# Jordanelle Gillnetting 10-3



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

There has been some discussion about the state of Jordanelle bass fishing and I figure there may be some interest in this report.

I was invited to help with the fall gillnetting for Jordanelle yesterday. I made some work arrangements and was able to go. Unfortunately I couldn't find my camera when leaving so no pics, sorry. It was an awesome time. Jordan and the crew were fun to work with and were happy to answer questions. Well worth it and I learned a few things as well.

I don't feel comfortable going over every item discussed, but here are some points that may be of interest to anglers.

1. The main fish pulled out of the nets were chubs. Big chubs and only big chubs. This is in part due to the gillnetting sampling as they are readily picked up at this time of year in the nets. All were quite large except for 1 solitary small one. Is this a problem? The biologist did an otolith study on the chubs last year and found that there hasn't been any significant chub recruitment at Jordanelle for *9* years. All the little ones get munched by perch and bass. Jordanelle will not be overrun by chubs. Chubs can live up to 25 years, but when they eventually die out, there will be a forage problem there. (Per the biologist)

2. We netted a fair number of trout. No super monster browns this time, but we did pick up some nice browns and good sized rainbows. They will plant there in a couple of weeks. The trout appeared to be in good shape. Several small browns showed up, indicating that there will be decent browns in the future.

3. We got a fair number of bass. We did net one nice 18-19 inch smallie, a couple of 15-16 ones, and a fairly large number of 8-12 inchers. Very small smallies showed up with the perch and were abundant. There are plenty of small smallies there. One solitary small LMB showed up.

4. The managing biologist told me that creel studies show that 24% of the bass harvest was of fish in excess of 12 inches, which is too high with the overall population profile of the lake. He is concerned that this is too high of large fish harvest to maintain Jordanelle as a blue ribbon bass fishery. Not enough harvest of the small bass is taking place. I will let you draw your own conclusions as to how that might affect regulations.

5. The better bass were eating perch minnows, and the small bass were eating zooplankton and minnows. As expected, the rainbow trout were full of zooplankton.

6. Multiple age classes of perch were netted. They seemed to be OK. We didn't talk about them much.

7. While working, I talked with another biologist about Utah lake. She told me that the walleye population out there is huge and this year and next will be off the charts for eyes if you can catch them. The catfish are still strong and the white bass are still going strong, although they and the panfish will probably be slowing down with the lower water levels.

Again, thanks to Jordan and the staff for the invite and a great morning on the lake. :O||:


----------



## tye dye twins (Mar 8, 2011)

I think if bassrods read this he would pee his pants in excitement.


----------



## huntingbuddy (Sep 10, 2007)

thanks for the report. Most of that is good news to hear./


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

tye dye twins said:


> I think if bassrods read this he would pee his pants


Doesn't he do that anyway?  (J/K)

I have been debating posting this "over there" and still might, but every time the subject comes up on BFT, the post takes a rapid descent to IBTL territory.


----------



## sawsman (Sep 13, 2007)

Thanks Catherder. Great info..


----------



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

Very interesting, great report.


----------



## Ton_Def (Dec 23, 2008)

Wow! Nice write up!


----------



## k2muskie (Oct 6, 2007)

Thanks for sharing and I'm sure a very interesting experience for you. I'm sure the information gathered has allowed folks to learn a great deal on this body of water.


----------



## Troll (Oct 21, 2008)

tye dye twins said:


> I think if bassrods read this he would pee his pants in excitement.


Yeah, cause he was right.
The DWR knew this going in, the data now confirms it.

They could write a book on how to ruin a trophy SMB fishery that was just becoming known as a destination all over the country, cause this lake has been a textbook example.


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

Troll said:


> tye dye twins wrote:I think if bassrods read this he would pee his pants in excitement.
> 
> Yeah, cause he was right.
> The DWR knew this going in, the data now confirms it.


Cliff wasn't the only one that had ,shall we say, reservations about the regulation change, (I didn't like the change either) but yep, he was right about there being too much harvest this quickly. I went ahead and posted it over "there" so I'm sure we'll get his take shortly.

