# Regulation changes at Kolob



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

I just read the proposed changes for Kolob in 2010. I hope it goes through, it would be nice to have a compromise of both bait and artificial fishers. I love the idea of a slot limit too. It would be great to be able to have the kids fish there again with bait. People, please support this change for all those who camp up there in the summer with there families.
Here's a link to the changes proposed: http://wildlife.utah.gov/public_meetings/info/may02.pdf


----------



## Jeremy28 (Dec 1, 2007)

I actually like the regulations there because the fish will be more numerous and bigger. I caught a 6.25lber there a year and a half ago that i probably wouldn't have caught if there wasn't the regulations that exist there now.


----------



## mjschijf (Oct 1, 2007)

ridgetop said:


> I just read the proposed changes for Kolob in 2010. I hope it goes through, it would be nice to have a compromise of both bait and artificial fishers. I love the idea of a slot limit too. It would be great to be able to have the kids fish there again with bait. People, please support this change for all those who camp up there in the summer with there families.


I have been hearing about these proposed changes in the regulations for a while, but what exactly are the proposed changes?

I agree with Jeremy28. I think the current regulations are what makes Kolob such a quality fishery. There are plenty of places to bring the kids and fish with bait in southern Utah. Why not have a place around like Kolob where you can go to get away from mob bait hucking crowds? That's just my 2 cents, but I might be a little biased...I hate fishing with bait.


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

I posted a link to the new proposed management plan. It seems like it could be great for both sides. ( bait and fly fishers) BTW, big fish can be caught in almost all the southern Utah lakes not just Kolob. Why should all the families that live on Kolob during the summers have to drive over an hour to the closest trout lake to fish with bait when they have one 5 minutes away.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

Jeremy28 said:


> I actually like the regulations there because the fish will be more numerous and bigger. I caught a 6.25lber there a year and a half ago that i probably wouldn't have caught if there wasn't the regulations that exist there now.


I have to disagree to a point. The current regulations help keep Kolob a good fishery, but they also prevent Kolob from being a GREAT fishery.

Kolob has great natural recruitment from both the rainbows and the cutthroat. While occasional large trout are taken from Kolob, your average trout max out around 17". You don't see that many trout make it to over the existing 18" minimum harvest regulation. The reservoirs sees very little harvest of trout, and we're seeing the negative results of nearly no harvest from this lake: too many fish.

The proposed regulation changes, as determined by the committee, are to liberalize harvest, and allow bait during the summer months. Rainbow trout and cutthroat trout should be done spawning prior to the gear restrictions being lifted -- the artificial only crowd will still have the lake to themselves for some of the best fishing of the year at Kolob. Additional fish will be harvested during the summer, which should allow for MORE trout to grow LARGER.

Personally, I see this as a win/win solution for anglers. Quality should go up while opportunity also increases. I think they've come up with a pretty good solution to make Kolob a better fishery for everyone.


----------



## EmptyNet (Mar 17, 2008)

Hey PBH whats the deal with all the dead shiners up there, went up there with jeremy30 today and noticed quite a few around the shores.


----------



## Jeremy28 (Dec 1, 2007)

You could be right PBH but I would think it would be an impossible task to decide whether the trout are overpopulating the lake to the point that the food source is scarce resulting in smaller fish (unless its totally obvious). All we caught were skinny fish which would support your claim but the ice just came off and the food source will be more abundant now in the coming months. Every fall when I fish there, the fish are majorly fat and healthy (fattest ive seen in any lake) which would not support your claim. Its a very subjective topic where one could make his point believable for both sides...kinda like politics.


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

PBH, I agree 100%!


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

Jeremy28 said:


> You could be right PBH but I would think it would be an impossible task to decide whether the trout are overpopulating the lake to the point that the food source is scarce resulting in smaller fish (unless its totally obvious).


What?

You need to consider that the DWR has data on these fish going back quite a number of years. They have netting data that contains far more information than what an angler can gather using a fishing rod. This isn't a new problem.

Consider, when the original special regs went into place it was an 18" minimum size for harvest. A couple years later that size jumped up to 22" to standardize with the rest of the state. A couple years later, it was once again adjusted back down to 18". Why? Too many fish and not enough harvest.

The lake is a fantastic lake. In fact, it's almost too good. The fish continue to reproduce, regardless of the amount of food available. While some people occasionally catch fish over 18", that is not the norm. The objectives are to try to increase quality while at the same time increase opportunity. I think that is an attainable goal under the proposed regulation changes.

This isn't a "stunting" issue. It's a size issue. The fish max out at around 18". They need some harvest in order to get MORE fish over that 18" ceiling.


----------



## Jeremy28 (Dec 1, 2007)

Fine!! I will get you someday PBH you just wait!


----------



## EmptyNet (Mar 17, 2008)

So if we look at the DWR data, I wonder if the netting results from 1993-96 have anything to do with the annual stocking of 29,500 fish at the cost of $5,740. I don't think that bait fishing is..........................................hey wait a minute I just realized why PBH is pro bait fishing..........................Power Bait Hucker
*OOO* -_O-


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

Actually, "PBH" stands for Powerbaitheppy....I think he chose this username to be sarcastic. I have NEVER seen him use powerbait even though I have seen him use worms, minnows, and grasshoppers for bait.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

EmptyNet said:


> ...hey wait a minute I just realized why PBH is pro bait fishing..........................Power Bait Hucker
> *OOO* -_O-


Glad to see that you're on top of your game EmptyNet...


----------



## neverdrawn (Jan 3, 2009)

Not that I doubt the DWR's info but it sure seems to me that the shiners have increased every year for the past 5. I believe they are partially responsible for the trout being skinny and looking undernourished. They will always out compete trout for the available food base. I think the new proposals can work, other than the lake will take a beating during the bait season, and at the warmest time of year alot of the slot fish will die after being stressed with the low oxygen levels of warmer water and poor overall knowledge of catch and release methods. Nothing against bait dunkers but for the most part they seem to be not quite as concerned about mortality rates of deeply hooked fish. (I'm sure I'll catch hell about that comment). But it is my opinion. I say go with the new regs but put the tigers or Bon. cuts in to predate on the shiners. 
Too bad we can't all own property around a mountain lake so we aren't inconvienced by having to drive somewhere to fish.


----------

