# Yuba Trout



## walk light look long (Mar 30, 2008)

Was able to fish Yuba yesterday, did not get one bite. Talked to a DNR employee who told me that last summer reservoir level dropped and water warmed up to much for the bows. A few people were fishing for walleyes but they were not having much luck either. The walleye fishing should pickup in the next two to three weeks. I guess I'll head back down in a couple of weeks to fish for the walleyes, now thats a good eaten fish.


----------



## LOAH (Sep 29, 2007)

I thought I read a post recently of someone catching a 12 inch rainbow from Yuba.

Now that doesn't add up with the stocking reports (last stocked with bows in '06), so that would suggest that some of those bows reproduced, wouldn't it?

I'm sure a lot of the trout in Yuba died, but I still can't help but think that lunker is still in there. I'm really hoping that a handful of those brookies from '07 made it too.

I guess we'll wait and see.


----------



## Improv (Sep 8, 2007)

This is exactly the point the Wyoming2Utah made with regards to the slot issues at Strawberry.  There is only so much biomass any given lake can handle.  When the trout were planted in Yuba the perch, walleye and pike were not in the numbers they are now which means there is just not enough food for the trout.  Trout will do great in Yuba as an interim fish when Yuba is on the bust end of the boom and bust cycle.  

I had always hoped that Yuba would be made a into a trout fishery, but once again the DWR has to be diplomatic to the population that want it as a walleye/perch fishery.  By the way, the current biologist for Yuba would also like to see Yuba as a trout fishery – but he superiors have told him otherwise.   So… I’m afraid you’ll have to wait another 5 years before your back to catching trout in Yuba again.  You’ll still pick up a stray from time to time – but nothing like you did 5 years ago.


----------



## whereisyourmind (Oct 24, 2007)

I fished Yuba the past two weekend and caught nothing but trout. :? Not a lot of them, but three fat, healthy 14 inchers. All of them had what looked like bite marks all over them.


----------



## LOAH (Sep 29, 2007)

Improv-

Yes, I understand all that. I read that whole article Mr. Hepworth (the elder) wrote. Knew before that was brought to my attention.

My comment had nothing to do with available biomass, nor did it have anything to do with Strawberry, so let's leave those debates in those threads. It had everything to do with me hoping some trout lived. That and the _possibility_ of a small reproducing population of trout. Perhaps you felt the trout were only 12 and 14 inches because of the other existing biomass, but my thoughts would be that when those trout were stocked and the following year, the trout would not have stunted.

Purely speculation, I suppose as I don't have a degree in that field, but we all know that Yuba grows a big trout quickly and a smaller one would suggest that it was less than a couple of years old.

And I remember reading that "the biologist" for that area would like to see it as a trout fishery. I read his post on the old forum in regards to that when the brookies were brought up in a thread.


----------



## Jacksonman (Jan 16, 2008)

I'm with you LOAH on the hope that some brookies and tigers survived - only if they were planted with the rainbows a few years sooner. My favorite trout are tigers and brookies and with Yuba so close to my dwelling in happy valley, I had some high hopes for some big Tigers and brookies coming out of Yuba. Thus far, I have heard of only one tiger being caught and that was probably two years ago and it was about 6 inches long. I did catch a bunch of rainbows last summer but they were acting odd, hanging out really shallow by the dam. Hopefully a few survived and with a few good water years we'll see a few large trout show-up again. My guess is that we won't  , but we should see some good walleye and pike action by this May and awesome fishing next year.  

At least we have Scofield for Tigers now and boulder mountain for brookies.


----------



## Improv (Sep 8, 2007)

LOAH… 

There is no natural recruitment of rainbow trout in Yuba. First off the rainbows are sterile, second the need running water to hatch their eggs (if they were not sterile to start with) and thirdly, even if they did make their way up the Sevier River, the water quality is way too poor along with all the other rough fish the exist in the Sevier would have wiped up any natural recruitment (if they were not sterile). The trout that are being caught are in fact 2006-year plants. Five years ago when there was no other fish in Yuba for the trout to compete with they did grow big fast. However, the size of a fish has nothing to do with the age of the fish. So, my point when I brought up the whole biomass thing was not to be argumentative, but it was the reason why a 3-5 inch fish planted two years ago is only 12-14 inches long today. 

By the way, all this information is available to you the same way it was available to me. I picked up the phone, called the DWR and asked for the biologist over Yuba. He is a really nice guy and was very willing to answer all my questions.


----------



## grousehunter (Sep 11, 2007)

Why does every reservoir in Utah need trout, can't we have diversity in our fish species? I love to catch trout, but there a lot of other fun fish to catch!


----------



## metal_fish (Mar 19, 2008)

Are all rainbow trout planted in utah sterile?? why plant sterile fish!


----------



## xxxxxxBirdDogger (Mar 7, 2008)

> Are all rainbow trout planted in utah sterile?? why plant sterile fish!


Because man wants to control the planet. So that there can be no hybridization between species, especially at one particular sacred cutthroat sanctuary (because we all know that a 10 lb. cutbow taken from Henry's Lake is not fun to catch :evil: ).


----------



## LOAH (Sep 29, 2007)

I think you missed my point again, Improv.

Again, I UNDERSTAND the Hepworth paper and realize that it's plausible for a 2 year old trout to only be 14 inches (like in many smaller streams abroad). Notice the words I underlined or italicized in my previous posts, just for you. Suggest meaning just that, not prove or state, definitively. I brought in the possibility of a naturally reproducing population of trout because it seems that the other trout planted in '06 grew quite rapidly and I don't think that "batch" would've had many runts...Especially two years later.

Just because rainbows USUALLY spawn in moving water doesn't ban them from doing it in a lake. The staff at Yuba seems to notice the bows going through the motions right up against the shore, near the dam. That would be where the current is the strongest and may trigger the spawn to occur. That seems to be the case with what I witnessed at Scofield, on Saturday. That dam has a lot of water moving through it right now and it has created quite the current in that channel. The bows were all lined up and spawning, leaving a long trail behind them, in the current. My bait was quickly drifted past me on every cast "upstream".

Fish aren't robots, you know that. They're living organisms and they don't program well. Nature has a way of making an exception, no matter what man does. Just because the DWR says the bows are sterile doesn't mean that there aren't a few that would get around that. Seriously. The DWR isn't fool-proof. I think they do a great job, but they're human. Hell, the 14 inch bows could've been mixed in with the brookies from last year for all we know.

And wouldn't you think that sometime there have been fertile bows in that drainage? It's a possibility. I never count Nature out to overcome "our" efforts to control her.

I'm no biologist (but I've spoken with the one to whom you refer so reverently...yes, nice guy) and I don't claim to know more about fish than they do (or yourself, for that matter). I just know that when man gets ****y, Nature tends to throw a curve ball, occasionally.

As much as I trust the DWR, they're still not God. I'm not calling them (or you) liars or cheaters on their paperwork, but I won't believe wholeheartedly an all-inclusive statement such as: All the bows in Yuba are sterile. There are far too many variables involved for that to hold any water with me.

Seriously, I'm not trying to start a war here, but I believe that 1: Rainbows will reproduce if tricked to do so under the right conditions in a lake setting. 2: You can't override the natural programming of every fish in your tank by zapping it or heating it. Some will find a way to cheat it.

I don't expect you to see it that way, because I'm realistic enough to know that you probably won't accept it.

I never said anything definitively anyway. That's the whole point. You can't be 100% of anything like this.

Accept, reject, I don't care. I'm sure someone else will come along for you to debate with about something trivial and then you can get all excited again. :lol:


----------



## Lakecitypirate (Mar 4, 2008)

There was an artical in Rocky mountain Fishing and hunting last month or this month about Yuba fishing. They trout in Yuba are rare these days since the Yuba cleanup, so the trout population dropped dramacially. Aslo they have not planted for trout for a few years. They stated if you want fast trout fishing your better of fishing Scofield or Strawberry. But if you have alot of time and patience then try yuba, cuz most likely if you catch a bow at Yuba its going to a Juicy one. There are in there just not too many spread far and wide through out through the lake. The average bows in Yuba now are between 2-6 lbs. The best time to fish Yuba for the trout is between June and July where the water is deepest. The deepest parts are in front of the dam, which you need a boat to fish because it is private property and along the Oasis camp ground.

Thus bringing up Walley is a great expamle of species slowing down reproduction till they are almost non existant. When trout levels and water levels drop, walley slow there reproduction down, because they know the food demand is in low demand. They do this so they dont over populate and kill them selves off from starvation. When trout levels are high, walley will reproduce more and bring there population back up. So you know if trout fishing is good, so will walley fishing. That also explains why walley has slowed at Yuba.
In 2007 when DWR netted for 2 days they only netted 2 walley. This year when DWR netted, they netted 29 walley in two days, hence the population is on its way back.
Scientist also predict That during 2008 and 2009 will be some the best fishing that Utah has seen in many years. There is also a video on youtube about Yuba being the best in years in these next couple years to come. I will try and find it again and post it.
However I will have to agree with LOAH in stating that does not hold mush water with me either. DWR cant controll everything no matter how much they would love to or try. I dont always believe everything I am told or read. half the time I have talked to DWR it seems that they heard from someone that heard from someone and so on.
Maybe if you through some viagra in there the fish will grow larger, but if the fish are larger for more than 4-6 hours you should consult your physican.
Heres one, maybe Nelly worked its way from lake lockness through under ground channels to yuba and is gobbling up all the trout, that would explain all the wierd sightings out there. Maybe the people that play the banjos are catching them all before you get there and making them sqeel like pigs?