I will say though, that if Cliff had taken the time to really talk with DWR personnel working there instead of incoherently berating them on the internet and spreading rumors, he would have found that many (but sadly, not all) agreed with him all along and maybe he could be a bigger part of the solution.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

I think some of you are missing the big picture here....the real problem isn't the regulations; the real problem is that the reservoir is going to be facing a food shortage pretty soon. As soon as those old chubs disappear, the perch, smallmouth, and browns are going to run out of forage and the regulations aren't going to matter!


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

wyoming2utah said:


> I think some of you are missing the big picture here....the real problem isn't the regulations; the real problem is that the reservoir is going to be facing a food shortage pretty soon. As soon as those old chubs disappear, the perch, smallmouth, and browns are going to run out of forage and the regulations aren't going to matter!


I don't think I am. If the chubs max life expectancy is 20-25 years, and there hasn't been recruitment in 9 years, then we have about 10 more years of decent chubs there. The lake is very low right now, which is bad, but it does reveal how much submerged structure is still in there. (a lot!) We had to untangle one of the gillnets out of a submerged tree the other day. Basically, the decision the DWR and the public has to make is this. We have maybe 1 more decade of blue ribbon potential bass fishing at Jordanelle before things go South (probably) irreversibly. Do we want the regs to be such to support a "blue ribbon" fishery during that time, or a mediocre fishery where you can go catch a few fish, enjoy the day, but not catch a lot of "blue ribbon" quality fish?

There does still seem to be demand for the "quality/trophy" fishery from some of us.


----------



## ColdWaterCoord (Jun 19, 2012)

I just wanted to post a quick reply to this thread to start to provide some more information. I am afraid that an incomplete picture of the Jordanelle smallmouth population may have been provided last week during the gill-netting.

In 2011, a creel survey was conducted on the reservoir. That survey estimated that there were nearly 13,000 smallmouth bass caught in 2011, however, only an estimated 615 were actually harvested. Applying the 24% value provided during the gill netting last week, that means that only about 150 smallmouth greater than 12" were harvested, whereas, over 3000 were caught and released.

Is 150 fish harvested too many from a 3000 acre reservoir? Probably not. There are without a doubt issues with the smallmouth bass in Jordanelle right now, but it is probably related to a multitude of factors, not just angling.

We will be posting more information on this topic next week when everyone is available.

Paul Birdsey
Coldwater Sportfish Coordinator, UDWR


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

Catherder said:


> 3. We got a fair number of bass. We did net one nice 18-19 inch smallie, a couple of 15-16 ones, and a fairly large number of 8-12 inchers. Very small smallies showed up with the perch and were abundant. There are plenty of small smallies there. One solitary small LMB showed up.


Interesting...how many nets were set? How many bass total were captured?


ColdWaterCoord said:


> In 2011, a creel survey was conducted on the reservoir. That survey estimated that there were nearly 13,000 smallmouth bass caught in 2011, however, only an estimated 615 were actually harvested. Applying the 24% value provided during the gill netting last week, that means that only about 150 smallmouth greater than 12" were harvested, whereas, over 3000 were caught and released.


This paints a totally different picture...if over 3000 smallmouth were caught and released that were greater than 12", and only 150 harvested, it doesn't sound like a regulation problem at all. Personally, I would worry more about a perch crash and the eventual chub crash...


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

Bassrods would be asking the DWR to start a chub stocking program!!

the problem is a predatorrey relationship. In a reservoir like Jordanelle, you have all predators and no prey. How do you fix that?


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

1.


wyoming2utah said:


> Interesting...how many nets were set? How many bass total were captured?


8 nets. We captured about 50 bass if you include the little 3 inchers. 1 trophy, 2 good ones (14-16), and a bunch of small ones. I was told beforehand that gillnetting didn't get a lot of bass, so I think the numbers collected was a pleasant surprise. But if it is representative of the total population, then it shows that there are way too many small ones compared to the big ones.

2.


wyoming2utah said:


> Personally, I would worry more about a perch crash and the eventual chub crash...


Obviously, the staff *is* worried about that.

3.


PBH said:


> Bassrods would be asking the DWR to start a chub stocking program!!
> 
> Isn't that the truth. :roll:
> 
> ...


