# Why not many Brown Plantings in Lakes?



## Jeremy28 (Dec 1, 2007)

Just wondering why the Fish n Game doesn't plant any (or hardely any?) Browns in lakes like Kolob, Minersville, Enterprise, Newcastle, or Baker? ITs always the same ol rainbows with an occasional cutthroat. Whats the reasoning for this?


----------



## LOAH (Sep 29, 2007)

Probably because the browns would do too well and most likely out compete the bows.


----------



## campfire (Sep 9, 2007)

I agree. Browns are very successful at reproducing, are quite efficient preditors and are not very selective of what fish they eat and they are not that easy to catch in lakes. So they could over populate, over predate game fish and they don't get thinned as easily as rainbows. And if the goal is to have a pescivorous fish to controle rough fish, tiger trout do this very well and their numbers are easily controlled by stocking because they are steril. That makes them a much better choice for stocking programs. Bear lake cutts are also good preditors, are so poor at reproduction that they need help so don't overpopulate easily and I think one of the reasons they have been used by the DWR is to preserve the species because they are a native species. Browns are not. My 2 cents.


----------



## Jeremy28 (Dec 1, 2007)

good at reproducing = more naturally born trout = less cost for dWR...efficient predators = bigger fish....browns usually get bigger....prettier....sounds like a GO to me!


----------



## chuckmiester (Sep 9, 2007)

Jeremy28 said:


> good at reproducing = more naturally born trout = less cost for dWR...efficient predators = bigger fish....browns usually get bigger....prettier....sounds like a GO to me!


right now the dwr's goal is to keep the fisheries with cutts in them in the states control. they dont want them to become endangered so the feds will start regulating them. that is why they plant tigers because they can be used for rough fish control and they wont overpopulate. also rainbows dont reproduce well but where their are cutts they stock sterile bows to minimize hybridizing. sterile/hybridized fish actually grow bigger and faster than normal fish. not saying browns dont get huge but it takes them longer.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

Jeremy28 said:


> Just wondering why the Fish n Game doesn't plant any (or hardely any?) Browns in lakes like Kolob, Minersville, Enterprise, Newcastle, or Baker? ITs always the same ol rainbows with an occasional cutthroat. Whats the reasoning for this?


Why? Basic fish management.

Predators vs. Prey come into play much when looking at a situation like this. If a lake is already full of predators (Enterprise, Newcastle) then adding an additional predator isn't going to be a good scenario. Baker has brown trout. Kolob is fantastic fishery that thrives due to natural recruitment from Kolob Creek with the cutthroat. Put brown trout in there, and you lose that natural recruitment. Minersville is fed by the Beaver River, which is already chuck full of brown trout. Stocking brown trout in Minersville is unnecessary. It's already got browns in it. Which brings me to one of the biggest reasons they are typically not stocked in reservoirs: the majority of fishermen can't catch lake resident brown trout. That's not a slam, or attack, at anyone. They are difficult to catch in lakes, and the majority of fishermen don't get any benefit from them being in the lakes and reservoirs.

The claims of more natural recruitment equally more and bigger fish is a false assumption. Many times this equation turns out too many fish, which equals small fish, which equals more problems / time / money spent to correct the problems.

If you are truly interested in the management of our fisheries I would highly recommend that you read through this document: http://www.wildlife.utah.gov/blueribbon/4-step_plan.pdf

If you still have questions -- give the Southern Region offices a call and talk with either Mike or Chuck. They'll give you straight up answers.


----------



## ScottyP (Sep 12, 2007)

Wow, I must be quite the accomplished angler then. I caught dozens of browns out of a lake this morning in a few hours-- biggest fish pushing 11". Hurry folks, Tibble Fork is freezing up quick!

Really though, PBH is right. I have caught just a few browns out of larger lakes and they were all through the ice. Not the easiest fish to target in lakes and they are already present in most of our larger ones. DWR isn't about to start a brown stocking program when they are so readily available in almost every stream in the state at no cost to them.


----------



## Packfish (Oct 30, 2007)

Used to catch many large browns out of Porcupine from the tube. But it was night fishing with large black buggers along the shore lines. Sadly those days are gone


----------



## flyguy7 (Sep 16, 2007)

ScottyP hit it right on the head. Most of your average recreational spin fishermen (who the DWR caters to anyway) would have a tough time catching them. How many of you catch predominantly browns out of tibble fork on bait? When you use flies it is almost all you catch. Browns do NOT do well in most stillwaters also because they are a fall-spawning fish. Many of the streams feeding lakes/reservoirs are very low that time of the year, limiting spawning habitat and creating upstream natural barriers. Rainbows and cutthroat spawn in the spring, when the water is higher, allowing them access to more spawning habitat.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

flyguy7 said:


> Browns do NOT do well in most stillwaters also because they are a fall-spawning fish. Many of the streams feeding lakes/reservoirs are very low that time of the year, limiting spawning habitat and creating upstream natural barriers.