----------



## ridgetop (Sep 13, 2007)

My daughter caught a 12" bow out of there last month right at ice off. It was very pale in color and when we cooked it that night, the meat was very very soft but the taste was not bad. Anyone else notice this about the bows taken out of there this year?


----------



## metal_fish (Mar 19, 2008)

I think they should stock fertile trout in community ponds so we can have an on going population and at other lakes and reserviors but not all.... (ones with cutthroats)


----------



## Nibble Nuts (Sep 12, 2007)

All I know is that trout make good food for walleye and pike. I am glad Yuba is a warm water fishery and I think it would be a shame to see it become yet another trout water in Utah. I hope that Yuba can see another boom that gave it such fame years ago as one of the best walleye waters around. As far as trout being necessary for the walleye to reproduce, the perch play a much bigger factor in that regard. Always have, always will.


----------



## Pez Gallo (Dec 27, 2007)

I wish yuba was only a trout fishery. I'm having a really hard time finding places to catch a trout here in Utah.

Get rid of them walleye and pike. There's too many places in utah where you can catch them.

sarcasm layed heavily.... :wink:


----------



## Improv (Sep 8, 2007)

LOAH…
First off, I understood your points quite well. I also understand that you believe for whatever reason my responses to you are only intended to be argumentative, that I don’t have another reason for saying the things I do. I’m sorry if you did not like the answer I gave. I’m also sorry that I wasn’t converted into the your Jurassic Park beliefs that “life cannot be denied – life will find a way” theory. Like you said you are a realistic person and you already knew that I wasn’t going to be easily converted. So… at least I didn’t let you down, yes? I welcome all my comments to be scrutinized and criticized. I never said I was the end-all answer to all the necessary environmental conditions needed for a non-sterile rainbow to reproduce. I can only tell you what I know from my own personal research. 

Let me give you a little more information with regards to sterile trout, whether they are chemically made that way or become that way by hybridization, they will still go through a “false” spawn – meaning the males will still produce milt and the females will lay eggs. This is what is going on right now at Minersville and Otter creek and other lakes throughout Utah. The rainbows are right next to the shore in the gravel beds – you can do quite well using an egg fly pattern (glo bug). However the fact remains they are still sterile.

Now I suppose it’s possible that Yuba has a rare strain of rainbows that will successfully spawn in a lake. If this is true, the DWR has a gold mind on their hands. Do you know how many closed system lakes are out there that would greatly benefit from a lake-spawning rainbow? It would solve the stocking problem in lakes where natural recruitment does not take place. I suppose the folks at Eagle Lake would be ecstatic at its possibilities.

I know this was not the answer you wanted – but don’t worry LOAH, you have a lot of fans I’m sure someone will come to your side and say that I’m just an idiot that doesn’t know what I’m talking about.


----------



## 71nova (Jan 9, 2008)

You guys need an eye witness. As it turns out I live in Gunnison and fishe dthere alot lasst year. I saw alot of trout last year, not that I caugh alot. but I alway saw them jumping or chasing a lure(definately not carp). one time bank fishing I saw about15 or so large groups(1-2hundred) of minnows swim by me so I nettd them to see what they were. They were very silvery and had the trout shape. I don't know my minnows but I would guess that they were trout. 
I didn't make it out fishing after the water level dropped considerably though due to bow hunting, And would assume that there are very large walleye and pike that hold the deeper parts and wait for the lake level to drop just to get in on the smorgasbord that it creates. 
Me and a buddy of mine also caguht several large carp 15lbs and up, last year and the start of this year.
I've been fishing for trout a couple of times already to a good (no the best)place for trout and have come up with only carp. I think when the carp finally bust we are going to see a dramatic surge in all the ohter species. It happened the last two years somewhere else I know that is overloaded with carp.


----------



## LOAH (Sep 29, 2007)

Improv said:


> I'm sorry if you did not like the answer I gave.


Any blanket statement in a situation where innumerable variables exist is sure to be inaccurate, to some degree whether minute or magnanimous. Apparently you didn't like my answer very well, since you seem unable to let anything go that you do not agree with.



Improv said:


> I'm also sorry that I wasn't converted into the your Jurassic Park beliefs that "life cannot be denied - life will find a way" theory.


And of course, I wouldn't expect you to give up your position. That just wouldn't be like you to let a debate die before it reached a 10 page soap opera. Call it what you want, but I call it common sense.

To better clarify what I mean, take New Orleans, for example. Common sense would tell someone that building a city below sea level, right next to the ocean is a bad idea, right? Well engineers (biologists, perhaps, for this discussion) claimed that they could solve that problem by building a big wall that would hold back that ocean, so that we could have our precious port and harness the logistical power of the Mississippi River (sterilizing rainbow trout so as not to cross breed with the cutts or just to have more control of the population).

Well...What happened there? Sure, it's not the same thing, but it _is_ the same concept. Again, I wouldn't expect you to budge from your viewpoint. Just not like you.



Improv said:


> Let me give you a little more information with regards to sterile trout, whether they are chemically made that way or become that way by hybridization, they will still go through a "false" spawn - meaning the males will still produce milt and the females will lay eggs.


Common knowledge (I would hope) to this type of community (fishing forum). I'm aware of that. At no point did I say anything to the contrary. Just like a man with a vasectomy, right? (Ouch!)



Improv said:


> Now I suppose it's possible that Yuba has a rare strain of rainbows that will successfully spawn in a lake. If this is true, the DWR has a gold mind on their hands. Do you know how many closed system lakes are out there that would greatly benefit from a lake-spawning rainbow? It would solve the stocking problem in lakes where natural recruitment does not take place. I suppose the folks at Eagle Lake would be ecstatic at its possibilities.


What does a rainbow need to reproduce (if, in fact some fertile bows remained in the drainage)? Running water, you say? So what do you call a strong current? Stationary? It wouldn't take a new breed of rainbow, it would take the proper conditions to trigger the spawn and subsequent incubation period. Clean enough water? Well, it's clean enough for them to live there, apparently.



Improv said:


> I know this was not the answer you wanted - but don't worry LOAH, you have a lot of fans I'm sure someone will come to your side and say that I'm just an idiot that doesn't know what I'm talking about.


Hardly an answer. Just more broken record arguing from the guy who can't take it when someone else doesn't see things the same way. And no backup needed. I've stated my case and you've stated yours. I won't accept your argument as "absolute fact" because there is no absolute. You won't accept my plausible possibilities because your DWR approved doctrine doesn't parallel that type of thinking with its blanket statements.

Fair enough. Go fishing. In fact, I think WE need to get out and fish someday to relieve some of this tension. Hmm?


----------



## orvis1 (Sep 7, 2007)

o-|| o-|| o-|| O*-- O*-- --\O --\O -*|*- -*|*- 


This is getting good!


----------



## seniorsetterguy (Sep 22, 2007)

Fun debate guys...fairly civil. I don't know enough about the topic to take sides. However, the following statement did catch my eye.



LOAH said:


> I won't accept your argument as "absolute fact" because there is no absolute.


Hmmm. Still trying to get my logical mind around that one... :? :?


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

grousehunter said:


> Why does every reservoir in Utah need trout, can't we have diversity in our fish species? I love to catch trout, but there a lot of other fun fish to catch!


Other fish can be fun to catch. I enjoy diversity as well. But, with respect to Yuba, rainbows were a very good fit (for a short time). Low elevation reservoirs typically grow big trout fast. Yuba is no exception. It's an excellent rainbow trout growing reservoir. It could be one of the best rainbow trout reservoirs in the state, if rough fish could be managed. Ideally, it would be a rainbow trout fishery. Not only would the rainbow trout thrive, but the potential for a steady fishery would be much higher.

Unfortunately carp, suckers, and chubs come in to play. With those fish in the river and reservoir, a rainbow trout fishery would be very difficult to maintain. If water cycles continued as in the recent past (complete drain, then refill), then a rainbow fishery could be sustained (or rather, re-started after each draining). The rainbows would come on faster than the rough fish and make a good fishery for a few years (as seen a couple years ago). However, eventually the rough fish will take over. Poisoning or draining every 5-7 years would be necessary to remove the rough fish.

This is why Yuba is being managed as a walleye \ perch \ pike fishery. They can compete with carp, suckers, and chubs. The problem with these game fish is that they themselves cannot be controlled, and we end up with a boom and bust cycle.

I wish Yuba was a trout reservoir. I think it could be one of the best in the Western US. Unfortunately, it won't work and we are stuck with the walleye, perch, and pike...


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

PBH said:


> grousehunter said:
> 
> 
> > Why does every reservoir in Utah need trout, can't we have diversity in our fish species? I love to catch trout, but there a lot of other fun fish to catch!
> ...


So what is wrong with that? :? You can fish for trout everywhere in this state, why not have a few areas to fish for warm water fish. I grew up fishing nothing but trout because that is mostly what is around the area I grew up. I now enjoy fishing for warm water fish more, not that I hate fishing for trout, but it gets old after a while IMO. I still love stream fishing for trout. All I am saying is the trout folks should not be so selfish. JMO.


----------



## Guns and Flies (Nov 7, 2007)

I have come to the conclusion that I am completely confused :|


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

jahan said:


> So what is wrong with that? :? You can fish for trout everywhere in this state, why not have a few areas to fish for warm water fish. I grew up fishing nothing but trout because that is mostly what is around the area I grew up. I now enjoy fishing for warm water fish more, not that I hate fishing for trout, but it gets old after a while IMO. I still love stream fishing for trout. All I am saying is the trout folks should not be so selfish. JMO.


Simple--Yuba does not have the optimal habitat for pike, walleye, and perch. In fact, by managing it as a pike, walleye, and perch fishery we are assuring that it will have as many bad fishing years as it has good. If it could be managed for trout, we would have far more good fishing years than bad!

