# Cutts, Bows and Tigers



## HighmtnFish (Jun 3, 2010)

I had an old fishing buddy come and visit this weekend. He was in the mood for pretty cutts and active tigers so we made some plans Friday night and decided we would hit a couple of different places. We started fishing before sun up and it looked promising when my friend quickly hooked up with a fat 13 inch Colorado river cutt. More would follow, I soon landed a 17 inch beauty on an olive colored jig. Colorado river cutts are incredible this time of year.[attachment=13:2mkol411]May 2011 001_edited-2_256.jpg[/attachment:2mkol411][attachment=12:2mkol411]may 2011 054_edited-1_256.jpg[/attachment:2mkol411][attachment=11:2mkol411]may 2011 030_edited-1_256.jpg[/attachment:2mkol411][attachment=10:2mkol411]may 2011 059_edited-1_256.jpg[/attachment:2mkol411]

As the sun came up the fishing slowed but before we left I was lucky enough to hook into another 16 inch pig. I chose to keep this one and weigh it. It went 3.2 pounds on the kitchen scale and it was really good eating too.[attachment=9:2mkol411]May 2011 010_edited-1_256.jpg[/attachment:2mkol411][attachment=8:2mkol411]Mayl 2011 011_256.jpg[/attachment:2mkol411]

It was tough to leave but the fish stopped biting and we still had an afternoon date with some tiger trout. We first stopped down along the stream for a quick lunch break with some nice rainbows and browns. we were both able to land a couple of nice 20 inch rainbows and a few smaller browns.[attachment=7:2mkol411]May 2011 008_edited-1_256.jpg[/attachment:2mkol411][attachment=6:2mkol411]May 2011 006_edited-1_256.jpg[/attachment:2mkol411][attachment=5:2mkol411]May 2011 005_edited-1_256.jpg[/attachment:2mkol411]
Finally we made it to our little tiger trout lakes and the tigers were aggressive and hungry. the water was clear and we were able to sight fish for them using small jigs and spinners. There is nothing more exciting than sight fishing. We probably landed 20 or more tigers each before we realized that we were completely worn out and sunburned.[attachment=4:2mkol411]May 2011 011_256.jpg[/attachment:2mkol411][attachment=3:2mkol411]May 2011 013_edited-1_256.jpg[/attachment:2mkol411][attachment=2:2mkol411]May 2011 014_256.jpg[/attachment:2mkol411][attachment=1:2mkol411]May 2011 015_edited-1_256.jpg[/attachment:2mkol411][attachment=0:2mkol411]May 2011 016_256.jpg[/attachment:2mkol411]
We went home exhausted but rejuvenated and excited for what the summer might bring 
It felt good to spend a whole day fishing with a good friend and recharge the old batteries.


----------



## sawsman (Sep 13, 2007)

You and your buddy did good! Great color on those fish, all of 'em.

I'll bet the sunburn was worth it.


----------



## LOAH (Sep 29, 2007)

Holy crap! That's the kind of trip I like!

Awesome day, nice job.


----------



## climberike (Mar 29, 2010)

wow cool fish


----------



## BrookTroutKid (Oct 10, 2007)

That cutt would make an amazing mount!!


----------



## Sageflyfish (Feb 22, 2008)

I wish i was on that trip with you that was sweet.. those are some sweet looking fish!!


----------



## orvis1 (Sep 7, 2007)

That sounds like a sweet day of fishing in my book that cut was like Danny Devito short but stocky thanks for the report!


----------



## tuffluckdriller (May 27, 2009)

Wow! Looks like it was a blast! Was that here in Utah?


----------



## HighmtnFish (Jun 3, 2010)

Thanks for the replies, this was in Utah. There is some great fishing in this state and it is not hard to get off the beaten path if a guy does some research and just goes for it.


----------



## Ton_Def (Dec 23, 2008)

Open High country?? Saweeet! Got me itchin' worse than this beard...


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

highmtn -- just curious -- how was the access to the tiger trout lakes? Did you run into many snowdrifts? Did you ATV, or drive the truck to where you hike in? How far up the mountain could you have gone?


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

yeah, that's what I was thinking...are those tigers from the Bullberries? Are the cutts from Pine Creek? How was the access getting in there?


----------



## brookieguy1 (Oct 14, 2008)

wyoming2utah said:


> yeah, that's what I was thinking...are those tigers from the Bullberries? Are the cutts from Pine Creek? How was the access getting in there?


Wow. How about a little corkage?


----------



## 280Remington (Jun 2, 2008)

The Bullberrys were never much, just stunted brookies, so the tiger trout are a good fit in there. But Pine Creek Reservoir is another story. Sad, sad, sad. I fondly remember catching 5 to 6 pound brookies out of there a long time ago. And the beaver pond just upstream from where the spring comes in ****... All of that is gone now, we are stuck with cutthroat trout. sad.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

280Remington said:


> All of that is gone now, we are stuck with cutthroat trout. sad.


Yep. Sad indeed. 5 to 6 lb cutthroat are certainly a shame to be seen. What a shamockery!

280 -- you need to get out more.


----------



## 280Remington (Jun 2, 2008)

PBH, 
Sir we all have differing opinions I guess. But to me a cutthroat that is 5 or 6 pounds isn't all that special. Every day Henry's Lake or Strawberry is fished, a 5 pound cutthroat trout is caught. A cutt that size is big, but it is ho hum and nothing to write home about. On the other hand a 5 or 6 pound brookie is something of a national treasure and sadly Pine Creek Reservoir won't have those fish in them again...


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

280Remington said:


> Every day Henry's Lake or Strawberry is fished, a 5 pound cutthroat trout is caught. A cutt that size is big, but it is ho hum and nothing to write home about.


Henry's and Strawberry don't have Colorado River Cutthroat, like those in Pine Creek. If there is such a thing as a national treasure on Boulder Mountain, it is the return of the Colorado River Cutthroat to it's historic range. Genetically pure. Native. In it's native range. Truly a national treasure. Much more so than some introduced non-native pest, like brook trout have become in so many of our lakes on the Boulder.



