[Stew]

I realize that bass and other warm water gamefish provide excellent sports fishing opportunities throughout the state but I have a real problem with someone just arbitrarily illegally introducing these fish into waters that they were never in before. Case in point is Crane Prairie resevoir. The bass and trout compete for the same food and since the intro of warm water species into the lake the size of the trout have steadily shrank in the years since. The introduction of these fish was not done by the state! It was done illegally.
What's your guys take on this?

[ 07-29-2003, 06:14 PM: Message edited by: Stew ]

 

[GutshotApe]

No Stew...armchair biologists are those who sit back and complain

...who think they know more than the biologists. You are talking about those who KNOW they know more than the biologists...and act on that knowledge by becoming "Johnny BassSeed". Have Live Well, Will Travel. :depressed:

Of course, it is illegal to transport live fish or to introduce live fish into new bodies of water without a DFW permit...but there's scarcely a lake in Oregon or Washington that might be capable of supporting bass that hasn't received an illegal planting of bass...then followed by bluegill, perch, crappie, etc.

I love springtime crappie fishing...in Fern Ridge Res...where they too are exotic, although they've been in the reservoir ~63 yrs...and provide a fishery where not much else exists. Bass have their places, too. But you're right...Crane Prairie, Wickiup, Davis...etc...sad examples of unfortunate and regrettable losses of trophy trout fisheries. :depressed:

[ 07-28-2003, 02:27 PM: Message edited by: GutshotApe ]

 

[garyk]

My take is the regulations need to be changed to allow for unlimited take of bass, walleye, etc. and other harmful exotics in all waters inhabited by salmonids. (PS, I grew up on bass and panfish so I do understand what and where their appropriate place is)

 

[lost_sailor]

My take is it's too bad about C.P.

It's too bad about Diamond Lake, too.

 

[Stew]

Originally posted by garyk:
My take is the regulations need to be changed to allow for unlimited take of bass, walleye, etc. and other harmful exotics in all waters inhabited by salmonids. (PS, I grew up on bass and panfish so I do understand what and where their appropriate place is)

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Good point garyk! I agree completely! Another reason for the decline in trophy trout in CP is the harvest of blue damsel nymphs for bait. They are an important food source for those trout in CP.
You're right GSA these guys who think they know better are a real problem. They've done the same with Hagg Lake but since it is fairly new, less than 25 years old, the trout have never established themselves and are planted several times a year.

[ 07-28-2003, 08:54 PM: Message edited by: Stew ]

 

[rebell]

What you are calling armchair biology stew, is what I have alway's called bucket biology. It's a real problem all over North America. There is nothing more damaging to a fishery than illegal introductions of fish.

Armchair biology is not looking at the entire picture when deciding what is happening to a certain fishery, or simply placing the blame on a single source.

By no means am I ever going to say that the introduction of bass in CP or anywhere else has had no impact on those fisheries. But there is room in the N.W. for bass and panfish. There are more and more people fishing bass, walleye, crappie and other warm water fish in the N.W. And they all spend money on a license with no return from the state. Zero dollars are put in to warm water fisheries now, and most of these anglers undertand why, and don't have a problem with it. I know several who don't salmon and steelhead fish, but yet are forced to pay extra money this next year to fish, with no return to them at all.

To each his own, I love fishing for bass, salmon and steelhead. But I will turn in a bucket biologist in a minute if I suspected someone stocking fish where they do not belong.

 

[Stew]

Bucket fish biologists...I like that.
Warm water species are just fine but only when introduced legally
This reminds of the piranha that was caught in the Willamette a few years ago.

[ 07-28-2003, 09:27 PM: Message edited by: Stew ]

 

[rebell]

I have heard of piranha and pike. It's spooky to think that there are people out there dumping fish like that in to the river.

I have alway's wondered why the state even allow's fish like that to be bought down at the local pet store. To many people buy them, and then realize they are a lot of work to keep. Then thinking they are doing their fish a favor, dump them in to the nearest lake or river.

The best thing we can do is try to educate the public on the damage they are causing. Otherwise the problem is only going to get worse.

 

[Straydog]

There is a strong movement, with a good chance of success I am told, of getting a warm water biologist back on staff at ODFW.

You're right Rebell, at this time the warm water fishers are getting little or nothing for their license fees in terms of return on investment, so to speak.

I also agree that bucket biologists are a menace.

 

[Point-of-Sale Clerk]

This is a touchy subject for me.