It doesn't have anything to do with what anyone like to fish with more, but what is best for the fishery. IF Yuba could be managed as a trout fishery, that would be best because its' habitat is much more suitable for trout than walleye, perch, or pike. The problem with walleye, perch, and pike is that their populations are virtually unmanageable--their numbers cannot be controlled. Unlike someone else in this thread mentioned, these species are very prolific spawners/breeders and ultimately their will be crashes in their numbers/sizes because of it. There is nothing in the habitat at Yuba that can help control their populations. So, with Yuba, we are stuck with a very mediocre if not poor fishery most years...with a boom cycle every ten years or so.

So, why not have a few populations for other species...well, if we could go back and change the past...because these "other" species are not well-suited to many of our waters. They don't provide fishermen the optimum bang for their buck.


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

wyoming2utah said:


> jahan said:
> 
> 
> > So what is wrong with that? :? You can fish for trout everywhere in this state, why not have a few areas to fish for warm water fish. I grew up fishing nothing but trout because that is mostly what is around the area I grew up. I now enjoy fishing for warm water fish more, not that I hate fishing for trout, but it gets old after a while IMO. I still love stream fishing for trout. All I am saying is the trout folks should not be so selfish. JMO.
> ...


Thanks for the reply. So why is trout manageable, but walleye, perch and pike not? Honest question. What about tiger musky and some other sterile warm water fish?


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

Because trout populations are virtually unable to reproduce...so managers can control their numbers through stocking. The problem with pike, walleye, and perch is that their populations are entirely left up to mother nature...at Yuba, the walleye and pike usually reproduce so quickly and heavily that they eventually eat all their forage base and are left to starve...hence the boom and bust cycles. The DWR cannot control their populations except through harvest...and fishermen have never been able to impact perch, walleye, and pike populations enough to impact the fishery.

Sterile warm water fish are the obvious solution to the above problem...that is why the DWR uses tiger musky and wipers in some reservoirs (because their population can be managed). However, in a reservoir like Yuba, sterile warmwater species are also not an option because we can never get rid of the species that tend to become a problem--carp, perch, and walleye.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

jahan -- ditto what W2U said. Populations of walleye, pike, and perch cannot be controlled.


tiger musky, tiger trout, wipers, etc are ever increasing in popularity because their numbers can be controlled. If you (DWR) can control the population size, then you (DWR) can also control size of fish. When numbers are not controlled, and populations continue to increase, size decreases.

The reason you don't see this happen with rainbows (at least not that often) is because most Utah reservoirs and lakes do not support natural reproduction of rainbow trout. 

You don't see this with Cutthroat trout because they are native. There are virtually 0 cases where a native species creates an overpopulation scenario in their native environment. Natural systems prevent overpopulation.

You see this all the time with Brown Trout in Utah streams and rivers. Non-native species tend to overpopulate when introduced into non-native systems because there is no natural system to limit population. Remeber the American Bull Frog that Bart Simpson let go in Australia? That's kind of what happens when you put walleye in a Utah reservoir. Same with perch and pike.

The environments are wrong. They simply support too much reproduction with nothing in place to limit numbers. Populations explode exponetially, and then crash.


----------



## Nibble Nuts (Sep 12, 2007)

I'm with you Jahan. I would rather deal with a boom and bust cycle then have a reservoir with more rainbows. They do get old catching after a while. This state needs more real fish.


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

wyoming2utah said:


> *Because trout populations are virtually unable to reproduce...so managers can control their numbers through stocking.* The problem with pike, walleye, and perch is that their populations are entirely left up to mother nature...at Yuba, the walleye and pike usually reproduce so quickly and heavily that they eventually eat all their forage base and are left to starve...hence the boom and bust cycles. The DWR cannot control their populations except through harvest...and fishermen have never been able to impact perch, walleye, and pike populations enough to impact the fishery.
> 
> Sterile warm water fish are the obvious solution to the above problem...that is why the DWR uses tiger musky and wipers in some reservoirs (because their population can be managed). However, in a reservoir like Yuba, sterile warmwater species are also not an option because we can never get rid of the species that tend to become a problem--carp, perch, and walleye.


So why are they virtually unable to reproduce? That seems weird to me. :? Is it just rainbows that you speak of not being to reproduce in most waters in Utah? I guess I am super naive because I was never aware of this.  Why is it when I fish many reservoirs I see thousands of fingerling trout? Are these cutts? Sorry for so many questions, but this is interesting to me. 

BTW one of my favorite places to fish is Powell for many of the reason that have been mentioned. You can catch a huge variety of fish. There is the boom and bust cycle you speak of with the stripers and shad. I like a little variety. Now I don't think all lakes should be one way or the other, but it is nice to have a few options available even if it may not be the BEST case for the waters. This is just my opinion.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

jahan said:


> [
> 
> So why are they virtually unable to reproduce? That seems weird to me. :? Is it just rainbows that you speak of not being to reproduce in most waters in Utah? I guess I am super naive because I was never aware of this.  Why is it when I fish many reservoirs I see thousands of fingerling trout? Are these cutts? Sorry for so many questions, but this is interesting to me.


Why can't they reproduce (rainbows)? Because of habitat. Very few Utah reservoirs support natural reproduction for rainbow trout. Paragonah (Red Creek) Reservoir is one of the only ones I know of that is self-sustaining, and they encourage harvest to try to keep the population in check. The fingerling trout (rainbows) that you see are the result of stocking, not reproduction.

Like mentioned previously, we do have problems with brown trout reproducing and overpopulating in Utah streams and rivers. We also have issues with brook trout populations and reproduction. We don't see this with cutthroat because they have natural systems in place that limit population sizes (native species in their native environment very rarely overpopulate).


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

Rainbows cannot reproduce in most utah reservoirs because the habitat isn't right...for the most part, rainbows need cool moving water with good gravel. Most Utah reservoirs do not offer this. The fingerlings you catch are stocked...most of the time, Utah stocks trout in reservoirs around 3 or 4 inches in length (depending on the fishery).

I hear bass fishermen complain all the time about the boom and bust cycles at Powell...in fact, many of these guys cuss the stripers to no end because they have hurt the largemouth bass fishing. Had stripers never been introduced, shad populations wouldn't fluctuate and both largemouth and smallmouth bass would have a much larger share of forage...the fishery would remain much more balanced and still offer a lot of variety maybe even more. 

The bottom line is that normally adding an uncontrollable non-native species to a water is a bad idea. Such introductions usually change fisheries for the worse.

Also, waters like Yuba see virtually no use during bust cycles and lots of use during boom cycles...this is bad because the boom cycles are much shorter than the bust cycles. If you could manage the reservoir for perennial boom, economically this is much wiser.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

Nibble Nuts said:


> I would rather deal with a boom and bust cycle then have a reservoir with more rainbows.


It's not about a specific species (rainbows). Its about managing for what the lakes can sustain best.

We already know that Yuba has problems sustaining populations of walleye and pike (boom then bust then boom then bust).

We also know that rainbow trout will have declines in quality as well due to eventual rough fish populations.

With walleye and pike, the boom\bust cycle creates a situation where good fishing lasts a short time, and poor fishing dominates. With rainbows, this boom and bust could be manipulated to periods of 3-5 years of good fishing and 2-3 years of poor. The stability would be better. The downside? Cost of cleaning up the rough fish (rotenone treatments every 5 years would be very expensive).

So, the DWR has been backed into a corner where the only realistic alternative was to attempt to give the perch population a head-start and hopefully sustain the walleye population for a longer period of time before we experience the first "bust". Once that first bust hits, we'll experience the same old Yuba cycle of good fishing every 7-10 years, and poor fishing in between.

Of course, it will be the DWR's fault.

did you know that Utah has MORE water containing traditional "warm water species" than it does "cold water" (trout)? I rarely feel bad for people when they complain about that Utah has too much water dedicated to trout...


----------



## orvis1 (Sep 7, 2007)

Nibble nuts- "real fish" ..... If you want warmwater species move to a warmwater state, this is like arguing for more trout in AZ. Utah is a great trout fishery and if yuba could be a steady fishery with tiger trout population I am all for it. Have you caught a 5lb tiger trout? I have and the fight like a freight train. I vote for tiger trout and rainbows in Yuba I could have been fishing for them for the last month instead of having to drive 3 hours with this tropical sun/winter freeze on and off weather!


----------



## whereisyourmind (Oct 24, 2007)

wyoming2utah said:


> The problem with pike, walleye, and perch is that their populations are entirely left up to mother nature...


I'd hardly call that a problem. Personally I'd much rather take my chances with a sustaining population of pike, walleye and perch. Yes, the fishing will vary from year to year, but I find that preferable to turning Yuba into a giant community pond.

I love going to Yuba specifically because it offers something other than trout. If Yuba were a trout fishery I'd never bother, since Strawberry is closer.


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

*Wyoming2utah wrote:*


> Rainbows cannot reproduce in most utah reservoirs because the habitat isn't right...for the most part, rainbows need cool moving water with good gravel. Most Utah reservoirs do not offer this. The fingerlings you catch are stocked...most of the time, Utah stocks trout in reservoirs around 3 or 4 inches in length (depending on the fishery).


I was specifically thinking of Scofield. I was fishing there last summer going into fall and there were thousands of 1 to 4 inch little trout right next to shore. I would be surprised if the little tiny ones were stocked, but I guess they could have been, I don't know how it works.  

*PBH wrote:*



> did you know that Utah has MORE water containing traditional "warm water species" than it does "cold water" (trout)? I rarely feel bad for people when they complain about that Utah has too much water dedicated to trout...


Are you talking more "quantity" of water or more "locations" of water containing warm water species?