Wouldn't this actually be a benefit and a positive reason for planting brown's in more lakes? If spawning habitat was poor, then this would provide the DWR with a way of controlling brown trout numbers, thus reducing the risk of potential problems due to uncontrollable populations due to better spawning habitat.

I don't believe that fall-spawning / limited spawning habitat has ANYTHING to do with why more brown trout are not stocked in our reservoirs.

I'd also argue your bait theory. In fact, I'd bet I could catch more browns on bait from tibble fork than the majority of flyfishermen. Obviously, it all depends on what bait you are using. Give me a nightcrawler or a dead minnow, and I'll outfish the majority of the flyfishermen!


----------



## J-bass (Oct 22, 2007)

PBH said:


> I'd also argue your bait theory. In fact, I'd bet I could catch more browns on bait from tibble fork than the majority of flyfishermen. Obviously, it all depends on what bait you are using. Give me a nightcrawler or a dead minnow, and I'll outfish the majority of the flyfishermen!


Now them's fightin' words!!! I really think it would be cool to see a battle between a bait fisherman and a flyfisherman on this. A civil battle of course, but I think it would be very interesting to see.


----------



## Packfish (Oct 30, 2007)

If I wanted to catch more browns it would definetly be with bait- I didn't start fly fishing because I thought I would catch more browns with a fly rather than a bullhead or a crawler. 
Personally I don' think it would even be a close competition


----------



## chuckmiester (Sep 9, 2007)

Packfish said:


> If I wanted to catch more browns it would definetly be with bait- I didn't start fly fishing because I thought I would catch more browns with a fly rather than a bullhead or a crawler.
> Personally I don' think it would even be a close competition


this is true, but when you catch one big lake brown on a fly rod you start looking for more.


----------



## Jeremy28 (Dec 1, 2007)

Anyone sho says that bait fishing is superior to fly fishing is off they're rocker! I used to do nothing but bait fish/jig/troll but once I switched to flyfishing this year, there is no comparison at all. Its all logic.....Fly fishing imitates what they eat better than anything else which = more success. Bigger more selective fish will hit a fly 10^10 times more often than they would anything else. An exception would be a worm or minnow but with flyfishing you can use lines to target the depth that they are at AND cover more territory because you can't fish fast with a worm/minnow.


----------



## chuckmiester (Sep 9, 2007)

Jeremy the only problem is the depth. i have type 3 full sink and have fished type 6 full sink and sometimes still dont get deep enough. as for fly-fishing in general. yes you will catch more-and typically bigger-fish , because flies imitate their natural food source, but lake browns rarely get caught on anything let alone fly gear. they do attack minnows (i have a great brown trout minnow pattern) but if you were to chuck a dead minnow LOAH style or a worm you would probably catch more browns, but flies may get you more fish. also i think it is probably easier to catch browns with lures than flies. i think this because lures typically are aimed to go to a certain depth and look like a wounded fish. flies go as far as the line and look like a slow swimming minnow. as for covering more area, fish are as lazy as humans. they dont like to move a lot, so if they see a minnow zooming by they might not go after it but if they saw a minnow floating a few feet from them they will probably be inclined to take it (spawning time disobeys every "rule"/habit though). another reason you probably did better with flies is because fly-fishing forced you to learn trouts habits and places they hide. because of this you now know better where to find these fish and what to use depending on the situation.

if you are talking river browns-that depends on the river, but typically flies will be more productive.


----------



## ScottyP (Sep 12, 2007)

PBH, you may be right on some waters but have you fished tibble fork before? I have watched bait guys do quite well there but for the planter bows, not the browns. Those browns get in a mood at times (like the other day) where they smack a soft hackle or nymph stripped quickly through or just under the film and it is a fish every cast. I litterally caught more than 40 little browns in a couple hours of fishing the same spot. I have never seen a bait guy there have success for the browns that came remotely close to that kind of action.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

Jeremy28 said:


> Anyone sho says that bait fishing is superior to fly fishing is off they're rocker! I used to do nothing but bait fish/jig/troll but once I switched to flyfishing this year...