True, but as I said before, it looks like we might have one more decade where we have a chance to do well there. The crash you allude to is in the future. The fish I caught this year and the sampled fish were well fed and in good body condition. As long as the chubs are still around, there is a chance at good growth. (obviously, other factors come into play too)

5. As for the harvest conclusion that has stirred things up a bit, yes, it was discussed that creel surveys did show that the bassers throw most of their fish back, as was explained, but in answer to the question of what happened to all of the big fish, the opinion of those in the know was that big fish harvest was a factor. That was not my concocted opinion.

6. Paul, thanks for chiming in, and I look forward to hearing more about this.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

Catherder said:


> 1.
> 
> 
> wyoming2utah said:
> ...


Do you know if they do any electrofish sampling for the smallmouth up there? I know that the smallmouth bass sampling in the south is usually done in the fall with electrofishing boats because gillnetting isn't considered really effective. So, I am wondering if the gillnetting is giving a representative look at what is or is not there...the sample size seems small compared to the creel survey catches...


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

wyoming2utah said:


> Do you know if they do any electrofish sampling for the smallmouth up there?


They haven't mentioned that they have electroshocked recently in our conversations, but I'm not 100% sure on that however.


----------



## Grandpa D (Sep 7, 2007)

So just what changed that caused the bass to disappear?
What was the change in the regulations that caused the bass to go away?

I thought that Jordanelle was actually tightened up with a 6 bass limit with one over 12" reg.
The general reg is 6 bass no matter the size.
How would that reg be better?


----------



## Clarq (Jul 21, 2011)

Grandpa D said:


> So just what changed that caused the bass to disappear?
> What was the change in the regulations that caused the bass to go away?
> 
> I thought that Jordanelle was actually tightened up with a 6 bass limit with one over 12" reg.
> ...


Actually, for years, you were allowed to keep no bass over 12 inches.


----------



## Grandpa D (Sep 7, 2007)

So a 1 bass over 12" limit has destroyed Jordanell?


----------



## Troll (Oct 21, 2008)

I believe it has had an impact.

There is just to much difference in the "before" regulations when no 12" were allowed and now when 1 over 12" is allowed.


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

One more set of comments.

First off, maybe there is one point that may have been missed and if I didn't convey it well enough originally, that is my fault. One of the main points I wanted to make on this thread was that Jordan and his staff are working their tails off to improve the fishery at Jordanelle. (both trout and warmwater) To me that is reassuring and they have my greatest respect. Those that whine on the internet that "the DWR doesn't care about bass" (or whatever) are mistaken. Keep up the good work guys.

Second, (and this is now my opinion) I didn't (originally) buy that the reg change had a big impact either. My 2011 Jordanelle bass fishing was pretty good and I thought this year would be nice as well. While I did have some success up there, there is a big difference, and other bassers report even worse results. Tournament results with the states best bassers don't lie. I asked the biologist if there could have been a "die off". He said there was no evidence of that. Again, I don't want to go into every detail, but I have had my opinion changed on the "big bass harvest" issue by what I learned, recognizing that most biological problems are complex and have more than one simple "answer". You are welcome to agree or disagree about this and that is fine. There are DWR personnel (that I respect) that agree and disagree as well. That is natural and good. However, if you do disagree, you need to come up with a plausible alternative reason and hopefully, solution. The generalized prey crash that I *do* agree with the Hepps will eventually come hasn't yet. The perch and chubs are still going strong there. There is no evidence of a die off. Lastly, I've argued with Cliff as much as anyone over the years on the interweb. Do you think it was easy for me to post info that suggested he was right in a couple of points?


----------



## Grandpa D (Sep 7, 2007)

I will give my opinion as to part of the problem at Jordanelle.
Poaching!
I just don't buy into a one bass over 12" limit as being the biggest factor to the problem.
Let's face the facts here. The DWR just doesn't have the personnel to spend a lot of time at all the fishing waters in Utah.
They depend on regs to help control fish populations.
Until there are more CO's on patrol at the reservoirs like Jordanelle and Strawberry, poachers will do what they want.
The best answer for now is for the rest of us to be the eyes and ears for the DWR and report poachers.
Most of the people that fish would rather complain than actually get involved.
The end result is lower fish populations and less large fish.
Let's all get involved and do what we can to stop the poaching of fish.


----------



## utahgolf (Sep 8, 2007)

I find it funny that you say another decade of good fishing???? I don't think so, quality bass fishing up there is done! it ain't worth the time to make 12 trips up there and maybe catch one or two decent fish. Its a dink fest now, spring browns is about the only lure to go up there. It's now become what the majority of people want it to become, a crazy wakeboarder/ski boat place.