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

orvis1 said:


> Nibble nuts- "real fish" ..... If you want warmwater species move to a warmwater state, this is like arguing for more trout in AZ. Utah is a great trout fishery and if yuba could be a steady fishery with tiger trout population I am all for it. Have you caught a 5lb tiger trout? I have and the fight like a freight train. I vote for tiger trout and rainbows in Yuba I could have been fishing for them for the last month instead of having to drive 3 hours with this tropical sun/winter freeze on and off weather!


I see what you are saying, BUT have you ever caught a 5 lb. Largemouth or striper. Have you ever caught a large walleye or bluegill? My favorite fight was with a 4 lb plus Largemouth Bass that came out of the water twice and the way they can hit a top water is awesome. Don't get me wrong I caught a nice 5 lb cutt out of Upper Fish creek once and that was awesome, but so is catching large warm water fish. Also warm water fish do well in Utah, not near as good as some other places, but to say to move to a warm water state is...well...not cool and mean. :twisted: :wink:  8) Thats it, I said it you are a big meany head Orvis. :lol: Anyways, we still need to get out and go fishing for what ever fish is in whatever lake.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

whereisyourmind said:


> wyoming2utah said:
> 
> 
> > The problem with pike, walleye, and perch is that their populations are entirely left up to mother nature...
> ...


Letting mother nature do the work is great when you are talking about native species...but mother nature allows non-natives to stunt. I am not sure what you mean by a giant community pond, but I would be willing to bet that if Yuba were turned into another Strawberry that its use would skyrocket and that Utah fishermen would be much happier as a whole!

I have been fortunate in my life to catch a wide variety of fish species...and some pretty large ones. I have caught numerous 5lb bass--both smallies and largemouth--as well as some large tiger muskies, bluegill, and catfish. I have also caught numerous walleye, perch, pike, and trout. My personal opinion is that a 5 pound rainbow trout will out fight any of the others...but that is just personal preference.

I, too, am glad we have some diversity...but, I would much rather have a consistently quality fishery than one that is only good once every 7-10 years.


----------



## orvis1 (Sep 7, 2007)

Also warm water fish do well in Utah, not near as good as some other places, but to say to move to a warm water state is...well...not cool and mean. :twisted: :wink:  8) Thats it, I said it you are a big meany head Orvis. :lol: Anyways, we still need to get out and go fishing for what ever fish is in whatever lake. [/quote]

A big meany head huh... Well yea you do do face, my dad can beat up your dad! Yes we do need to get out fishing this summer. I just don't like my favorite fish being refered to as a "non-real" fish...


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

I understand Orvis, that would make most defensive. I don't think NN was trying to be mean, I just think he was trying to get peoples attention. It worked. It was starting to sound like another warm water bashing and I think he made that comment also because he was being defensive because of his like for warm water fish. ****, I am on fire today. Move over Dr. Laura.  

I don't really think this needs to turn into a warm water is better than trout fishing debate or vice versa. Everyone has their preference, I just don't like when people try to push theirs on me.


----------



## whereisyourmind (Oct 24, 2007)

wyoming2utah said:


> whereisyourmind said:
> 
> 
> > wyoming2utah said:
> ...


Perhaps, but I know at least one Utah fisherman that would be sorely disappointed to lose his favorite(only) spot for pike. Yuba is great because it's not another anything.


----------



## mzshooter (Apr 8, 2008)

I thought that I would enter my penny’s worth!! First there are a good number of self sustaining lakes in Utah Scofield is one, they usually stock it to get through the heave fishing season, but there are reproducing fish in there thats why they raised the limit (they are over producing).
As for Yuba they tried this back in the 80’s the water gets to warm every three or four years and kills the majority of the fish (Trout). Last year the water got below the ramps (Water users). The biologists calculate that they lost 95-100 % of the tiger trout that where 4-5” when stocked, and 75-85% of all rainbows that where stocked. It’s was pretty easy catching trout when there was 50,000 to 60,000 in there, It’s a little harder to find a fish when there’s only 5,000 or 6,000. 
For my last question, can anyone remember why the put them in there?? They had a surplus of fish due to Hatchery problems and decided to put them there till the perch and eye’s could bounce back. When they netted the next year and found they did real good they put more and more. They new that the lake would go through its cycle, but it was bringing $$$$ to the lake getting trout fishers down there. 

P.S. I caught a brown there in 2000 27” probably 5 lbs. and caught rainbows ever so often in the 90’s. I think they would spend too much money trying to keep trout in Yuba!!! Some might make it but most will die.


----------



## orvis1 (Sep 7, 2007)

Jahan, that still doesn't change the fact you are a do-do head buger eater! J/K 


Everyone know trout are better than rough fish geez.... :mrgreen: 


That is why the they allow us snobby fly fisherman to catch them :mrgreen: 


No seriously I caught my first smallmouth last year and it was fun, so I understand the obsession with warm water stuff. I would love to get a musky or a pike this year. Maybe if I am really nice to k2muskie I can get an invite to pineview pllleaaazzzz?


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

mzshooter said:


> For my last question, can anyone remember why the put them in there?? They had a surplus of fish due to Hatchery problems and decided to put them there till the perch and eye's could bounce back.


Correct. They had the fish, and they needed to provide something for fishermen until the walleye and perch came back. The rainbows did fantastic! I don't think this was a surprise to biologists that they did well -- but maybe a surprise as to how well. Obviously, they kept stocking them as they could. Now that the walleye are back, it is pointless to continue stocking them.

To claim that Yuba isn't stocked because of water temps is wrong. Yuba doesn't get any warmer than other low elevation reservoirs like Minersville (blue ribbon trout fishery) Otter Creek, or Piute. The problem is water levels and fluctuations. Minersville can have the same problems if the level gets down to the Conservation Pool and we have an extreme heat wave. Yuba doesn't have a Conservation Pool. Water owners can, and do, drain the like to extremely low levels, at which point the trout will struggle. If there was a C-pool with adequate water, trout would not have this problem.

It's just fine to me that Yuba is not a trout fishery. It is sad, however, that Yuba will have more bad years of fishing than it ever will good years. That's simply the nature of walleye fisheries in Utah.

Mother Nature. Someone commented on mother nature not being a bad thing. Mother Nature doesn't care about size. She doesn't care about population size. She doesn't care about stunting. She doesn't care if there is no room for growth, or if the environment can handle additional recruits. Mother Nature simply provides a means for procreation. After that, the fish just reproduce. And reproduce. And reproduce. Mother Nature doens't always provide a means to limit reproduction of non-native species. Mother Nature does provide limits to native species in native environments. But when a non-native species enters the system, mother nature didn't plan any limits to them. Thus, brook trout keep reproducing until the system can no longer sustain them. Walleye eat themselves out of house and home, yet they continue to spawn and create more walleye (regardless of no food!).

People assume that mother nature will balance things out. She doesn't. Especially with non-native's.


----------



## mzshooter (Apr 8, 2008)

PBH said:


> To claim that Yuba isn't stocked because of water temps is wrong. Yuba doesn't get any warmer than other low elevation reservoirs like Minersville (blue ribbon trout fishery) Otter Creek, or Piute. The problem is water levels and fluctuations.


Sorry if I made it sound like I thougth it was just temp. I agree with you 100% even on the mother nature thing.

To set the record strait I don't like trout I've caught many but im a true warm water fan!!!

One more question I herd that they put largemouth in there just after the dam fix??? The person that told me works for the state and has a fish cop that live next to him that he herd it from. Park ranger says its not true!!!

It would be nice!!!


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

The DWR stocked largemouth in Gunnison, but NOT Yuba. Any bass that show up in Yuba are coming in from upstream. They have not been stocked in Yuba.


The tiger trout and brook trout were excess fish that were not wanted anywhere else. Those fish were to either be stocked in Yuba, or put in the ground. They were stocked with the knowledge that they would not survive. Basically fish food.

The rainbows were put in there to provide sportsmen with a fish to catch until the walleye and perch took hold.

Yuba will never be anything except a walleye, perch, and pike fishery. I expect that fishery will be fantastic this year, and probably next year as well.

But we all know that this will be a boom and bust fishery for walleye. Expect some really poor years in the future.


----------



## Nibble Nuts (Sep 12, 2007)

orvis1 said:


> Nibble nuts- "real fish" ..... If you want warmwater species move to a warmwater state, this is like arguing for more trout in AZ. Utah is a great trout fishery and if yuba could be a steady fishery with tiger trout population I am all for it. Have you caught a 5lb tiger trout? I have and the fight like a freight train. I vote for tiger trout and rainbows in Yuba I could have been fishing for them for the last month instead of having to drive 3 hours with this tropical sun/winter freeze on and off weather!


Orvis, I didn't realize you were in bed with the trout and take it so personally. 
Have I caught a 5 lb. tiger? Uhhh... yeah. Remeber that 25 and a quarter incher that you speculate may be the same one you caught. I'm going to assume your just having a bad day and leave it at that.


----------



## Nibble Nuts (Sep 12, 2007)

PBH said:


> Nibble Nuts said:
> 
> 
> > did you know that Utah has MORE water containing traditional "warm water species" than it does "cold water" (trout)? I rarely feel bad for people when they complain about that Utah has too much water dedicated to trout...


Did I ask for your sympathy? Why should I feel bad that my preferred fish can hack it? If Utah contains more warm water species that is because they are better survivors and don't get sick over every little imbalance. I know it is not because the DWR spends more time stocking them.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

Nibble Nuts said:


> Why should I feel bad that my preferred fish can hack it? If Utah contains more warm water species that is because they are better survivors and don't get sick over every little imbalance. I know it is not because the DWR spends more time stocking them.


