# Kokanee in Bear lake



## hunting777 (May 3, 2009)

So I was just looking at the "history of Utah fishing" post. 
P.S. thanks for that. It was a good read.

So this made me to start thinking about one of my favorite places to fish, Bear Lake. I was doing some online research and found that they planted Kokes in Bear Lake back in 1922. 

I am wondering if someone can fill me in why aren't they there now and why not restock them?

Just thinking out loud. I would love to hear some comments about this.


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

hunting777 said:


> So I was just looking at the "history of Utah fishing" post.
> P.S. thanks for that. It was a good read.
> 
> So this made me to start thinking about one of my favorite places to fish, Bear Lake. I was doing some online research and found that they planted Kokes in Bear Lake back in 1922.
> ...


The biologist for Bear lake sometimes posts on here. He would know the answer definitively.

This is only a *guess* but here are a couple of possibilities.

1. With Bear Lake being ultra oligotrophic, there isn't enough zooplankton to feed them very well and they can't outcompete the cisco and other species for what is there.

2. Spawning may be an issue too.

Going forward, I wouldn't expect kokes to be a priority there. With as many endemic species as Bear lake has, I would expect planting new species would be frowned upon.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

I think Cat man hit it correct -- what would kokanee eat in Bear Lake? They'd probably starve.

Spawning shouldn't be an issue -- many places currently rely on hatchery stocking to sustain kokanee anyway. I think the real reason is simply there is no niche for them.


What should be evident from reading that article (history of Utah fishing) is that fish need slightly more than just water in order to survive and thrive.


----------



## DallanC (Jan 13, 2009)

Catherder said:


> Going forward, I wouldn't expect kokes to be a priority there. With as many endemic species as Bear lake has, I would expect planting new species would be frowned upon.


I always heard that Kokanee as filter feeders, dont impact the other species in a lakes biomass. They aren't competing for the same food sources of the other species so generally fit in most lakes just fine... assuming zooplankton is enough to support them (which as noted, doesn't happen in bear lake).

I'd be interested to know if that is NOT the case.

-DallanC


----------



## taxidermist (Sep 11, 2007)

I boated the last one.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

DallanC said:


> I always heard that Kokanee as filter feeders, dont impact the other species in a lakes biomass. They aren't competing for the same food sources of the other species so generally fit in most lakes just fine... assuming zooplankton is enough to support them (which as noted, doesn't happen in bear lake).
> 
> I'd be interested to know if that is NOT the case.
> 
> -DallanC


Like with anything else, it depends on the lake and the existing mix of fish in that lake.

Do the current species rely upon the same food source (zooplankton) that the kokanee would rely on?

Often times, this niche is underutilized and thus the kokanee fit. Fish Lake is a good example. Open-water schooling fish that feed on zooplankton make up a small portion of Fish Lake species. There was a large, underutilized niche at Fish Lake which kokanee can utilize without negatively affecting the other species. In fact, the kokanee should (are?) provide additional options / benefits for those other species (lake trout) that rely on open-water schooling fish for predation.

I'm sure this is the case at numerous places that kokanee have been planted, and thus the explanation for such comments that they don't affect other species. They aren't going to make much of a negative affect on species like perch, lake trout, small mouth bass, brown trout, etc. because they occupy a completely different niche. Rainbow trout may be affected slightly, but usually there are other factors that limit rainbow trout - available zooplankton would be further down that list of factors and most likely be negligible as the zooplankton are not being completely consumed by the existing population of rainbow trout. Again, underutilized niche is the key


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

PBH said:


> Rainbow trout may be affected slightly, but usually there are other factors that limit rainbow trout - available zooplankton would be further down that list of factors and most likely be negligible as the zooplankton are not being completely consumed by the existing population of rainbow trout. Again, underutilized niche is the key


That's one thing I've always wondered about with Kokes. Rainbows (and chubs for that matter) also readily eat zooplankton as a large part of their diet if available. It would be thought that bows and kokes would not coexist all that great since they seem to take from the same resource, yet they seem to coexist just fine in many fisheries. Do the 2 species prefer different sizes or species of zooplankton or is there another reason they seem to do fine together?


----------