----------



## Troll (Oct 21, 2008)

Explain what you mean ny Poachers, GrampaD. Cause there are many different kinds of poachers.

There are those who keep a 12" bass for everyone in the boat, even though not everyone caught a 12" bass. There are those who keep a 12" and the 14" they caught after that.
There are those who keep what ever they catch no matter what and there are those who throw back the almost dead 14" when they catch a 15".

The reservior did fine before any bass over 12" were allowed to be kept, but here we are only 2 years after that change in the regulations and poof, 8 years of big bass are gone.

Utah Golf, I think you're on to something here.


----------



## Grandpa D (Sep 7, 2007)

I simply mean people that take or kill fish illegally, period.
If everyone stayed within the limits, I doubt that the problem would be anything like it is now.
If one bass over 12" was going to be something that would ruin a place like Jordanelle, the DWR would have never made the change in regs.

How long ago was the limit 6 bass under 12" at Jordanelle?
I remember back when Jordanelle first opened and the regs were no bass in your possession.
That was the way it was for for several years, as I remember.
This was to allow the bass to populate.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

Grandpa D said:


> So just what changed that caused the bass to disappear?
> What was the change in the regulations that caused the bass to go away?


What's changed? You mean, what's changed since the dam was constructed and the reservoir was made? Well -- a lot, actually.

Look at every single bass fishery in Utah. Nearly all of them are reservoirs. Further, every single one of them had a "hey day", or a "boom" with the bass. Then, every single one of them, slowly went downhill. Much of this can be attributed to water fluctuations. Remember, they're all reservoirs. Historically speaking, Utah's bass fisheries have all gone through EXACTLY what you're seeing at Jordanelle. In fact, you're going to see (or, already are) the same thing at Sand Hollow. Habitat. Managers, whether they want to admit it or not, have known that the bass at Jordanelle would not stay at "trophy" level they were at. Why would they? You have pristine waters (ie: low nutrient content) flowing off the Uintah's to fill the reservoir. That doesn't help. Just look at other reservoirs in the area: Rockport, Echo, Deer Creek. Why should Jordanelle be any different than those reservoirs?

(one major exception to the above comments is Utah Lake. Carp really changed that lake, and destroyed what could have been a fantastic bass fishery.)

Many of you want to blame regulations. But, if you look at Quail Creek, where strict bass regulations were in place for numerous years, you'll see that the same thing happened. Even under strict "trophy" regulations, eventually that bass fishery came down to what it is now -- a good fishery, but certainly not what it was during it's "hey day". Look at creel surveys conducted by the DWR at Jordanelle and you'll find that anglers simply don't harvest bass. The problem isn't harvest. And, as for poaching, I doubt there is enough poaching going on cause the problem -- honestly, who's doing the poaching? Is it the bass guys that want a trophy fishery (doubtful)? Is it the common, average joe-angler (who can't catch the large bass anyway)? it isn't poaching.

Jordanelle is going through the natural stages of a bass fisheries in Utah. That doesn't mean that we throw our hands in the air and say "to hell with it". It means that we need to look at things realistically and accept that it may never be as good as it was during it's "hey day". It means that we, as anglers, need to accept and understand that our reservoirs in Utah may not be the ideal place for bass to live -- but we can still make things work and have good fisheries.

To be honest, if anglers wanted to improve the quality of fish in Jordanelle, and provide a "trophy" fishery, then they should look at the currently regulations and make a change. I would suggest loosening the bass regulations, and restrict the trout harvest to something similar to Minersville: 1 trout over 22". Watch what happens to that place under those regulations!!


----------



## utahgolf (Sep 8, 2007)

how would other bait fish do in there? blue gill? some cats? I look at pineview and its becoming the best bass fishery in northern utah. tons of food and different species. I know they're different places and structure but the nelle still has a ton of underwater structure, my weedless jigs sure get hung up for some reason.


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

One more comment on this, then I'll turn things to you guys to carry on.

1.


Grandpa D said:


> I will give my opinion as to part of the problem at Jordanelle.
> Poaching!


Poaching is a problem in just about every fishery. I don't doubt that it contributes a little, but why would poaching be worse with more liberal regs than more restrictive ones?