Hmmm...funny comment. I bet your bassies would do really well in all of our cold water; they would be great survivors! Just look at how well smallmouth have done in Strawberry--they have been found in there numerous times over the past 10 years and they still can't get going. Heck, for all the bass that have lived in the drainage below Gunnison, how come we very rarely--if ever--see any bass in Yuba. Is it because they are such great survivors....And, I am sure that your precious bass would never get sick if stocked in the Uintas and Boulders...

The bottom line truth is that Utah IS a trout state...not because that is all the DWR wants to manage, but because most of our waters just aren't suitable to bass. Cry for more diversity all you want, but stocking bass in most of our fisheries is about as dumb as running through the streets naked with peanut butter smeared across your face and howling at the moon.


----------



## rapalahunter (Oct 13, 2007)

So are they going to stock trout again during the inevitable walleye bust years?


----------



## Bassrods (Jan 14, 2008)

Warm water??? Cold water????

What makes it a warm water lake???

What makes it a cold water lake???

What makes Utah a trout state???? (Other then they only plant trout)


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

Bassrods said:


> Warm water??? Cold water????
> 
> What makes it a warm water lake???
> 
> ...


I will answer these one of a time for you:
1) the water temperatures
2) the water temperatures
3) the water temperatures

Do you honestly think that bass would do well in all of our lakes?


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

rapalahunter said:


> So are they going to stock trout again during the inevitable walleye bust years?


No, because in those walleye bust years, you will usually still have too much competition from other species for trout.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

Bassrods said:


> What makes Utah a trout state???? (Other then they only plant trout)


They only plant trout? That's odd.

How did Jordanelle get the smallmouth in it? they were planted by the DWR.
How did Minersville, Otter Creek, and Piute get their smallmouth? They were planted by the DWR
How did Quail Creek and Sand Hollow get their largemouth? They were planted by the DWR.

People keep claiming that the DWR doesn't plant "warm water" species, and thus they don't manage for those species. That's just plain dumb -- kind of like running through the streets naked with peanut butter smeared across your chest howling at the moon.

Fish Lake has had both largemouth bass and smallmouth bass planted in the past. They couldn't survive their either.

Fact: Utah has MORE water with "warm water" species than it does water with "cold water" species.

Fact: Utah has more WATERS with temperatures more conducive to "cold water" species than "warm water" species.

I don't understand the complaints about Utah not stocking bass on a yearly basis. Why? Is there a need? Cliff -- what places are you thinking about that need supplemental bass stocking? Are there reservoirs where the currently populations are not able to sustain themselves?

Rapalahunter -- I would suspect that if the DWR has available rainbows that are not scheduled to be stocked in other waters, that they would stock them in Yuba. But I don't believe that the hatcheries currently have any production scheduled for Yuba. I think it would be purely based on whether or not there are extras available. The problem is that those extra fish, if stocked, would be done with the knowledge that they would not survive.  Either predation, or competition from an overloaded system will quickly diminish those extra fish.


----------



## orvis1 (Sep 7, 2007)

Nibble Nuts said:


> orvis1 said:
> 
> 
> > Nibble nuts- "real fish" ..... If you want warmwater species move to a warmwater state, this is like arguing for more trout in AZ. Utah is a great trout fishery and if yuba could be a steady fishery with tiger trout population I am all for it. Have you caught a 5lb tiger trout? I have and the fight like a freight train. I vote for tiger trout and rainbows in Yuba I could have been fishing for them for the last month instead of having to drive 3 hours with this tropical sun/winter freeze on and off weather!
> ...


Thanks for cutting me the slack, but I don't need you to. To each his own, but I do prefer a good trout stream/lake over a warmwater fishery. I know you go friggin nuts over walleye but I honestly don't see the draw. Just as you don't have the same appreciation for flyfishing as I do. So I stand by my statement of bring on the tigers and bows. Besides you warmwater guys have willard, utah lake, lake powell, and quail creek isn't that enough?


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

orvis1 said:


> Besides you warmwater guys have willard, utah lake, lake powell, and quail creek isn't that enough?


and Yuba, Jordanelle, Sand Hollow, Gunlock, Newton, New Castle, Starvation, Pellican, Steinaker, Mantua.....

hell, i haven't even mentioned the "combo" places like Piute, Otter Creek, Flaming Gorge, Minersville...

there are a lot of places to go catch "warm water" species...


----------



## Guns and Flies (Nov 7, 2007)

PBH said:


> orvis1 said:
> 
> 
> > Besides you warmwater guys have willard, utah lake, lake powell, and quail creek isn't that enough?
> ...


Pineview...


----------



## mzshooter (Apr 8, 2008)

PBH said:


> orvis1 said:
> 
> 
> > Besides you warmwater guys have willard, utah lake, lake powell, and quail creek isn't that enough?
> ...


Don't for get Recapture they plant trout there to feed the pike!!!
Same with the "ALL THE LAKES" those little trout make some very big Bass.


----------



## Improv (Sep 8, 2007)

Sorry it too so long getting back with you. I took your advice and did some fishing.



LOAH said:


> Any blanket statement in a situation where innumerable variables exist is sure to be inaccurate, to some degree whether minute or magnanimous. Apparently you didn't like my answer very well, since you seem unable to let anything go that you do not agree with.


I didn't mind your answer at all. I love that you are open minded enough to think that evolution has finally caught up with the environmental changes and we now have right here in Utah a strain of lake spawning rainbows. I sincerely hope we exploit the hell out of them- like I said before, a lot of lakes would greatly benefit from them.



LOAH said:


> And of course, I wouldn't expect you to give up your position. That just wouldn't be like you to let a debate die before it reached a 10 page soap opera. Call it what you want, but I call it common sense.


What you call a soap opera I call a discussion. I guess that would be too much to hope for - after all, this is a _*DISCUSSION FORUM *_



LOAH said:


> To better clarify what I mean, take New Orleans, for example. Common sense would tell someone that building a city below sea level, right next to the ocean is a bad idea, right? Well engineers (biologists, perhaps, for this discussion) claimed that they could solve that problem by building a big wall that would hold back that ocean, so that we could have our precious port and harness the logistical power of the Mississippi River (sterilizing rainbow trout so as not to cross breed with the cutts or just to have more control of the population).
> 
> Well...What happened there? Sure, it's not the same thing, but it _is_ the same concept. Again, I wouldn't expect you to budge from your viewpoint. Just not like you.


WTF???? Let me make sure I understand your comparison. Your saying that common sense says that it was a mistake to build a city where Mother Nature may have other plans, right? Using that logic, the entire human race is idiots. Take right here in SLC for example, how many homes, schools and hospitals are built right on the Wasatch fault? We fortify our buildings; we make them "earthquake proof " so what's the difference between SLC and New Orleans? I'll agree that mankind can only do so much, but if Mother Nature has other plans - it's not going to matter what we do or where we do it. So&#8230; if Mother Nature wants to have lake spawning rainbows in Yuba - She will and who am I to say She can't.



LOAH said:


> What does a rainbow need to reproduce (if, in fact some fertile bows remained in the drainage)? Running water, you say? So what do you call a strong current? Stationary? It wouldn't take a new breed of rainbow, it would take the proper conditions to trigger the spawn and subsequent incubation period. Clean enough water? Well, it's clean enough for them to live there, apparently.


Do a Google search and find out.



LOAH said:


> I won't accept your argument as "absolute fact" because there is no absolute. You won't accept my plausible possibilities because your DWR approved doctrine doesn't parallel that type of thinking with its blanket statements.


If by my DWR approved doctrine you mean scientific evidence&#8230; I understand. After all, who needs evidence, most of the decision made by our fish biologist is done by hunches and guesses - that ole' "gut feeling" anyway, right?



> Fish Biologist Apprentice:	"Hey Mr. Fish Biologist, don't you think we should conduct a fish population survey, you know put out some gill-nets and see what's going on?"
> 
> Fish Biologist:	"No need, I've got a gut feeling that these rainbows are now self-sustaining - we'll never have to stock again."





LOAH said:


> Go fishing. In fact, I think WE need to get out and fish someday to relieve some of this tension. Hmm?


This has Deliverance written all over this -)O(- Just kidding. Anytime.


----------



## LOAH (Sep 29, 2007)

Improv said:


> I didn't mind your answer at all. I love that you are open minded enough to think that evolution has finally caught up with the environmental changes and we now have right here in Utah a strain of lake spawning rainbows. I sincerely hope we exploit the hell out of them- like I said before, a lot of lakes would greatly benefit from them.


Okay, this is why we keep going round and round:

I never said that there ARE, in fact, reproducing trout in Yuba. I merely stated that a 14 inch rainbow in Yuba suggests (not determine...suggest) that it is a possibility that reproduction may have occurred since the last stocking in '06 because of its size relative to the size of the others that were stocked then (that were around 16 inches by fall '07). And from my deductions (definitely not a biologist), with the way Yuba has been growing trout AND with the way the real predators tend to ravage food, any "runts" from that stocking in '06 would most likely have been munched by now. Most likely, but I suppose the possibility exists, since I never count out possibilities.

I don't feel that evolution has happened in a matter of years. I AM, however, open minded enough to accept the possibilities of conditions in an impoundment to become "just right" for a successful spawn to occur, given some of those treated fish got around the sterilization process, somehow. Another long shot, but again, a possibility.

Sorry, Wyo2Ut...gotta use some of your material: Wyo stated that it is VIRTUALLY impossible for rainbows to reproduce in a lake. I can see that he was very careful in choosing his words (as am I). Virtually, meaning not entirely. That's the thread of possibility I'm talking about. Nothing is absolute in this situation, but a level of confidence can be reached in your determinations which, I believe, is the reason we keep this discussion going. ??