280Remington said:


> On the other hand a 5 or 6 pound brookie is something of a national treasure and sadly Pine Creek Reservoir won't have those fish in them again...


a national treasure?? Come on 280. You're in a dream world. Prior to the cutts being put in Pine Creek, hardly anyone even knew it existed. If 5-6 lb brook trout were being caught, it would have been as famous as McGath. The truth is: it never had brook trout that large. The truth is: it is a MUCH more popular lake today than it was 10 years ago -- that FACT tells me that people are happy with what was done.

5-6lb brook trout aren't as special as you are trying to make them out to be. They aren't that uncommon, and they are still readily available in better lakes on the Boulder than Pine Creek ever was. Get over your exaggerated memories and go try something different.

Yes sir. We all have different opinions.


----------



## 280Remington (Jun 2, 2008)

PBH, 
You have 700 posts and I only have 70. Therefore you must know more than me.


----------



## Brookie (Oct 26, 2008)

I agree 280remington, I would much rather catch a 3 lb brookie than a 3 lb colorado cut. Thats just me and I've argued with PBH and Wyoming to Utah about this before. its gets nowhere


----------



## brookieguy1 (Oct 14, 2008)

If Pine Creek EVER had 5-6lb. brook trout it had to be well over 25 years ago. When it was poisoned, all it had was headed-out stunted brookies, and was doomed to that situation as long as the ideal spawning conditions existed. I share your passion for big squaretails 280, but Pine Creek is much better suited for the COs. Too bad these arguements on the forum are exposing it so heavily.
On another note I wish the Hepps would spill some intel (to me) on the "hot" brook trout lakes as easily as they'll spray info on the lakes I treasure and have worked my a#$ off to find. Certain lake names are mentionable only in PMs in my opinion, but I guess others will decide.


----------



## 280Remington (Jun 2, 2008)

Pine Creek Reservoir was constructed in 1912, yeah about a hundred years ago. So to look at it from about post 1985 isn't looking at it in the right context. It would be like a new young generation of Jazz fans looking at the entire Jazz franchise in a context that did not include when Stockton and Malone played.
What hurt Pine Creek Reservoir actually was when the roads were shut off to access it. There used to be enough balance in there between harvest and fish density to produce large fish. Once the roads became closed off the overall access decreased and the fish gradually overpopulated due to little harvest. But there was a time when Pine Creek and Beaver Dam were among the best on the mountain.


----------



## brookieguy1 (Oct 14, 2008)

280Remington said:


> Pine Creek Reservoir was constructed in 1912, yeah about a hundred years ago. So to look at it from about post 1985 isn't looking at it in the right context. It would be like a new young generation of Jazz fans looking at the entire Jazz franchise in a context that did not include when Stockton and Malone played.
> What hurt Pine Creek Reservoir actually was when the roads were shut off to access it. There used to be enough balance in there between harvest and fish density to produce large fish. Once the roads became closed off the overall access decreased and the fish gradually overpopulated due to little harvest. But there was a time when Pine Creek and Beaver Dam were among the best on the mountain.


Now that makes sense. Thank you. But, since they did close the road, I feel CO Cutts are the better choice.


----------



## brookieguy1 (Oct 14, 2008)

280Remington said:


> Pine Creek Reservoir was constructed in 1912, yeah about a hundred years ago. So to look at it from about post 1985 isn't looking at it in the right context. It would be like a new young generation of Jazz fans looking at the entire Jazz franchise in a context that did not include when Stockton and Malone played.
> What hurt Pine Creek Reservoir actually was when the roads were shut off to access it. There used to be enough balance in there between harvest and fish density to produce large fish. Once the roads became closed off the overall access decreased and the fish gradually overpopulated due to little harvest. But there was a time when Pine Creek and Beaver Dam were among the best on the mountain.


Now that makes sense. Thank you. But, since they did close the road, I feel CO Cutts are the better choice.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

280 -- things change. You can't always have everything stay the same. Stockton and Malone retired. Handlogten was traded away. the Big Dog had to quit. People have to adjust.

it's the same with fishing. Conditions change. Regulations change. Roads are closed. Airplanes miss. Buckets are carried. Springs dry up. Beavers die.

If you can't adapt to changing conditions, you'll never catch that trophy fish. Wishing that things were the same as they were 15 years ago is, well, living in the past.

Beaver Dam was among the best on the mountain -- right up until the dam was repaired, which raised lake levels to a point that allowed the brook trout to reproduce without limit. Things changed. Same story with Pine Creek: things changed. Since the conversion to CR Cutts, popularity of the lake has increased 10 fold. That's NOT a bad thing! In fact, it's a sure sign that the fishing _must be better now_ than it was before. Things change.

Big brook trout are still readily available. You just have to be willing to stop living in the past and adapt to current conditions.  Things change.

Harris, Hayward, Millsap, Favors, Jefferson -- 2011/12. Things change.

BKT: I can only tell you what I knew. I can't predict the future -- so telling you where the "big" brook trout currently are is like telling you who KOC will draft in the upcoming draft. Sure, I can make an educated guess based on past data, experience, and logic. But, when it comes down to it, we won't really know until it happens.


----------



## 280Remington (Jun 2, 2008)

PBH
You mention PCR's popularity has "increased 10 fold". Is this a scientific statistic available from the DWR or did you just randomly pull a number out of thin air? In other words is their a scientifically valid creel survey on PCR with a baseline sometime in the past and another valid creel survey done recently that backs up your "10 fold" number. If so please provide this information, I would be interested in seeing it.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

Trying to get your thinking down 280Remington.....so, in your mind, the pre-poisoned Pine Creek Reservoir was better than what it is now because some time in the last 100 years you claim to have caught 5-6 pound brook trout? Just out of curiosity, what was its attraction before the poisoning and since the brook trout started stunting?

Also, FWIW, you are claiming that fishermen were able to hold the brook trout numbers in check prior to the road being closed....if that is the case, it is the only brook trout lake on the entire mountain that such a scenario has EVER happened on. Again, I highly doubt it.

Also, FWIW, if harvest was high, how was the lake putting out 5-6 pound brookies? Didn't the fishermen harvest these big guys out? Seems to me that if harvest were high, fish sizes would have been down...


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

Brookie said:


> I agree 280remington, I would much rather catch a 3 lb brookie than a 3 lb colorado cut.  Thats just me and I've argued with PBH and Wyoming to Utah about this before. its gets nowhere


I would rather catch a 3 pound brooke than a 3 pound colorado cutt too...but, I sure as heck don't enjoy catching skinny 10-14 inch big-headed brookies that have stunted. To me, that is totally worthless...and, I would much rather catch 2-3 pound colorado cutts than 10-14 inch big-headed brookies that have stunted!

Just out of curiosity, in these lakes full of stunted brook trout, what is going to change and keep the brook trout from continuing to stunt?


----------



## 280Remington (Jun 2, 2008)

Wyoming2Utah
There is a little thing called "sterile brook trout". They are in Beaver Dam and also in Henry's lake by the hundreds of thousands. 

Beaver Dam is a perfect example and shoots your theory down very quickly. Beaver Dam produced a 7 lbs 8 oz brook trout record. It then turned south and started stunting, thus it was poisoned. Explain to me how a 7 lbs 8 oz brook trout grew in Beaver Dam? McGath is another one. Whether you know it or not McGath used to have very small brook trout in it. The stocking numbers were reduced way down and the fish size went up. But there was a time in the past when McGath produced poorly conditioned small brookies.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

280Remington said:


> Wyoming2Utah
> There is a little thing called "sterile brook trout". They are in Beaver Dam and also in Henry's lake by the hundreds of thousands.
> 
> Beaver Dam is a perfect example and shoots your theory down very quickly. Beaver Dam produced a 7 lbs 8 oz brook trout record. It then turned south and started stunting, thus it was poisoned. Explain to me how a 7 lbs 8 oz brook trout grew in Beaver Dam? McGath is another one. Whether you know it or not McGath used to have very small brook trout in it. The stocking numbers were reduced way down and the fish size went up. But there was a time in the past when McGath produced poorly conditioned small brookies.


Oh...so your beef is that the DWR didn't restock Pine Creek Reservoir with sterile brook trout. Just out of curiosity, what other lakes on the Boulder have a population of strictly colorado river cutthroat?

Also, Beaver Dam produced big brook trout prior to the dam being fixed because the fish could NOT reproduce. That was the key....the brook trout numbers were controlled. Same with Magath...the brook trout numbers were controlled by stocking. How are you going to control the numbers in lakes where brook trout can and do reproduce readily? You can't stock "sterile" brook trout on top and expect the others to not reproduce.


----------



## 280Remington (Jun 2, 2008)

Wyoming2Utah
No offense but the more you keep responding the deeper the hole you are burying yourself in. Beaver Dam was poisoned in 1969, uh why do you think it was poisoned? It was a partial kill, the remaining fish that survived the treatment grew very large, thus the Utah state record was caught out of there in 1971. So you were wrong on that one. 

Here is another one, PCR does NOT have a self sustaining population of CRC's, not even close. If it did why, have they planted it every single year since the poisoning? If CRC's were reproducing why in the world would it need to be planted with hatchery fish every year??? 

My suggestion is to research what you are talking about, experience the Boulders, talk to someone that fished it prior to 1985, then come back on here and tell us what you learned.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

280Remington said:


> There is a little thing called "sterile brook trout". They are in Beaver Dam and also in Henry's lake by the hundreds of thousands.


And they are not 100% sterile...and the IF&G recommends not stocking them over the top of native or "sensitive" trout populations. Interestingly, hatcheries have not achieved 100% success in sterilizing brook trout through heat shocking. The latest research shows that heat shocking can produce brook trout that are at best 97% sterile.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

280Remington said:


> Wyoming2Utah
> No offense but the more you keep responding the deeper the hole you are burying yourself in. Beaver Dam was poisoned in *1970*, uh why do you think it was poisoned? It was a partial kill, the remaining fish that survived the treatment grew very large, thus the Utah state record was caught out of there in 1971. So you were wrong on that one.


I am digging a hole? Good grief :roll: You really don't understand the biology of these lakes do you? No, I am not wrong...Beaver Dam has grown big fish in the past because the fish numbers in it remained relatively low and because brook trout did NOT reproduce...brook trout in Beaver Dam had NOT been reproducing until after the dam was repaired. That poisoning in *1970* dropped the number of brook trout down to levels where they could grow. From 1971 on, Beaver Dam was "stocked" by Fish Creek...and when Fish Creek stunted, the fish in Beaver Dam slowly became smaller and smaller because the population in Beaver Dam grew. Again, the whole idea is that brook trout numbers were low enough that they could grow large....they were NOT reproducing in Beaver Dam. Are you trying to say that fishermen were controlling the population?



280Remington said:


> Here is another one, PCR does NOT have a self sustaining population of CRC's, not even close. If it did why, have they planted it every single year since the poisoning? If CRC's were reproducing why in the world would it need to be planted with hatchery fish every year??? .


Uhhh...not sure what you are getting at with this, but Pine Creek DOES have a naturally reproducing population of fish. Pine Creek Reservoir does NOT.

Also, FWIW, my experience on the Boulders goes back to the 70s.


----------



## orvis1 (Sep 7, 2007)

o-|| o-|| o-|| o-|| o-||


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

wyoming2utah said:


> From 1971 on, Beaver Dam was "stocked" by Fish Creek...and when Fish Creek stunted, the fish in Beaver Dam slowly became smaller and smaller because the population in Beaver Dam grew. Again, the whole idea is that brook trout numbers were low enough that they could grow large....they were NOT reproducing in Beaver Dam. Are you trying to say that fishermen were controlling the population?


In fact, the DWRs EA done for the Boulder Mountain prior to any of the poisonings states: "The average size of brook trout is down from previous surveys and will continue to decrease as additional fish from Fish Creek Reservoir migrate to Beaver Dam Reservoir leading to overpopulation and stunting. Beaver Dam Reservoir would be treated in conjunction with Fish Creek Reservoir because of their close proximity. Treated waters would be restocked with a trout species or community of trout species that can be managed by stocking."

Also, because the DWR expected partial kills with these poisonings it is also the reason that they did NOT restock Beaver Dam...because they knew that fish from Fish Creek would reproduce and eventually migrate down to Beaver Dam.

Also, FWIW, fish in Fish Creek averaged 10.8 inches before the last poisoning...fish in Pine Creek Reservoir were about the same. So, any way you try and slice it, fishing at Pine Creek Reservoir and at Fish Creek Reservoir has improved greatly!


----------



## 280Remington (Jun 2, 2008)

Wyoming2Utah. You are 32 years old!!! Seriously your personal experience with the Boulders goes back to the 1970's?? Really? Really? Tell us how that is possible....


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

280Remington said:


> Wyoming2Utah. You are 32 years old!!! Seriously your personal experience with the Boulders goes back to the 1970's?? Really? Really? Tell us how that is possible....


Uhhh...I am NOT 32 years old. Sorry.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

Remington, I suggest you go back and do some research. Start here:
http://wildlife.utah.gov/cutthroat/BCT/ ... -et-al.pdf


----------



## Chaser (Sep 28, 2007)

I got some firsthand information on the subject over the weekend regarding PCR. Here it is: THEY WEREN'T HUNGRY!!! We saw some fish in there, especially right around the dam. A few were even jumping at the surface, but we didn't catch crap despite throwing everything we had at them.


----------



## 280Remington (Jun 2, 2008)

Wyoming2Utah
You know how old you were in the "70's". I am not going to belabor that point anymore. Like George Constanza once said "It is not a lie, if you believe it". 

But I will say you are definitely lying when you say sterile brookies cannot be 100% sterile. Please read the following excerpts by the DWR's own Fisheries Experiment Station in Logan, UT; "Idaho Fish and Game has also been experimenting with sterile brook trout production. In a recent report (Kozfkay 2002), triploid induction rates of 100% were achieved by heat shocks of 27 C (for 20 min, 20 min after fertilization), 28 C (10 min, 10 min after fertilization), and 29.4 C (7 min, 18 min after fertilization)." 

And this one: "Triploidy rates were encouraging in the test, reaching 100% in the 9500 psig treatments conducted at either 32 or 43 min after fertilization."

So in summary, can you be trusted in anything you say???


----------



## 280Remington (Jun 2, 2008)

Again Wyoming2Utah how old were you in the 1970's????????

http://www.utahonthefly.com/forums/show ... hp?t=25123


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

Ok, Wyo, can we see your birth certificate? Were you born in Utah, Wyoming, Hawaii or Kenya?  


Carry on. o-||


----------



## 280Remington (Jun 2, 2008)

Nobody likes to cross examine or put a person like Wyoming2Utah on the spot. Also bearing in mind this is the internet and facts often get in the way of exaggeration or hyperbole, but for his sake I hope he has some dignity, swallows his pride and fades away from this thread for a while. He has a lot to offer this site and he has been a real asset in the past. But Wyoming2Utah learned a valuable lesson in that second hand hearsay and second hand knowledge does sometimes cloud real facts.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

280Remington said:


> Wyoming2Utah
> You know how old you were in the "70's". I am not going to belabor that point anymore. Like George Constanza once said "It is not a lie, if you believe it".


Yup, I know. I began fishing the Boulder in the 70s with my father. In fact, I remember my first trip in 1977 or 1978 (Would you call that the 80s?). Again, I am not 32.


280Remington said:


> But I will say you are definitely lying when you say sterile brookies cannot be 100% sterile. Please read the following excerpts by the DWR's own Fisheries Experiment Station in Logan, UT; "Idaho Fish and Game has also been experimenting with sterile brook trout production. In a recent report (Kozfkay 2002), triploid induction rates of 100% were achieved by heat shocks of 27 C (for 20 min, 20 min after fertilization), 28 C (10 min, 10 min after fertilization), and 29.4 C (7 min, 18 min after fertilization)."


"Lying"? NO. The information I looked at from the Fisheries Experiment Station in Logan stated: "The survival of the eggs and the ploidy assay results are shown in Table 1. The data indicated that the higher the temperature of the heat shock, the higher the triploidy induction rate. T*he highest rate achieved was 96.7% triploidy*, using a recipe refined and recommended by Tim Yesaki, a British Columbia researcher. Heat shock had a detrimental effect on egg survival, with a general increase in mortality as temperatures climbed from 27 to 29 C. Reducing the duration to 7 min in the 29.4 C treatment significantly improved eyeup rates over that for the 29 C for 10 min treatment. However, mortality was still significantly above that for controls. This survival reduction effect is generally greater than we experienced with the rainbow trout heat shocks and what has been reported for brook trout (Galbreath et al. 2000). Hatching rates were significantly better in controls than the treatments (P <0.001, ANOVA). The 27 and 28 C treatments had significantly poorer hatching rates than the 29.0 and 29.4 C treatments. Crippling rates were similar among treatments ranging from 1.0 to 3.3%, although the 29.0 and 29.4 C treatments had significantly higher rates than controls (P = 0.049)." So, from what I read, Utah's highest sterility rate was 96.7%...
If the hatcheries are able to get 100% sterility, great. I still don't agree with them being stocked into Pine Creek Reservoir which is a conservation population of CR cutts...and which was found to have a native population.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

280Remington said:


> Nobody likes to cross examine or put a person like Wyoming2Utah on the spot. Also bearing in mind this is the internet and facts often get in the way of exaggeration or hyperbole, but for his sake I hope he has some dignity, swallows his pride and fades away from this thread for a while. He has a lot to offer this site and he has been a real asset in the past. But Wyoming2Utah learned a valuable lesson in that second hand hearsay and second hand knowledge does sometimes cloud real facts.


 :roll:

:roll:


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

280Remington said:


> Again Wyoming2Utah how old were you in the 1970's????????
> 
> http://www.utahonthefly.com/forums/show ... hp?t=25123


So, what does that thread show? That I was "32"? Good grief...I was born in 1973. Right now I am 37 years old. I began fishing the Boulder as soon as my father became in charge of managing it in the 1970s and I was old enough to go with him.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

Again, though, back to my original questions: 1) In your mind, was Pine Creek Reservoir better prior to its poisoning when it was full of 11 inch skinny brook trout? Or now when 3-4 pound cutts are common? 2) Give me one example of a brook trout lake on Boulder Mountain where fishermen controlled the brook trout population.

Because, after all, you have still failed to answer these questions.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

280Remington said:


> But I will say you are definitely lying when you say sterile brookies cannot be 100% sterile. Please read the following excerpts by the DWR's own Fisheries Experiment Station in Logan, UT; "Idaho Fish and Game has also been experimenting with sterile brook trout production. In a recent report (Kozfkay 2002), triploid induction rates of 100% were achieved by heat shocks of 27 C (for 20 min, 20 min after fertilization), 28 C (10 min, 10 min after fertilization), and 29.4 C (7 min, 18 min after fertilization)."


Good grief...how about the rest of that quote? Here, I will post it for you:
Idaho Fish and Game has also been experimenting with sterile brook trout production. In a recent report (Kozfkay 2002), triploid induction rates of 100% were achieved by heat shocks of 27 C (for 20 min, 20 min after fertilization), 28 C (10 min, 10 min after fertilization), and 29.4 C (7 min, 18 min after fertilization). *Survival to eyeup averaged 52% at 27 C, 50% at 28 C, and 62% at 29.4 C. Controls (7.5 C) averaged 89% eyeup. Kozfkay repeated the 29.4 C treatment this past year and induction was much lower (82%). Dubé et al (1991) found that the best triploid yield for brook trout was at 28 C for 10 min initiated 15 min after fertilization. Galbreath and Samples (2000) also found that 28 C for 
10 min at 10-16 min after fertilization worked most effectively, resulting in 79-99% triploid with a relative survival of 68-71%. *

So, after reaching the 100% point one year the same researcher failed the next...?

Also, later in the same report: "The results indicate a window of opportunity between 32 and 43 min after fertilization for optimal triploidy induction via pressure induction. The triploidy rates *(66.7-97.9%)* achieved in this study and by Joe Kozfkay in Idaho, indicate that pressure treatment is a viable technique for producing sterile brook trout. In Utah, however, we will need to improve overall survival. Future trials should focus on production scale efforts at hatcheries where the temperatures are appropriate for brook trout."

Hmmm...it is funny how the rest of the story changes the picture you painted!


----------



## 280Remington (Jun 2, 2008)

Do you even understand what you are talking about? There is a big difference between sterilization and survival. Let me help you out. Survival rate isn't 100% but those that do survive are 100% sterile. 

Let me help you out some more. Let's say you have a large mormon family. The mother gave birth to eight children, but unfortunately two of them passed away at birth. Thus they had a 75% survival rate ( 6 out of 8). That has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not their children were sterile!!!!!!

There is a big difference between sterilizing eggs in a hatchery and then having those eggs survive to become fry. 

Wyoming2Utah: please, please go back to the Big game board where you are not outmatched. You are out of your league here and seem hell bent on embarrassing yourself.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

280Remington said:


> Do you even understand what you are talking about? There is a big difference between sterilization and survival. Let me help you out. Survival rate isn't 100% but those that do survive are 100% sterile.
> .


Go back and read what I wrote! 100% fertility was only achieved in 1 test...the same guy tried the repeat the test the following year and failed. Not only that, but 100% fertility has NOT been achieved in Utah. 100% fertility is not a reality in brook trout. Your own quotes verify this. It is also a reason that sterile brook trout have NOT been used in Pine Creek...because the threat of stocking them over the top of a conservation population of native trout is too high.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

280Remington said:


> Wyoming2Utah: please, please go back to the Big game board where you are not outmatched. You are out of your league here and seem hell bent on embarrassing yourself.


You are so full of BS, I bet your eyes are brown. You haven't even answered my two original questions...and keep throwing out these kind of quotes because you can't! Let's try again:
1) In your mind, was Pine Creek Reservoir better prior to its poisoning when it was full of 11 inch skinny brook trout? Or now when 3-4 pound cutts are common? 2) Give me one example of a brook trout lake on Boulder Mountain where fishermen controlled the brook trout population.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

280Remington said:


> Do I even understand what I am talking about?


Here fixed it for you!


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

280Remington said:


> Let me help you out some more. Let's say you have a large mormon family. The mother gave birth to eight children, but unfortunately two of them passed away at birth. Thus they had a 75% survival rate ( 6 out of 8). That has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not their children were sterile!!!!!!


No, but the fact that only 6 of the 8 kids were sterile leaves 2 of those 8 as fertile! That's the danger with heat shocking...NO METHOD HAS BEEN FOUND TO PRODUCE 100% STERILE FISH CONSISTENTLY!

One time in a test it was done, but when the test was repeated it only produced 82% sterile fish! In fact, the same source of information states: " Heat shock has been successful 
for producing high triploidy rates in Utah's rainbow trout, but for brook trout it has not worked as well."


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

wyoming2utah said:


> You haven't even answered my two original questions...and keep throwing out these kind of quotes because you can't! Let's try again:
> 1) In your mind, was Pine Creek Reservoir better prior to its poisoning when it was full of 11 inch skinny brook trout? Or now when 3-4 pound cutts are common? 2) Give me one example of a brook trout lake on Boulder Mountain where fishermen controlled the brook trout population.


JUST IN CASE YOU MISSED IT THE FIRST 3 TIMES!


----------



## 280Remington (Jun 2, 2008)

I have no problem answering your questions. In regards to PCR I believe it was a better fishery prior to the treatment. The point I have made all along is you have to look at a fishery in its entirety and look at its potential. Heavy emphasis on potential. PCR had trophy sized brook trout in it. Thus the potential is there to grow trophy sized brook trout again. The definition of "had" was prior to 1985 when stunting, for whatever reason, was not an issue. This is why I continually asked you if you had ever fished it in the 70's. Finally you admitted to being a toddler during this timeframe and did not fish it. Thus you have not seen firsthand its potential. So to answer your question, I believe it was better prior, much prior, to the treatment. I would liked to have seen sterile brook trout put in there or at least augment the CRC population. I do not see the risk to the downstream population of CRC's in Pine Creek by putting in sterile brook trout in the reservoir upstream. 

In regards to your second question, that is easy and didn't require much thought; Upper Bowns (Oak Creek Res.). Upper Bowns has a wild population of brook trout. It consistently ranks in the top five Boulder Mountain lakes in mean length and mean weight. It has shown signs of stunting, but it has not gotten out of control to this point. Who knows why it hasn't become grossly stunted. Maybe the fluctuating water levels? But the fact is there are wild brook trout in there and they have not been stunting and it has not needed to be treated with poison to remove them.


----------



## NHS (Sep 7, 2007)

You two sound like my kids in the back seat of the car on a long road trip.


Carry on.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

280Remington said:


> I have no problem answering your questions. In regards to PCR I believe it was a better fishery prior to the treatment. The point I have made all along is you have to look at a fishery in its entirety and look at its potential. Heavy emphasis on potential. PCR had trophy sized brook trout in it. Thus the potential is there to grow trophy sized brook trout again. The definition of "had" was prior to 1985 when stunting, for whatever reason, was not an issue. This is why I continually asked you if you had ever fished it in the 70's. Finally you admitted to being a toddler during this timeframe and did not fish it. Thus you have not seen firsthand its potential. So to answer your question, I believe it was better prior, much prior, to the treatment. I would liked to have seen sterile brook trout put in there or at least augment the CRC population. I do not see the risk to the downstream population of CRC's in Pine Creek by putting in sterile brook trout in the reservoir upstream.


Now we are getting somewhere....prior to 1985, you said the lake didn't stunt. The bottom line, though, is that now it does. And, it has for over 20 years. So, in my opinion, replacing the stunted brook trout with cutthroat was a great move because the fish sizes have improved dramatically. If we had a guarantee that any method could undoubtedly make brook trout 100% sterile, I don't have a problem stocking them on top of the cutts. As is, though, I believe the threat is way too large.

As far as my experience in the 1970s goes, I first began fishing the Boulder as a young kid. I was no toddler and I remember those first trips vividly. You NEVER once asked me about fishing Pine Creek in the 1970s. You challenged my honesty by claiming that I had no fishing experience on the Boulder Mountain in the 1970s....the fact is that I did fish the Boulder Mountain in the 1970s as a school-aged kid. And it was during this decade that my experience on the mountain began. During that time frame (30+) years, I have never seen a stunted brook trout fishery correct itself.


280Remington said:


> In regards to your second question, that is easy and didn't require much thought; Upper Bowns (Oak Creek Res.). Upper Bowns has a wild population of brook trout. It consistently ranks in the top five Boulder Mountain lakes in mean length and mean weight. It has shown signs of stunting, but it has not gotten out of control to this point. Who knows why it hasn't become grossly stunted. Maybe the fluctuating water levels? But the fact is there are wild brook trout in there and they have not been stunting and it has not needed to be treated with poison to remove them.


Upper Bowns or Oak Creek is, in my mind, not an example of where fishermen have controlled the population. Gill-netting surveys have shown that Oak Creek is virtually void of certain year-classes of fish. This, to me, undoubtedly shows that reproduction in those years was negligible or non-existent. So, something natural within that system is keeping the brook trout numbers in check other than fishermen harvest.

I raised these questions because it seemed you were asserting that both Pine Creek Reservoir and Beaver Dam were examples of where fishermen were keeping the brook trout numbers in check...I doubt it was possible at Pine Creek because in my 30+ years of fishing the Boulder Mountain I have never seen fishermen control a stunted brook trout population. Beaver Dam was able to grow large fish--including the state record--immediately following rotenone treatments that were designed to partially kill the brook trout off. Beaver Dam was also an example of where stunting did not occur for a prolonged period of time because reproduction wasn't occurring within the reservoir. Beaver Dam stunted because fish were moving downstream from Fish Creek to occupy the lake. If fish were reproducing within Beaver Dam, stunting would have occurred much quicker.


----------



## 280Remington (Jun 2, 2008)

If you can remember back to when you were 3 or 4 years old, more power to you. I have to give you credit, not everyone has a vivid memory of when they were a toddler. 

You are backed into a corner now about saying fishermen have not controlled or impacted brook trout populations. Why did they outlaw ice fishing on the Boulder Mountain? Again why can't a person ice fish McGath? The answer is anglers can impact the numbers of brook trout. If they didn't the entire mountain would be open to ice fishing. But it is closed in the winter for a reason. The reason was overharvest of brook trout.


----------



## Jed (Feb 25, 2009)

Fantastic!!!    8) :lol:  _(O)_ o-||


----------



## Chaser (Sep 28, 2007)

The ironic thing about this pissing match is the high level of exposure you guys are giving all of these lakes you are discussing. Sure, some could use the pressure to thin out the snakes, but others should bekept on the DL. I'm no stranger to Boulder, but you guys have already given enough intel that I could put together a pretty sweet trip to some spots I may have otherwise overlooked. I can't thank you enough! Maybe you should consider taking the discussion to PMs...then again, the damage may have already been done.


----------



## Brookie (Oct 26, 2008)

Very true Chaser, but when is PBH going to join in again.


----------



## 280Remington (Jun 2, 2008)

I actually enjoy talking about McGath, Upper Bowns and Pine Creek. If you know anything about the Boulders you will know that McGath is to trophy brook trout in the Boulders as the Green River is to Utah fly fishing rivers. In other words McGath is the place that takes the heat and attention away from much better places. The Green River is for out of state yuppies and Wasatch Front folks and McGath is also for Wasatch Front folks that really don't know any better. I am glad it is there. I wish they would pave the road into it. Maybe even put in a Forest Service campground there...


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

brookie said:


> Very true Chaser, but when is PBH going to join in again.


right now. (some of us have jobs, and have to work occasionally.



280Remington said:


> PBH
> You mention PCR's popularity has "increased 10 fold". Is this a scientific statistic ... or did you just randomly pull a number out of thin air?


I made it up. I apologize for not using scientifically proven statistics. Next year, I'll provide those for you.



280Remington said:


> PCR had trophy sized brook trout in it.


You mention PCR's had trophy sized brook trout in it. Is this a scientific statistic ... or did you just randomly pull that out of thin air? Do you have any evidence to show that PCR had trophy brook trout -- I believe you've mentioned 5-6lb brook trout. Do you have a picture you could provide?



280Remington said:


> If you can remember back to when you were 3 or 4 years old...


Dude -- you really confuse things. It was me, not W2U that was 3 or 4 years old in the 70's. W2U was born in '73 -- which would have made him 6 in 1979. I can certainly remember fishing trips from when I was 6. And 5.

McGath -- why was it closed to ice fishing? Well, in my own personal opinion, I believe it was due to social reasons, not biological reasons. I believe that many anglers feared what might happen if anglers continued to ice fish lakes like McGath where the brook trout become more susceptible than other times of the year. Biologically, I don't believe that this type of fishing would have been the demise of lakes like McGath. But that's just my opinion.

I don't understand the argument that 280 is debating. Here are the facts:

1. Pine Creek Reservoir had a brook trout stunting problem that is documented for nearly 20 years.
2. It was determined that brook trout should be removed from Pine Creek Reservoir and replaced with Colorado River Cutthroat -- a fish that was found historically in Pine Creek, a fish native to the drainage, a remnant fish.
3. Popularity of Pine Creek Reservoir has increased since the sport fish improvement project that renovated Pine Creek of brook trout.

I do agree with 280 -- discussing some of these lakes is certainly not a bad thing. This mountain is remote enough that the hoards of the Wasatch Front are not going to show up tomorrow and fish these lakes out. They are good lakes, and they can handle what pressure they are currently getting.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

280Remington: You have a pretty big opinion about the Boulder Mountain, and the brook trout. If you truly care about the fisheries of this mountain, then I certainly hope that you'll find yourself at the open house on Wednesday night: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=34016


----------



## 280Remington (Jun 2, 2008)

Not sure I agree with St. George as the right location for an open house. If this is for the southern region I would have thought Richfield or Cedar City would have been more appropriate. But I will try to be there.


----------



## FishMogul (Sep 8, 2007)

brookieguy1 said:


> If Pine Creek EVER had 5-6lb. brook trout it had to be well over 25 years ago. When it was poisoned, all it had was headed-out stunted brookies, and was doomed to that situation as long as the ideal spawning conditions existed. I share your passion for big squaretails 280, but Pine Creek is much better suited for the COs. Too bad these arguements on the forum are exposing it so heavily.
> On another note I wish the Hepps would spill some intel (to me) on the "hot" brook trout lakes as easily as they'll spray info on the lakes I treasure and have worked my a#$ off to find. Certain lake names are mentionable only in PMs in my opinion, but I guess others will decide.


I'm with you D.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

280Remington said:


> Not sure I agree with St. George as the right location for an open house....


Strangely, that doesn't surprise me.


----------



## doody (Apr 2, 2009)

These sound like nice lakes! Love the idea of restoring historic populations of Cutts. This is exactly why I'm all in favor of naming names in reports....After a little more research I'm totally heading here next month!! Thanks for pointing me in the right direction and I'll be sure to limit out each day so you guys can catch bigger fish. You're welcome.


----------



## BrookTroutKid (Oct 10, 2007)

Ha ha ha this is great, armchair biologist VS biologists o-||


----------



## brookieguy1 (Oct 14, 2008)

BrookTroutKid said:


> Ha ha ha this is great, armchair biologist VS biologists o-||


You mean "Sons of Biologist"? Or am I missing something.


----------



## BrookTroutKid (Oct 10, 2007)

Yes son's, most people learn a thing or to from their dads,
Oh and I also think a great deterrent from lakes on places like the boulders,
$3.80 a gallon of gas, keeps me away.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

280Remington said:


> The point I have made all along is you have to look at a fishery in its entirety and look at its potential. Heavy emphasis on potential. PCR had trophy sized brook trout in it. Thus the potential is there to grow trophy sized brook trout again. The definition of "had" was prior to 1985 when stunting, for whatever reason, was not an issue.


Hmmm...I emailed my older brother yesterday asking if they had any information on Pine Creek. Here is what I found out:
From gill netting:
1958 - average length of Brook Trout 10.5 inches
1971 Brook Trout 8-14" most in the 10-12" range also 2 cutthroat
1978 Creel - Brook Trout 10-15" catch
1982 Brook (28) average length 10.5" Cutthroat trout (4) average length 11"
1991 Brook Trout average length 10.2 inches

Also, gill netting from 1958 to 1971 did NOT show average sizes but did state that lots of small brook trout - cutthroat present.

So, Remington when did you catch these "5-6 pound" brookies? Because it appears that no such fish existed from 1958 on! In fact, it appears that very little changed at Pine Creek as far as fish sizes go until it was poisoned. So, unless you were catching those "5-6" pound hogs right after the dam was built in 1912, I really have a hard time believing anything else you say....


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

280Remington said:


> If you can remember back to when you were 3 or 4 years old, more power to you. I have to give you credit, not everyone has a vivid memory of when they were a toddler.


English lesson for you buddy--my area of expertise--a "toddler" is someone between 1 and 2 years of age and just learning to walk. So, unless you learned to walk between 3 or 4, "toddler" is NOT the correct word.

Also, your age might have something to do with your lost memories....how old are you?



280Remington said:


> I
> You are backed into a corner now about saying fishermen have not controlled or impacted brook trout populations. Why did they outlaw ice fishing on the Boulder Mountain? Again why can't a person ice fish McGath? The answer is anglers can impact the numbers of brook trout. If they didn't the entire mountain would be open to ice fishing. But it is closed in the winter for a reason. The reason was overharvest of brook trout.


First of all, I have said that fishermen have not "controlled"; I never said they have not "impacted". There is a big difference between the two. So, Magath is not an example of where fishermen have controlled a stunted population of brook trout. The argument could be made that fishermen impacted the number of trophy-sized brook trout, but they surely didn't control a stunted population of brook trout in Magath.

Also, I wouldn't say that ice fishing is closed on Boulder Mountain because of "overharvest" of brook trout. I was at the RAC meeting when this change was made...the fear of fishermen was that "trophy" brook trout were being overharvested and that the trophy potential of places like Magath was being diminished.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

PBH said:


> Here are the facts:
> 
> 1. Pine Creek Reservoir had a brook trout stunting problem that is documented for nearly 20 years.


Actually, it looks like documented stunting exists for over 50 years....


----------



## 280Remington (Jun 2, 2008)

you seem to forget there was "Pine Creek Reservoir" and "Pine Creek Pond". Again if you know anything you would know most of the larger brook trout caught off the Boulder were caught out of the large beaver ponds. Haven't you ever heard the old timers complain that the real demise in the Boulders was due to the removal of the dams by the Forest Service?? Go back to my very first post on this, I specifically talk about Pine Creek Pond.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

280Remington said:


> you seem to forget there was "Pine Creek Reservoir" and "Pine Creek Pond". Again if you know anything you would know most of the larger brook trout caught off the Boulder were caught out of the large beaver ponds. Haven't you ever heard the old timers complain that the real demise in the Boulders was due to the removal of the dams by the Forest Service?? Go back to my very first post on this, I specifically talk about Pine Creek Pond.


I knew that was what you were going to say....thankfully, though, gill netting/creel reports from 1958-1982 included data from "the upper and lower ponds".


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

280Remington said:


> The Bullberrys were never much, just stunted brookies, so the tiger trout are a good fit in there. But Pine Creek Reservoir is another story. Sad, sad, sad. I fondly remember catching 5 to 6 pound brookies out of there a long time ago. And the beaver pond just upstream from where the spring comes in ****... All of that is gone now, we are stuck with cutthroat trout. sad.


Were you referring to this quote? Hmmm...it seems that you were saying that you caught "5 to 6 pound brookies out of" Pine Creek Reservoir...and that the "beaver pond just upstream" was even better.

I am not sure what you consider 5 to 6 pounds, but I have NEVER seen a 10-12 inch brookie reach 5 let alone 6 pounds. I need to borrow your scale!


----------



## 280Remington (Jun 2, 2008)

Yeah and I guess if you looked at the creel surveys from East Canyon Reservoir you would assume it could never grow monster cutthroats like the one recently caught....

Also the bigger fish rarely make it in a gill net sample. The very large brook trout typically hang out in extremely shallow water and weedy areas where a gill net is ineffective. Especially at night time when most fish are caught. Certain lakes such as McGath, Oak Creek, it is easy to get a good read with a gill net because they have open "holes" or lots of deeper water to put out the nets. Places like Pine Creek Reservoir and Pacer are much more difficult. It does not surprise me smaller fish were captured and sampled.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

280 -- give it up. You've been provided with the evidence you requested. Can you provide ANY evidence of YOUR claims? We've given you what you wanted. pony up -- show me this legendary 5-6lb brook trout from PCR.


don't worry. we all know you're full of it.


----------



## 280Remington (Jun 2, 2008)

you are right i am full of b.s. Guilty as charged.


----------



## k2muskie (Oct 6, 2007)

Allrighty then...I've really enjoyed reading include learning from this thread and would really hate to see it digress. Sometimes folks just need to take a deep breath and walk away...okay fellas...


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

I thought this was a good thread. It had all of the classic themes. Hotspotting, semantical arguments, the veracity of DWR studies, lots of references to the good old days, lots of studies thrown out, etc,etc...... We even learned the definition of "toddler". We do need pictures though. Lets see those kids pics in the Boulders guys.  


The only things this one may be missing is a reference to SFW, and maybe a comment from a certain basser stating that shad ought to be able to fatten up the brookies in these lakes.


----------



## Grandpa D (Sep 7, 2007)

-_O- -/O_-


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

Catherder said:


> We do need pictures though. Lets see those kids pics in the Boulders guys.


Here: http://www.fs.usda.gov/wps/PA_WIDConsum ... %20Service

how's that?


----------



## HighmtnFish (Jun 3, 2010)

You guys disgust me. I will never post another fishing trip on the boulder again.


----------



## brookieguy1 (Oct 14, 2008)

HighmtnFish said:


> You guys disgust me. I will never post another fishing trip on the boulder again.


I'm with you HMTF, I was hoping the pieholes would get corked sooner than they did.


----------



## .45 (Sep 21, 2007)

brookieguy1 said:


> *Wow. How about a little corkage?*


Yep...it should have happened long ago.....too bad. This forum actually has rules just for this sort of thing.....


----------



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

Catherder said:


> Ok, Wyo, can we see your birth certificate? Were you born in Utah, Wyoming, Hawaii or Kenya?
> 
> Carry on. o-||


I'm lovin this and I'm only on page 5!
o-|| o-||


----------



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

OK, I read all 9 pages.

4 oz snagging hooks at 20 paces you guys.


----------