2.


utahgolf said:


> I don't think so, quality bass fishing up there is done! it ain't worth the time to make 12 trips up there and maybe catch one or two decent fish.


Hmmm, I'll just agree to disagree there. Even this year I had some very good days by anyone's standards. But hey, if everyone thinks it sucks, then I can have it to myself. Maybe that'd take care of harvest issues too. Maybe you're on to something. :idea:

3. Yes, PBH, we have already covered what you wrote and yes we agree that it is true. The only thing was disagree on is whether that time has fully arrived or not. The structure isn't gone yet, the chubs are still there. As I said before, in 8-10 years, when the chubs are gone, we might as well turn to general regs there because it will be another Deer creek. As for the rest of what I wrote, if it interests you beyond debating on the interweb, I suggest you follow the advice you give to others so freely and ask/call the biologists working there. I believe you know who to call.

4.


utahgolf said:


> how would other bait fish do in there? blue gill? some cats? I look at pineview and its becoming the best bass fishery in northern utah. tons of food and different species.


I'm sure the bucket bozos will eventually turn Jordanelle into a biological alphabet soup like Pineview and Deer Creek. I think that Pineview has been aided by good water years and is doing well from that. Deer Creek also is benefiting some from the previous 2 good water years. I don't think Jordanelle will be different in the far future. Good water will allow better forage, which will have (temporarily) better fishing. But that is part of why I believe there could be a harvest issue now. Jordanelle had very good water last year, has good forage the past 2 years and the bass are in good shape, yet the fishing didn't correspondingly improve.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

I am willing to entertain the possibility that overharvest of big fish is a problem. But, with the available creel data, it doesn't appear that it is...so, I would suggest getting any more information before any harvest regulations are changed. I think a couple things could be done to determine whether harvest is or is not the problem: 1) electrofish and get a larger sample size than what the gill nets offered 2) it would also be interesting to look at the ages of the fish sampled and determine growth rates and see if age classes are of similar sizes or different sizes.

I think the loss of big fish could also be a result of slower growth rates...possibly due to a result of more smallmouth bass and more competition. If this is the case, more harvest of small fish would be the answer to the problem. In such a scenario, the decreased number of big fish could be a result of the older fish dying off and younger fish having more difficulty replacing those bigger fish because of decreased growth rates and increased competition among bass (same number and possibly declining number of perch and chubs feeding a larger smallmouth population). When the reservoir was younger, smallmouth bass had less competition to grow large and growth rates were undoubtedly higher than they are now. IF this is the case, regulations should be changed to increase/encourage the harvest of more small fish...the water conditions the past couple years not only improved habitat for forage but also for small bass and perch. So, theoretically, you could have had more forage and more predators which could have balanced themselves out...


----------



## utahgolf (Sep 8, 2007)

catherder,

whats your definition of success this past summer? nailing 10-13 inch bass isn't stellar in my definition, its a dink fest by most peoples standards. I agree there will always be some decent fish in there but they are so few and far between now. I'd be happy with 15-16 inch smallies. I'm not looking for giants every other cast but just catching a 14 incher up there can be a task, I've talked with several people that fish there and looked at the tourny results as well as fished my guts off up there the past two years. To say that the nelle has a decade of blue ribbon fishing is pretty far fetched with what's going on now. maybe blue ribbon for a chance at a monster brown during the spring but for bass it fishes like a community pond, the bass are just decent sized perch at this point.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

Utahgolf -- do you ever harvest any of the bass?

I think W2U has a very valid point, and one that falls in line with many other bass fisheries in Utah. Historically, harvest of bass has always been low on all sizes.

Instead of stricter regulations to protect large bass at Jordanelle, maybe we need to seriously consider increasing harvest rates of smaller fish with some added education of the benefits of harvesting small fish?


----------



## utahgolf (Sep 8, 2007)

I'm not talking about any specefic reg stuff being the culprit.. I'm just making the point that the division shouldn't be calling it a blue ribbon fishery or at the very least, even saying that it will continue to be a blue ribbon fishery for the next decade and then we'll see it go down hill. It's already downhill. Sounds like we need some more sampling to get an exact grasp on it and go from there. If it's determined that harvest will help, due to short supply of forage, than lets harvest some bass. If it's determined that the perch just can't make it and maybe some crappie or blue gill will be better than ok.. etc....


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

OK, one more.



PBH said:


> maybe we need to seriously consider increasing harvest rates of smaller fish with some added education of the benefits of harvesting small fish?


Absolutely! And there is *no* disagreement among the biologists and DWR staff about this. Heaven knows some of us have tried to promote this. (Yes I will keep some small bass when possible) But the message falls on deaf ears. Many bassers continue to insist on throwing everything back and Joe six pack anglers and spear guys are only interested in whacking a "big one". It seems hopeless. 



utahgolf said:


> whats your definition of success this past summer? nailing 10-13 inch bass isn't stellar in my definition, its a dink fest by most peoples standards. I agree there will always be some decent fish in there but they are so few and far between now. I'd be happy with 15-16 inch smallies. I'm not looking for giants every other cast but just catching a 14 incher up there can be a task,


My Definition? 30 fish evenings, with *all* of the top 5 fish in excess of 14 inches. Did it more than once.

Sheesh, now I'm beginning to sound like Cliff too. :roll: I hope you don't start needing a decoder ring to read my posts.


----------



## utahgolf (Sep 8, 2007)

so your top five fish added together to equal 14 inches?  Well I'm glad the division is at least looking at it and hope a solution is possible to get some better quality up there. It was nice having a place close to salt lake. but for now, I'll take the extra time to drive to the view.


----------



## GeorgeS (Dec 22, 2010)

The Blue Ribbon Fisheries Advisory Council has seriously considered removing Jordanelle from the list of Blue Ribbon Fisheries due to the decline in big Smallmouth (which is what it is listed for). The decision has been postponed because of the DWR's efforts in determining what the issues are and if they can be reversed/corrected. 

Part of the problem in many of our bass fisheries is the lack of harvest of smaller fish. We see this with Jordanelle, East Canyon, Pelican and many others. Education will help with the knowledegable anglers but probably not with the regular angler. I say this because we have noticed that society as a whole has a "bigger is better" mentality. We catch a bunch of small fish and throw them back saying "go get bigger" and we keep the biggest fish we catch. Once we remove the larger fish, then all we have left are the little ones. Then what? Go somewhere else and repeat the process?


----------



## k2muskie (Oct 6, 2007)

Catherder said:


> I'm sure the bucket bozos will eventually turn Jordanelle into a *biological alphabet soup like Pineview* and Deer Creek. I think that Pineview has been aided by good water years and is doing well from that.


Please educate me on the bolded statement above...only thing I can think of is the _'alphabet soup' __of clueless rec boaters_ in the summer...but again we've only been aggressively fishing PV for the past 7 years...so again tell me about the bucket bozos and what has happened wrt fish species in PV...I'd like to know...decline in Perch and Crappie sizes on the hard deck...would agree its the cycle of the fish species for me on pan fish...but bucket bozos on PV; please share with me as I'd like to know...again we've only been fishing PV for the last 7 years and hard deck for like 5 years...so what have the bucket bozos introduced illegally into PV... :? :?


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

k2muskie said:


> Please educate me on the bolded statement above...


The statement refers to the sheer number of fish species in Pineview and only that. Lets see:

1. perch
2. crappie 
3. bluegill
4. green sunfish
5. smallmouth bass
6. largemouth bass 
7. Bullheads (mud cats)
8. carp
9. Tiger muskies
10. brown trout
11. rainbow trout

I probably missed a couple. I have no idea how many of these arrived legitimately or by bucket biology. At Deer creek, a lot of the "new arrivals" have indeed been bucket biology. The only point I was making was that I foresee Jordanelle becoming like Deer Creek and Pineview with a large array of different species with accompanying bad and good consequences. Sorry I can't help you further.


----------



## utahgolf (Sep 8, 2007)

I hope the nelle turns into a soup. all that fry makes for good bass food!


----------



## Fishrmn (Sep 14, 2007)

Smallmouth bass don't eat very many fish. They want crawdads. If they were effective at eating chubs, the UDWR wouldn't have had to plant Wipers at Minersville.


----------



## Grandpa D (Sep 7, 2007)

Fishrmn said:


> Smallmouth bass don't eat very many fish. They want crawdads. If they were effective at eating chubs, the UDWR wouldn't have had to plant Wipers at Minersville.


Wiper are added to placed that do need some extra help. Because they are sterile, Wiper are easy to control.
Bass do eat fish and do it quite well. Don't forget that Wiper are bass.


----------



## Fishrmn (Sep 14, 2007)

I know that Wipers are bass. But Smallmouth Bass don't eat very many other fish. Not enough to cause the demise of the Utah Chub population in Minersville, or Jordanelle reservoirs.


----------



## utahgolf (Sep 8, 2007)

if smallies don't eat fish than why on earth have I wasted so much money on swimbaits!


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

It's not the smallmouth that are wiping out the chubs. It's the perch. We've seen this time and again at different places across Utah. Look at Fish Lake.

Smallmouth do eat other fish. However, I believe their primary food source would be crawdads, if they were available. I don't believe they are in the 'nelle (I could be wrong).


While wipers are a very good management tool for control open water rough fish (look at what's happened at New Castle!), they're sole purpose at Minersville wasn't just chub control. This was certainly a good reason to put them in Minersville, but they also provide a fish that anglers can harvest -- which is something that many locals want at Minersville. While smallmouth do provide for some harvest at Minersville, many "average joe" anglers don't know how to fish for them. Wipers aren't necessarily an "easy" fish to catch, but they are a fish that a person out trolling with a "trout" rig would have the potential to catch (and keep). They are a good fit.


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

Smallies are opportunists and eat what is available. If there are 'dads available, they will eat them. If there are fish, that is what they eat. Jordanelle has *never* had very many crawdads in the lake and both during its heyday and now, the smallies main diet is/was fish. The only thing we sampled out of the stomachs of the netted smallies during the gillnetting was fish and zooplankton from the little guys. Even though there are a few dads in there, we didn't retrieve a single dad from the stomach sampling. I get covered in vomited up perch minnows on almost every bassin trip to Jordanelle, but I have yet to have one barf up a crawdad on me in 9 years.



Fishrmn said:


> Not enough to cause the demise of the Utah Chub population in Minersville, or Jordanelle reservoirs.


I haven't been to Minersville in a few years, (too long actually  ) but at Jordanelle, the average size of the chub was 13-15 inches. I'd love to hook into a smallie capable of sucking down a 15 inch chub. It'd probably be a world record.

Which segues into one more Jordanelle topic you trout guys may be interested in. The managing biologist is doing a study to determine the optimal size of rainbows to plant at Jordanelle to prevent predation from the smallies and to some extent, browns. (Keeping in mind that if you plant the trout too big, it markedly affects the cost of raising the fish.) The data is not in yet, but it looks like about 8 inches is where bass predation drops off. I hope to hear more about this in the coming year.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

Catherder said:


> Which segues into one more Jordanelle topic you trout guys may be interested in. The managing biologist is doing a study to determine the optimal size of rainbows to plant at Jordanelle to prevent predation from the smallies and to some extent, browns. (Keeping in mind that if you plant the trout too big, it markedly affects the cost of raising the fish.) The data is not in yet, but it looks like about 8 inches is where bass predation drops off. I hope to hear more about this in the coming year.


Not just predation by other fish, but predation by birds as well.

this is a management practice that has been adopted in numerous southern utah lakes, including minersville.

One thing management needs to keep in mind, and that the public also needs to understand, is that if you are going to stock larger trout, then you may also want to implement some regulations to protect those trout if harvest is an issue. Seriously: place some restrictive regulations on the trout in Jordanelle while at the same time place more liberal bass regulations along with education on why you want higher harvest of small bass, and watch what happens. Not only will you end up with more big bass, but you'll also have trophy class trout (rainbows)! (keep in mind, Jordanelle is set up ideally to be a trout water!)


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

PBH said:


> place some restrictive regulations on the trout in Jordanelle while at the same time place more liberal bass regulations along with education on why you want higher harvest of small bass, and watch what happens. Not only will you end up with more big bass, but you'll also have trophy class trout (rainbows)! (keep in mind, Jordanelle is set up ideally to be a trout water!)


I wouldn't object to this. Jordanelle grows nice rainbows, along with hefty browns and a few nice cutts. However, that would mean complicating the regulations. And you know how some in the DWR feel about complicating the regs. :O//:


----------