So I guess it all comes down to:

You could very well be correct in assuming that the pan sized rainbow could be one that was stocked in '06. That would be the same kind of possibility that I'm talking about, wouldn't it? Maybe more believable, but still only a possibility.



Improv said:


> WTF???? Let me make sure I understand your comparison. Your saying that common sense says that it was a mistake to build a city where Mother Nature may have other plans, right?


Other plans? The city is BELOW SEA LEVEL and RIGHT NEXT TO THE OCEAN. Man had other plans. Man got stomped, like usual. More than a mistake...A complete failure to accept reality. Total ignorance and yes, SLC is a huge gamble that is destined to fall. At least, the developments closest to the fault. There is no "earthquake proof", but I agree that preparations could be made to increase one's odds of survival when the inevitable strikes. SLC isn't trying to hold back trillions of gallons of turbulent water though. They're just trying to stand up straight on a couple of rocking chairs, so to speak.

Look at all the houses on the hill that have had landslide issues. Don't build where you shouldn't. Need I say more?

And finally, of course the DWR bases their decisions from scientific research and experience. Not disputing that at all. Doesn't mean that they hold all the cards for the end results when controlling nature. I'd say they have a winning record though.

No Deliverance, Ben. We both play guitars, not banjos. :lol:

Good discussion, but I believe we've both said enough.


----------



## Nibble Nuts (Sep 12, 2007)

wyoming2utah said:


> Hmmm...funny comment. I bet your bassies would do really well in all of our cold water; they would be great survivors! Just look at how well smallmouth have done in Strawberry--they have been found in there numerous times over the past 10 years and they still can't get going. Heck, for all the bass that have lived in the drainage below Gunnison, how come we very rarely--if ever--see any bass in Yuba. Is it because they are such great survivors....And, I am sure that your precious bass would never get sick if stocked in the Uintas and Boulders...
> 
> The bottom line truth is that Utah IS a trout state...not because that is all the DWR wants to manage, but because most of our waters just aren't suitable to bass. Cry for more diversity all you want, but stocking bass in most of our fisheries is about as dumb as running through the streets naked with peanut butter smeared across your face and howling at the moon.


Funny comment on your behalf. If you take bass and trout and put them in a water they both could potentially survive, then it is a no brainer that the bass will dominate. Your reference to the Berry is stupid because I am not aware of any serious attempts to stock bass in there. I think we both know that would be the last thing you want. Unless you are self-destructive and want to see Utah's poster trout water get overtaken. 
Now speaking of really dumb, I will use your last paragraph in its entirety to illustrate my point. Who said I want every water stocked with bass? I don't. I appreciate trout to an extent, and I do love tiger trout. If you are thinking bass cannot live in Yuba because of pike and walleye, you are wrong. I could take you to my favorite lake in Wyoming that is loaded with pike and walleye to an extent that Yuba can only dream of. You will find plenty of bass living in there too. I think running through the streets naked with peanut butter smeared across my face while howling at the moon makes more sense then any point you just tried to illustrate.


----------



## Nibble Nuts (Sep 12, 2007)

PBH said:


> orvis1 said:
> 
> 
> > Besides you warmwater guys have willard, utah lake, lake powell, and quail creek isn't that enough?
> ...


 FYI, you already mentioned plenty of combo places ike Jordanelle, Starvation, Steinaker, Mantua and so on.


----------



## Nibble Nuts (Sep 12, 2007)

PBH said:


> People keep claiming that the DWR doesn't plant "warm water" species, and thus they don't manage for those species. That's just plain dumb -- kind of like running through the streets naked with peanut butter smeared across your chest howling at the moon.


There is not much of a need to continually plant bass when they are capable of sustaining themselves. If you look at the planting schedules you will see that the majority of the plantings are rainbows and cutts. Also, that whole peanut butter rip-off your using is just plain dumb. It shows that you are lacking in content to prove your point, and you, like others on here are the ones who are doing the crying because you know your trout are being threatened.

Fact: Utah has MORE water with "warm water" species than it does water with "cold water" species.
Fact: That is because the warm water species are heartier, not because there is more effort to plant them by the DWR. I cannot help it if the trout can't hold their own.

Fact: Utah has more WATERS with temperatures more conducive to "cold water" species than "warm water" species.
Fact: You just acknowledged that even with the water temps tipped in the trouts favor, they cannot sustain themselves against the slightest imbalance. It appears that once they reach beyond the Uintahs, there is just too much competition for them.

[/quote]


----------



## Poo Pie (Nov 23, 2007)

Nibble Nuts said:


> PBH said:
> 
> 
> > People keep claiming that the DWR doesn't plant "warm water" species, and thus they don't manage for those species. That's just plain dumb -- kind of like running through the streets naked with peanut butter smeared across your chest howling at the moon.
> ...


[/quote]

Nibble- I would have to agree with you on all of your rebuttals, sorry it took me till now to chime in.


----------



## Bassrods (Jan 14, 2008)

wyoming2 you said temp. well what temps are you talking and what type of fish do you call warm water???

Utah has water temps that go up into the 90's and down to freezeing so as far as I know trout like cooler water like 52 or less I think and bass like smallmouth like water in the 60's...

Then you have largemouth bass they like water in the 70's ...

So what is warm water fish??? Is that any thing but trout????

Walleye like water in the 50's, Northen pike like water in the 50's...

Now lakers don't they like water in the 40's ???

Oh waite What dose Brookies like?? 

How about Browns??? Don't they like water temps in the 60's????

WHAT IS WARM WATER???


----------



## grousehunter (Sep 11, 2007)

Bass seem to do well most places they are tried, take a look at Maine, Pennsylvania, Minnesota, Wisconsin, oh and don’t forget the great lake small mouth. Bass are tough fish and can live almost anywhere from the cold lakes in the north to the stinky swamps of the south. Got to love those tuff S.O.B.'s. :mrgreen:

As for stocking, I could be wrong but there are no facilities in the State so they must be getting them from current thriving populations.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

Leave it to Bass lovers to come out of the woodworks to throw out some truly dumb arguments:

1) Utah doesn't stock bass as much as trout because there isn't a need to (Utah does have warm water hatchery by the way). Bass are like rabbits and reproduce like rabbits...uncontrollably--kind of like brown trout, brook trout, rainbow trout, and lake trout when stocked in non-native situations.
2) Bass don't do well in most of utah's colder waters because the water temps don't allow for a growing season long enough to support bass...in order for bass to live through cold winters, they must reach certain sizes; otherwise, they die. Bass have been dumped into Strawberry by bucket bass idiots many times...yet, their population has never taken off because the growing season at Strawberry is simply too short and they can't tough out the cold winters. They aren't tough enough to handle the cold. 

By way of comparison, less than 100 bass were stocked into Sand Hollow, Piute, and Otter Creek...and look at what they are now. What is the difference between Sand Hollow and Strawberry? Water temperatures...Strawberry is just too cold too long for those "tough" bassies. Bass would never and could never overtake Strawberry.
3) Many of Utah's waters have both bass and trout in them (smallmouth bass)...NONE of these waters is "dominated" by bass.
4) I hate to break it to you bass guys, but most of Utah's fisheries simply are too cold too long for bass to survive and flourish, Yuba is not and will never be a great bass lake, and all your arguments that the DWR should manage more waters for bass are based on pure nonsense.
5) I like bass...I fish for both smallmouth and largemouth often; however, I am not dumb enough to think that bass--especially largemouth--would do well in high elevation and cold water reservoirs.


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

wyoming2utah said:


> Leave it to Bass lovers to come out of the woodworks to throw out some truly dumb arguments:
> 
> 1) Utah doesn't stock bass as much as trout because there isn't a need to.
> 2) Bass don't do well in most of utah's colder waters because the water temps don't allow for a growing season long enough to support bass...in order for bass to live through cold winters, they must reach certain sizes; otherwise, they die. Bass have been dumped into Strawberry by bucket bass idiots many times...yet, their population has never taken off because the growing season at Strawberry is simply too short and they can't tough out the cold winters. They aren't tough enough to handle the cold.
> ...


First of all no need to be calling people dumb just because they don't agree with you. Second no one is saying they think we should plant bass up in the high elevation Uinta lakes. I am not going to argue with you because I will admit you are much more knowledgeable than I will ever be when it comes to fish. I just wanted to post basically to let you know you do not need to stoop to the level of referring to the "bass guys" as idiots and being dumb. Just point out facts and go from there. Thanks for the information.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

Bassrods said:


> WHAT IS WARM WATER???


http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/fishing/regiona ... water.html

"Fisheries managers today prefer the term "warmwater" game fish for the so-called spiny rays, and "coldwater" game fish for salmon, trout, char and whitefish."

A few important "FACTS" about these "warmwater" fish or "spiny-rays":

Walleye: "Walleyes begin spawning when water temperatures reach 45F."

Largemouth Bass: "Largemouth bass spawn on sand and mud beaches when the water temperature approaches 62F."

Smallmouth Bass: "Smallmouth Bass spawn on gravel and sandy beaches when the water temperature approaches 65F".

Yellow Perch: "Yellow Perch spawn even earlier than crappies, beginning when water temperatures reach 45 or 50F."

Bluegill: "They spawn when water temperatures approach 70F..."

These water temperatures become very important for Utah waters because the later the temps reach levels high enough for spawning, the less likelihood fish will reach sizes large enough to survive winters. In FACT, Strawberry has had documented catches of smallmouth numerous times over the years, yet they have never been able to establish a population:
http://www.utahoutdoors.com/pages/straw ... lmouth.htm

Also, these spawning water temps are also very indicative of why perch and walleye are able to do well...too well. The problem with perch and walleye is that we have NO natural regulators to their populations, so they tend to overpopulate and cause more harm than what they offer as a viable fishery.