I grew up next to a warm water lake and learned many of the skills fishing for bass that I utilize today when fishing for all types of fish. I realize that warm water fisheries play an important role in Oregon’s sport fishing economy. Yet like GaryK, I believe that ODFW should not restrict harvest of any exotic species in bodies of water where they can impact native salmonids. Poorly done studies like Kin Daily’s “reconnaissance” into the impact that Willamette bass have on smolts do nothing more than perpetuate ODFW’s non-action.

With regard to CP and other lakes I believe it is important to remember that the introduction of warm water species does not have to be human related. Although unlikely, it is possible for bass to have populated this lake using natural transportation vectors.

Someday I hope to be able to volunteer to net warm water fishes in the rivers and place them in public lakes. Concentrating them in lakes will provide for some fantastic fisheries and help reduce their populations in salmon bearing rivers.
A win-win for everyone.

 

[Stew]

Yep Rusty a piranha was caught in the Willamette! :shocked: Doubtful he would have survived the cold winter temps but the possibilities are scarey to say the least. No doubt someone thought it would be fun to have one of these in their home aquarium.
I hope that there is going to be a warm water bio added to ODFW in the future. One of the best times I have ever had was on smallmouth in a farm pond near Heppener.
We just don't need them in places where there are trophy trout and they would interfere with trout.
BTW how were walleye introduced into the Columbia?

 

[SureSet]

There is no place for "bucket Biologists" or "Live Bait Buddys", but unfortunatly, they are winning the game. It used to be, someone introduced an unplanned species and the "real" biologists took care of it quickly with a dose of Rotone(sp?). Here we are now with situations like Diamond, Davis and CP, where the traditional fishery is toast, but the avenues to correct it are blocked by those who believe they are doing the right "natural" thing. So what happens? Everyone gets what they want, except for the guy who wants a good trout lake. In this case, maybe it is survival of the fittest and trout be damned.

Just ask how many interim steps, how much money and how many reviews and plans it will take in today's climate to get Diamond lake back, we're 5 plus years along without a real plan. Even if it were treated, God knows, there will be bass in it within months, just as CP , Davis, etc. I find myself asking if we should waste the money or punt.


SureSet

 

[garyk]

Not to pound on ODFW too much but their management with respect to exotic species is schizophrenic. Here's what I mean:

The Game Division has taken a hard stance against exotics (with the exception of pheasant and chukar and huns). They fought hard, and correctly so, against the introduction of exotics like Axis deer, fallow deer, wild boar, and so forth. And taken action to eliminate them when feral populations have taken hold.

ODFW convened the Wildlife Integrity Task Force to develop recomendations to control exotics and protect Oregon's indigenous species.

On the other hand, the Fish Division seems to place the highest priority on license sales, and so we see protective regulations on bass, walleye etc. Not to mention the stocking of brook trout, browns, atlantic salmon.

While BPA pays a bounty to reduce the Northern PIke Minnow population in the Columbia, ODFW enacts limits to protect and maintain bass and walleye populations in the same waters. Does that make ANY sense at all?

A final comment about bass/warmwater anglers not getting a return on their license. They are paying for the 'opportunity' to fish. Nothing more. How they want to use that opportunity is up to them. Big populations of salmonids are there if they choose to pursue them. The opportunity is there, and that's all they (and we) pay for.

 

[UmpquaSpecial]

Interesting subject. Some may recall a proposal by ODFW several years back to remove, or severly relax catch and size limit restrictions for non-native gamefish. This proposal met immediate and loud resistance from the multitude of warm water fishing clubs and guides in our state who depend on these fish for recreation and jobs (e.g., think John Day and Umpqua smallmouth bass fisheries, or Columbia R. walleye).

ODFW, serving the publics interest, quickly recinded the proposal, and we were largely back to status quo. To my knowledge however, ODFW has largely eliminated stocking of warmwater gamefish in streams and rivers and lakes with outlets. Getting rid of warmwater gamefish that are introduced into these areas is a challeging and sometime futile effort. We will probably have better success educating the public as to the dangers and detriments of moving fish from one water body to another, or fishing live bait, which was the likely source of tui chub introduction to Diamond Lake.
Chris

 

[Snapset]

I am wondering if Livewells shouldn't be banned.

 

[TheTexan]

Anyone see this one?

http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/science/09/24/critters.maryland.snakehead/

 

[Stew]

Wow that is scarey :shocked:

 

[WildHawg]

Bass are a bane on our rivers and reesrvoirs. They do, however taste good. Kill 'em all--let god sort 'em out!!
Tanner, you are the man!!!

 

[Tanner]

Here we go again. Crane Prairie Bassin

 

[Stew]

Originally posted by Tanner:
Here we go again. Crane Prairie Bassin

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">You know Tanner I think you're a great guy :cheers: