The brook trout of the adirondacks
have been hurt by acid rain and the loss of their native lakes but also by the
bucket brigade of armchair biologists who took it upon themselves to decide
what species belonged in lake X. Northern pike, bluegills, etc., while exciting
species to fish for, are far more aggressive feeders than native brook trout
(or non-native brown trout for that matter) and can easily displace the
species. The DEC would probably suggest that they are just righting a wrong
that man is responsible for.
Don't tar and feather me, as I said I am just playing devil's advocate but I do
see the value in trying to protect and/or reestablish native species. I've
obviously enjoyed pursuing ringneck pheasants, brown trout and walleye in areas
that they are not "native" to but I am a bit bothered by our
propensity to always try to "stock" areas that already have native
fish and game species in acceptable numbers.
If anybody has a chance, pick up a copy of "50 years a hunter and
trapper" which was written about 200 years ago by a man by the name of
Tombs. He descibes "salmon" runs in the Loyalsock Creek in Pennsylvania that were so thick that they
literally turned the stream black. I suspect that the salmon he refers to were
actually brook trout in numbers far exceeding anything in America today. I long for those days.
Just my two cents.
Posted by Paul Mattie on 2002 AM:
The fisheries biologist
has spent at least 4 years and probably more on a college education that
trained them in the "art and science of fishery management" and by
golly that's what they are going to do. They are going to go out and alter the
present enviroment to make it more suitable for whatever purpose is deemed
appropriate. Just so you guys know all these panfish and black bass are not
native to many if not all the habitats that get treated. In a few months
fishermen will be dumping whatever kind of bait and fish they want to see in
that particular body of water. A few years ago there was a reservoir in Central CA that had pike that was unwanted(nonnative)
they killed every fish in the whole lake (and this was no puny eastern lake
either.) It wasn't a year or 2 before the pike was back. Really the biologist
is just trying to take back control of fishery management from the anglers that
will dump species into lakes despite the fact that it's against the law.
It's just a blip on the screen and besides the trout fisherman has to have a
place to go too.
Posted by Scully on 2002 AM:
My simple reply....Put me
in with "Ganggreen". Besides, I wouldnt mind catching a few brookies.
In my younger days I spent many happy hours searching out and catching
"native brookies" on the Tug Hill Plateau area of New York State.
I just hope they re-establish this species in creeks that arent bordered with a
million tag alders. My back cant take that sort of abuse any longer. lol
Scully
Posted by judge66 on 2002 AM:
There have been many good points made so far. The problem with this new we must have native fish is this most trout are not really native. This killing the lake and starting over, they kill a natural self sustaining population of perch, blue gills, and most likely bass, pike, bait fish, ect. The dump fish that have nevr seen natural water before, have the same genetic make up, poor servial skills, poor immune systems. In addition to these fish they most likely have to add bait fish, and in order for this to work they will most likely have to do it for quite a few year. To me that is a waste of money. If they want more trout water if they must let them knock down a dam and just make the environment more favorable for trout, smallies and other can live side by side with trout. Save the money and use it for environmental and habit improvements. Plus this way both bass and trout fisherman can use the waters not just one or the others.
Posted by Paul Mattie on 2002 AM:
The fishery biolgist
would love to be able to manage the land surrounding the water to effect
change. It's a much more sensible and long lasting approach. However they don't
own the land, nor are they responsible to manage the land.
Yes brown trout aren't native, but the other trout species are. We tend to
concentrate our thoughts on the gamefish, but really there is a lot more too
the ecosystem than the top predators.
The fishery biologist is doing his best with the constraints that they have.
Posted by ADKBass on 2002 AM:
Actually Pat, this is an
ongoing practice.
wnybassman: this is not the reason for the "dead" lakes. As we are
all very much aware, the main reason is the acid rain.cussin
__________________
"Time spent fishing does not count against our allotted time on this
earth." Joe V. - The Troll
Posted by mr jig on 2002 PM:
Judge 66.
I rarely post on this
board but i respectfully suggest you re examine your post. Your errors are
astonishing.
This is a complex issue.
Thus far only Paul Mattie has a handle on it.
mr jig
Posted by Bass Rat on 2002 PM:
Judge 66, I have to agree
with Mr. Jig. Check your post. Your thoughts are not comming across in your
typing.
Mr.Jig, Why do you rarely post on this site? Do you frequent this site often? Just
curious.
Nick
__________________
I'm smellin Spring!!!
Posted by Scott E. on 2002 AM:
Rotenone's
uses, misuses, and non-native fish stocking.
Guys,
Some of you may remember a few years ago stories about Lake Davis in Nothern California as Rotenone was used there to rid the lake of the
non-native species pike. The lake was a prized trout and salmon fishery and the
towns surrounding the 7 mile lake used it as a drinking water supply, the DNR
had planned to capture and remove all existing trout and salmon in the lake and
told the towns that the water would be suitable for drinking again in a few
weeks after the poisoning.
The day came to treat the lake and the DNR did not even try to capture and
remove any of the trout or salmon from the lake and a few weeks later when the
towns tested their water supply they found out it was still poisoned and it
took more than 6 months for the water to become potable again, they also failed
to poison the pike as they found 2+ year classes of pike that had survived.
New York is looking to save the native
brook trout in a few Adirondack lakes and ponds that have been
illegally stocked and they have had success, the problem comes in when the
pesticide is misused or over applied as it was in California. I also do not think it is a good
idea to use this pesticide in lakes that are used for drinking water supplies
as Rotenone can have adverse affects on humans, as it has been linked to
causing parkinson's disease in some rare cases.
The Strawberry Res. in Utah is another example of the success
in the use of Rotenone, the trout fishery was saved and the economic value of
the fishery was also increased by $2 million dollars a year.
The AMERICAN FISHERIES
SOCIETY condones the safe and effective use of Rotenone in protecting sport
fisheries and they have come up with many guidelines for the use of this
chemical pesticide for fisheries management.
__________________
Nothing sets a person so far out of the devil's reach as humility.
Jonathan Edwards
---
Scott E.
scotte@pikeonline.net