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

wyoming2utah said:


> Bassrods said:
> 
> 
> > WHAT IS WARM WATER???
> ...


Thank you, that was great information. I love learning everyday on these forums.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

grousehunter said:


> Bass seem to do well most places they are tried, take a look at Maine, Pennsylvania, Minnesota, Wisconsin, oh and don't forget the great lake small mouth. Bass are tough fish and can live almost anywhere from the cold lakes in the north to the stinky swamps of the south. Got to love those tuff S.O.B.'s. :mrgreen:


Good post. Let's take a look at those areas you mentioned for comparison sake to Utah.

Maine
Highest elevation: Katahdin (Baxter Peak) - *5,267 feet*

Pennsylvania: Mount Davis - *3,213 feet*

Minnesota: Eagle Mountain - *2,301 feet*

Wisconsin: Timms Hill - *1,951 feet*

Michigan: Mount Arvon - *1,979 feet*

Ontario: Ishpatina Ridge Tower Summit *2,265 feet*

Jordanelle Reservoir, UT: 6,200 feet

Minersville Reservoir, UT: 5,503 feet

Strawberry Reservoir, UT: 7,602 feet

As you can see, the majority of Utah is higher in elevation than the highest peaks in the Great Lakes Regions. I'm not saying that winters aren't harsh back there, but elevation is VERY low. The majority of the smallmouth bass fisheries in the Great Lakes area are below 2,000 feet in elevation! Heck Sand Hollow Reservoir is at near 3,000 feet elevation!

Elevation plays a major role in spawning temperatures. It's the spawning temperatures that are critical with species like bass, walleye, perch, and pike. This is why the majority of Utah's waters are better suited for species like trout. There are many places that smallies do well in Utah -- or even better, they thrive! But Utah is far from being a "warm water" species state.


----------



## Nibble Nuts (Sep 12, 2007)

wyoming2utah said:


> Leave it to Bass lovers to come out of the woodworks to throw out some truly dumb arguments:


 Speaking of truly dumb arguments, you appear to me to have the comprehension level and ability to stay on point of a high schooler. 


wyoming2utah said:


> 1) Utah doesn't stock bass as much as trout because there isn't a need to (Utah does have warm water hatchery by the way). Bass are like rabbits and reproduce like rabbits...uncontrollably--kind of like brown trout, brook trout, rainbow trout, and lake trout when stocked in non-native situations.


 Can you show me of an example of a non-trout water that the trout were actually able to overtake? I'm yet to hear of it. Also, if you think rainbows are native here they are not. Why is it then that these trout have yet to take over anything.


wyoming2utah said:


> 2) Bass don't do well in most of utah's colder waters because the water temps don't allow for a growing season long enough to support bass...in order for bass to live through cold winters, they must reach certain sizes; otherwise, they die. Bass have been dumped into Strawberry by bucket bass idiots many times...yet, their population has never taken off because the growing season at Strawberry is simply too short and they can't tough out the cold winters. They aren't tough enough to handle the cold.


 It is readily obvious that you are having a tough time accepting that bass are quite a bit tougher than trout and in waters that are suitable for the both of them, the bass will dominate. You cannot change that so give it a rest.



wyoming2utah said:


> 3) Many of Utah's waters have both bass and trout in them (smallmouth bass)...NONE of these waters is "dominated" by bass.


 Wrong, places like the Nelle, I think it is beyond debate that the bass are the predominant species. Nive try though.


wyoming2utah said:


> 4) I hate to break it to you bass guys, but most of Utah's fisheries simply are too cold too long for bass to survive and flourish, Yuba is not and will never be a great bass lake, and all your arguments that the DWR should manage more waters for bass are based on pure nonsense.


 Hate to break it to you, but I don't think you can show me one instance on here where anybody said they wanted Yuba to be a bass water. I am many others like the fact that it is a walleye and pike water. Once again, try and stick to valid arguments and demonstrate that you can stay on track without infereing claims were never made.


wyoming2utah said:


> 5) I like bass...I fish for both smallmouth and largemouth often; however, I am not dumb enough to think that bass--especially largemouth--would do well in high elevation and cold water reservoirs.


 Who said anything about about putting them in the high elevation lakes like the Uintahs? You know one of the reasons California bass get so huge? They feed them trout. You can actually catch bucketmouths using trout shaped swimbaits in excess of 12 inches. That right there is enough proof that bass are just too much for trout to handle. Now I have noticed that you have convienently stayed away from the fact that in waters suitable to both of them, bass have shown time and time again that they will become the predominate species of that lake. Hence the need to constantly stock trout.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

Nibble Nuts said:


> It is readily obvious that you are having a tough time accepting that bass are quite a bit tougher than trout and in waters that are suitable for the both of them, the bass will dominate. You cannot change that so give it a rest.


I'm still struggling with your argument. Your use of "tougher" and "dominate" don't make any sense.

If you provide a fish with the correct spawning habitat, the fish will reproduce. What does that have to do with being "tough" or "dominating"?

Simply put, the majority of Utah reservoirs do not support rainbow trout reproduction. Rainbows don't reproduce in reservoirs. They reproduce in streams, and those streams still need to have the correct conditions. Their ability (or inability) to spawn is a great tool in fisheries management. Controlling numbers of fish is one of the basic tools managers use to manage populations. If you can't control those numbers, fisheries struggle (ie: Yuba).

Is the 'Nelle really dominated by bass? Or is it dominated by perch? I know the brown trout aren't being dominated by any other species!

You credit California's largemouth bass size to a diet of rainbow trout. So why are you against stocking rainbows in Utah's fisheries again? I'd think you be wanting rainbows stocked everywhere!

One thing that no one has talked about is, where are you guys wanting more bass that they aren't already at? People continually as for more bass waters, and the need for more bass stocking, but they never say where.

Little Nuts -- where are you wanting more bass? This discussion might get somewhere if you could tell us where you want them, and why they might be better for that suggested water?


----------



## Bassrods (Jan 14, 2008)

Wyoming 2 if utah is such a great trout state why do they have to plant so many why can't they reproduce like bass?????

And there is a big differance in largemouth and smallmouth bass.....

And walleye can and do live in colder water then your rainbow do...


----------



## Nibble Nuts (Sep 12, 2007)

PBH said:


> I'm still struggling with your argument. Your use of "tougher" and "dominate" don't make any sense.


Let me illustrate what I mean by tougher. If you catch enough trout and bass in your life you will notice that the bass is more durable (tougher) than the trout. It takes alot more handlking to harm a bass, whereas a trout will end up floating on its back if it "handled" too much. By too much I mean sometimes hardly any handling and the trout suffers. In comparison to bass, they are therefore not as tough. Anybody who catches enough of each of these will readily notice this to be true. 


PBH said:


> If you provide a fish with the correct spawning habitat, the fish will reproduce. What does that have to do with being "tough" or "dominating"?


What that has to do with being tough is that the less durable fish like trout cannot handle changes in their environment as well. Things have to be even more perfect for them to survive to reproduce than most fish.



PBH said:


> Is the 'Nelle really dominated by bass? Or is it dominated by perch? I know the brown trout aren't being dominated by any other species!


 I thinnk we all know that the smallies are the predominant species in the nelle. The greater amount of perch is necessary because they are a good source of prey to other fish. 


PBH said:


> You credit California's largemouth bass size to a diet of rainbow trout. So why are you against stocking rainbows in Utah's fisheries again? I'd think you be wanting rainbows stocked everywhere!


Show me one place where I have ever said I am against rainbows being stocked. I don't mind that the trout are stocked so much. I do not think that my not wanting Yuba to be solely a trout lake is a far cry from your claims that I don't want them stocked.


PBH said:


> One thing that no one has talked about is, where are you guys wanting more bass that they aren't already at? People continually as for more bass waters, and the need for more bass stocking, but they never say where.


Once again, how do you get this conclusion out of my stating that I like Yuba the way it is? I think it is those who are crying that it is not a trout fishery are the ones who are saying we need more trout waters. We have plenty, Yuba does not need to be another one. 


PBH said:


> Little Nuts -- where are you wanting more bass? This discussion might get somewhere if you could tell us where you want them, and why they might be better for that suggested water?


 Where am I wanting more bass? Well I was content with the places I frequent but since you asked, I think it would be wonderful to stock Birch Creek with bass, walleye, and pike. :mrgreen:


----------



## fixed blade XC-3 (Sep 11, 2007)

Last year I didn't think bass were that coool. But as of last year I think they are the Sh*t.  


Hey, do you guys think there are any trout in Yuba. :lol:


----------



## rapalahunter (Oct 13, 2007)

They should stock them bass in Vivian. 8)


----------



## grousehunter (Sep 11, 2007)

PBH said:


> grousehunter said:
> 
> 
> > Bass seem to do well most places they are tried, take a look at Maine, Pennsylvania, Minnesota, Wisconsin, oh and don't forget the great lake small mouth. Bass are tough fish and can live almost anywhere from the cold lakes in the north to the stinky swamps of the south. Got to love those tuff S.O.B.'s. :mrgreen:
> ...


I was not saying that we should just concentrate on warm water species; I was making a comment about how protective the "trout only" guys are being. Yes elevation plays a big roll, yet the bass survive much to the chagrin of the "Trout guys"! Trout are far more fragile than bass and the DWR continues to concentrate on them even though the summer will start killing them off. I love trout also, however I don't believe they are the only fish Utah can support. If the fact that even in difficult environments bass and other "non-trout" species survive upsets you I can't help you there. I for one would like to see more types of fish in Utah and I don't get upset or defensive because my favorite fish gets pushed out of a reservoir.

