# More Scofield.



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

Ran up to Scofield this afternoon to test some gear and fish for a bit. The action was decent and the ice was 8 inches of hard, clear ice. It was nice to get out of the inversion for a couple hours. If you go up, bring your ice cleats as the ice is smooth and slick. 


I have read a number of reports about Scofield this year or so. Some have been favorable, others more pessimistic. Since Scofields management has been, um, controversial, the topic has some interest to a variety of anglers. I haven't fished it myself for about 2 years, so I was curious about what I would find. I caught enough fish today to at least throw something together for discussion. FWIW, todays catch was 50% cutt, 25% tiger trout, and 25% bows.

First, the tigers. As the first picture shows, the tigers caught today seemed to be very thin. They all were the same. I can't say I was impressed. 

Next, rainbows. These also were seemingly underweight but not as bad as they were the last time I fished it. When they were stocked will have an effect on their condition at this time. The same may apply with the tigers too. 

Finally, the cutts. Cutts, especially sub slot cutts, are normally somewhat thin, complicating analysis. However, I only caught one "slotter" today. It seemed to be in decent shape. The closer the fish were to 15 inches, the better shape they seemed to be. That said, most were still pretty thin. 

So, my unofficial and minimally scientific analysis  is that it is getting better but has a ways to go still. I didn't catch any chubs though.


----------



## taxidermist (Sep 11, 2007)

WOW!! Those are some ugly looking "toothpicks"! Last time I hit the hard deck there, (five years ago) we were into Tigers that were pushing the 5+ pound class. In fact, all the bows and cuts were fat dudes and tested the 4lb line fighting.


We had the best luck catching the bigger tigers using red shiners. Just a swivel for weight and before it would hit the bottom it was fish on.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

that cutt actually looks like a nice fish. It is very pretty.


I think this management plan may actually end up working -- but it's going to be a slow process. i hate to keep beating a dead horse, but.....had they poisoned it 2 years ago, we'd be in a better position today! Oh well. Slow and steady....

Glad you got out on the water Catherder!


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

PBH said:


> that cutt actually looks like a nice fish. It is very pretty.
> 
> I think this management plan may actually end up working -- but it's going to be a slow process. i hate to keep beating a dead horse, but.....had they poisoned it 2 years ago, we'd be in a better position today! Oh well. Slow and steady....
> 
> Glad you got out on the water Catherder!


Yeah, the cutt was kinda pretty, but then I think most of them are.  I just took that pic as a representative sample but as noted, I felt the cutts were in the best shape of the 3 species. The slot and near slotters weren't too bad. That said, it is apparent that growth there for them is far behind what is seen at Strawberry or Panguitch.

Taxi, Yeah, I caught some of those too back in the day, (in fact there is an old U tube video of me catching a slot buster cutt from there, unwittingly filmed) but I wouldn't expect that now for tigers or bows, unless you hook up with one of the brood stock rainbows they put in each fall. 

At least it is improved enough that it is worth an afternoon trip and some decent tugs.


----------



## Dekeh (Nov 13, 2018)

It is being a slow process but I am encouraged by what it going on. There are still the skinny fish to be found but the cutts have been getting healthier every year. We caught close to a dozen musky this summer and even hooked into some wipers. One of the challenging things is people having to change they way they fish to catch the bigger fish. I know we have had to but I feel it has been worth it. IMO


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

Don't mean to hijack this one, but I will.  

What are the size of the muskies you were catching up there this summer? I'm really intrigued by how they will do in that lake.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

I don't think there is any doubt: they will do well. You will get some big tm's. 

The real question is whether or not the chub population will regress to a controllable size. It won't be the musky that do that. It will be the wipers.


----------



## taxidermist (Sep 11, 2007)

PBH said:


> I don't think there is any doubt: they will do well. You will get some big tm's.
> 
> The real question is whether or not the chub population will regress to a controllable size. It won't be the musky that do that. It will be the wipers.


The Muskies will eat the 8-10" planter bows the DWR pumps out of the tank truck! It will be like ringing the dinner bell. In five years (if the plan works) you'll be hooking fish like one can at Minersville.


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

PBH said:


> I don't think there is any doubt: they will do well. You will get some big tm's.
> 
> The real question is whether or not the chub population will regress to a controllable size. It won't be the musky that do that. It will be the wipers.


Since I started the thread, I guess I can hijack it.  Speaking of wipers, when I was down for the hunt, we stopped by that store across the street from Otter Creek State park. They had a few pictures of some very obese wipers taken from OC. I believe you were telling me about them this spring. Have you heard anything recently of how big they are getting in there now?


----------



## Dekeh (Nov 13, 2018)

The majority of muskie we have been catching are around 24”. The largest was 30” right on the dot.


----------