I personally do not want any more non-trout fisheries; I just want the ones we have to remain. Yuba is the perfect example. Yes trout may do well in Yuba, but they also do well in other reservoirs. You cannot say that about the Pike in Yuba.


----------



## fixed blade XC-3 (Sep 11, 2007)

The pike probably ate all the trout.


----------



## BERG (Dec 4, 2007)

+1 for Nibbles posts.


----------



## Bassrods (Jan 14, 2008)

No make that + 2...

If they didn't plant so many trout their wouldn't be any, they just can't make it on there own....


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

Nibble Nuts said:


> Can you show me of an example of a non-trout water that the trout were actually able to overtake? I'm yet to hear of it. Also, if you think rainbows are native here they are not. Why is it then that these trout have yet to take over anything.


Can you show me one example of a non-bass water where bass were able to actually overtake? Also, I never said rainbow trout were native; in fact, I said they were non-native. And, they have overtaken several places--I can think of two within 10 minutes of my home. Paragonah Reservoir is another example.



Nibble Nuts said:


> It is readily obvious that you are having a tough time accepting that bass are quite a bit tougher than trout and in waters that are suitable for the both of them, the bass will dominate. You cannot change that so give it a rest.


Name one place where the bass dominate? Again, if you look at the places where both are stocked, most of them are more popular as trout fisheries than bass fisheries--take a look at Piute, Otter Creek, and Minersville, and Flaming Gorge for examples. You cannot change the fact that this is predominantly a trout state because most of our waters are too cold for the bass, so give it a rest. And, walleye and pike are not good options because their fecundity is too high and they end up stunting.



Nibble Nuts said:


> Hate to break it to you, but I don't think you can show me one instance on here where anybody said they wanted Yuba to be a bass water. I am many others like the fact that it is a walleye and pike water. Once again, try and stick to valid arguments and demonstrate that you can stay on track without infereing claims were never made.


I thought you were talking about how tough your bass are? If they are so tough, why aren't they tough enough to handle Yuba? You may like that Yuba is a pike and walleye water, but only one year in ten...the other years you probably don't touch it because it isn't any good.



Nibble Nuts said:


> Who said anything about about putting them in the high elevation lakes like the Uintahs? You know one of the reasons California bass get so huge? They feed them trout. You can actually catch bucketmouths using trout shaped swimbaits in excess of 12 inches. That right there is enough proof that bass are just too much for trout to handle. Now I have noticed that you have convienently stayed away from the fact that in waters suitable to both of them, bass have shown time and time again that they will become the predominate species of that lake. Hence the need to constantly stock trout.


You have been talking about how tough bass are...all most all of Utah is high elevation. Don't you get that? Our elevation is high enough that it shortens the growing season for your tough bass so that they can't do well in most waters...what is so hard about that that you don't get it. Stocking largemouth bass in even mid-elevation reservoirs would be stupid because they can't survive in them...they are not tough enough to handle the cold.

You can actually catch trout using perch shaped swimbaits in excess of 12 inches...so what is your point?

And, as for lakes with both, I can think of only one where bass are the predominant species--Quail Creek. And, that reservoir happens to be one of the warmest in the state and it still pumps out huge rainbows.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

Bassrods said:


> If they didn't plant so many trout their wouldn't be any, they just can't make it on there own....


That's funny...I wonder how many bass would be in Utah if they had never been stocked...they just couldn't make it here on their own.


----------



## Nibble Nuts (Sep 12, 2007)

Wyo2Ut,
I can see you are having a hard time accepting that bass are more durable and therefore tougher. In fact there is alot more types of waters they can survive in than your trout. I see this bothers you and you are willing to go on and on reaching for straws in hopes that you can change the way things are. I am sorry you feel like the trout are your family members and that you need stand up for them. I see no more sense in going on about this subject when it is pretty common knowledge that bass are much more capable of surviving than trout are. We can keep on beating a dead horse in hopes that it will wake up for you, but I know that is just not going to happen. Also bass walleye and pike and musky have been inhabiting the same waters for years. So I am sorry that your Yuba example really doesn't hold much weight because Ican think of plenty of waters where they all exist in the same environment. I'll take the state of Minnesota as my proof. Also as I mentioned before, my favorite lake in Wyoming holds more pike and walleye then Yuba does, and it is still a popular bass destination. I hope you can accept the facts of life and move on. 

Sincerely,
Your Bass Fishing Friend.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

What, you can't argue the facts, so you give up? Come on...if bass are so tough, why can't they handle most of the water in utah? The fact is this: in Utah, trout can live and thrive in almost every single fishery, but bass can't. 

You don't get the fact that each fishery is different and brings different habitat to the table...

You'll take the state of Minnesota as your proof of what? Proof that elevation and growing seasons are much different in Utah and that bass can't thrive hear as much as trout?


----------



## Nibble Nuts (Sep 12, 2007)

Wyo2Ut,
I see that this is still bothering you. You have not proven anything that common observation will not show otherwise. I see no point in beating a dead horse because it is obvious what is really bothering you is that bass are tougher than trout. I hope that you can learn to deal with it and not feel the need to get defensive for the trout. After all, do you really think the trout are going to stick up for you like you do for them? Beyond the Uintahs, the trout will not have ideal conditions in other waters because there is too much competition for them. the bass will still find ideal conditions with the trout present because they are better competitors. I referenced Minnesota as proof against your claims that bass do not survive when pike and walleye are present. That is just not true. Look at Pineview, it has plenty of bass but not many trout. So you tell me which species can adapt to the presence of the mighty tiger musky? Certainly not the trout. I am not giving up, I just know there is no point continuing to beat a dead horse and I still stand by my claims. Maybe we should go bass fishing. We could even use trout as bait. :mrgreen: 
Sincerely,
Your Bass Fishing Friend


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

Just for fun, I went to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources to see what they said about bass...here is what I found:
http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/fish/bass/management.html

A few facts from their information:
1) stocking plays a very small role in the management of smallmouth and largemouth and is "usually limited to newly filled basins, winter kill lakes or chemically "rehabilitated" waters. This is almost the identical approach Utah has with bass.
2) "largemouth needs the following if it is to flourish: 1) spawning areas with a firm bottom of sand, mud, or gravel. 2) Beds of rooted aquatic weeds or other heavy cover...3) Adequate dissolved oxygen, particularly during the winter." In other words, bass need certain habitat elements--just like trout--in order to survive.
3) "Even mildly acidic waters prevent smallmouth bass from successfully reproducing. (They are, in fact, one of the first species to be affected by acidification." So, acidic waters affect smallmouth more than trout...
4) Successfull spawns for bass is determined by weather...if the weather suddenly gets cold after bass have laid their eggs, the eggs will die and spawns will be unsuccessful.
5) "Smallmouth rivers have more immediate problems. The rivers of central and southern Minnesota suffer to varying degrees from poor municipal sewage treatment, farmland runoff, sedimentation from soil erosion and extremes in water level fluctuation." Hmmm...these things sound like the same problems our trout have in Utah. "Grazing livestock along bass streams causes banks to slough, increasing siltation and changing the profile of the stream channel form narrow and deep to broad and shallow. The consequences of warmer water, less dissolved oxygen, and fewer spots with the depth necessary to hold bass." But, I don't think these stream smallies could hack Utah runoff..."Perhaps the most pervasive destroyers of smallmouth streams are the quick, intense floods and siltation caused by the drainage of wetlands and the destruction of soil cover. Heavy spring rains raise a tide of chocolate-colored waters in small streams, often at the very time smallmouths are spawning."
6) "Even in good smallmouth waters, smallmouth are not terribly abundant. They are never as numerous as trout are in a good stream, for example."
7) "Smallmouth can be easily "overfished""...
8) Even Minnesota--the "Walleye State"--relies heavily on stocking of walleye..."The major value is to provide walleye fishing in areas of the state void of natural walleye populations."
9) "There is evidence that stocking can be harmful as well. Stocked walleye may compete for food with other game fish, particularly largemouth and smallmouth bass. The result may be fewer or smaller bass."
10) Most of Minnesota's fisheries do NOT support trout because the water is too warm...just like most of the fisheries in Utah do/will not support bass because the water is too cold.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

using nibblenuts logic, Zebra Mussels are a "tougher" species than Walleye, because they are "out competing" walleye in Great Lake areas. Mussels consume all the plankton, which allows for waters to become clearer, thus reducing walleye habitat and numbers.

Sea Lamprey's are also "tougher" than Lake trout and walleye. They've also made huge impacts on ecosystem's of the Great Lakes, and populations of native sport fish.

We could also assume that rabbits are the "toughest" species of the entire Australian continent.



What nibblenuts is failing to understand and come to terms with is that being "tough" has little to do with balancing an ecosystem. When species are introduced into a non-native environment, that system lacks the controls that mother nature uses to keep populations in check. By introducing smallmouth bass, walleye, pike, brown trout, carp, or other species non-indigenous to Utah, we upset ecosystems, and introduce species that mother nature has no way of controlling and never had any intentions of needing to control.

It's not because they are tougher.

History proves to us that Utah is in fact a trout state.


----------



## Nibble Nuts (Sep 12, 2007)

I think unbalancing Utah's ecosystem is the best thing that could have happened for its fisheries. I could care less about loads of cutts in a balanced ecosystem. Give me the unbalanced system with better fish anyday. The face of the land is changing and those best at adapting will survive. I think the future looks specifically bright for the bass. Say what you will, but those who've handled enough bass and trout will easily notice which one is tougher, vs. which one ends up floating on its back if it is even looked at funny. Now why don't we all go bass fishing.


----------