This year, eh?



Jeremy28 said:


> Its all logic.....Fly fishing imitates what they eat better than anything else which = more success.


Wait a minute. Are you telling me that an imitation works better than the real thing? That just plain doesn't make sense!

I"m a flyfisherman. I've been a flyfisherman for many years. I learned to fish streams using bait with a fly rod. Grasshoppers, minnows, nightcrawlers, rock-rollers. I've since moved on to flyfishing for two reasons:

Confidence -- I have total confidence that I can catch fish using flies if I try hard enough. Sometimes, the "try hard enough" is pretty easy. Sometimes it's hard.

Challenge -- flyfishing is much more of a challenge.

With that being said, if one of my brothers (I know that they've been taught how to fish a stream with bait...) ever challenged me to a competition - fly vs. bait - I certainly hope I'm not the one left holding the box of flies! I know they'd beat me 2:1.

...OK. So, maybe I'd be up for the challenge!


----------



## Packfish (Oct 30, 2007)

It really wouldn't be a close competition. I started in the late 70's with a fly rod but grew up with the spinning rod, live bait, a black maribou jig and a rapala and there is no way if you give me that arsenal that you can beat me day in and day out with a fly rod and I think of myself as a fairly accomplished angler with a fly rod. Now I may be greater in my own mind than I really am but going on 30 years with a fly rod just out of that much time on the water I have to be at least semi accomplished. 
But I enjoy a fly rod more and have caught some very large browns in Utah both in the river and on the lake. I would have caught more out of the lake with a minnow that I did with the fly though. As PBH said " An imitation is better than the real thing ?"


----------



## chuckmiester (Sep 9, 2007)

one thing you guys are forgetting is you have to have what the fish are targeting. for instance if the fish are hitting surface flies or emergers, fly-fisherman will out fish bait fisherman easily. if the fish are targeting nymphs (probably the most nutritious for them for the least amount of work) the fly-fisherman will win easily also. if the fish are targeting fish it could go either way. if they are targeting what looks good the bait fisherman will probably out fish the fly-fisherman because the bait fisherman has the real thing.

i have been to many places this year where bait fisherman (using all different kinds of bait) and lure fisherman weren't catching a lot if anything. i go out there with a fly rod use a dry fly and a dropper (nymph or emerger) and i out fish them easily 20:1. that is because the fish are targeting on top and bait fisherman can't get their bait there.

back to the original topic, IMO fly fisherman will catch more and bigger fish than other types of open water fisherman, but bait fisherman will catch more lake browns than fly-fisherman, easy.

packfish when i get back i will take you up on that challenge.


----------



## Packfish (Oct 30, 2007)

Get ready to be humbled and I haven't picked up a spinning rod with bait on it for 20 years. (0:

There will always be fish in the river that will take bait, I don't care what else is going on. And by the way, I can take a seine and get "real" what ever you are fishing with.
Go up above the first dam on the Logan, roll over some rocks and take those may fly nymphs and put them on a nymph rig ( small hook, split shot and even a friggin ballon if you want) and tell me what happens. Been there done that thru my college days and it fed 4 guys on a regular basis.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

chuckmeister -- you're giving fish too much credit! "probably the most nutritious for them for the least amount of work" -- do you really believe that a fish has a brain with the capacity to think logically like that? Anthropomorphism -- go look it up.

Quit worrying about what they are targeting! Give them what they really want! Fish are opportunistic. Just because a hatch of mayflies is coming off the top doesn't mean a fish isn't going to opportunistically take a big, fat, juicy nightcrawler that is dangled just below the surface.

I can't figure out your theory on bait fishermen not being able to fish different depths, or on the surface. This makes no sense to me. Why can't I fish different water depths with bait? Is this some type of rule I am not aware of? I know that you can't be talking about physical limitations, because I fish different depths all the time with bait -- and that includes the surface.

Hell, don't grasshoppers float? Your arguments have me extremely confused.


----------



## chuckmiester (Sep 9, 2007)

whoa pbh i never said bait fisherman cant fish different depths. a few post back i said fly-fisherman cant get the depth bait fisherman can, so as for different depths bait fisherman can get more. all i was saying is how does a bait fisherman have his bait float on the surface like a fly fisherman. do grasshoppers float? from my experience for about 20 seconds then they sink. if you really wonder why this is, when they die they no longer intake oxygen and then they become denser than the water they are on and guess what they sink. i am not talking rocket science here i am just talking simple rules of gravity/density. also if fish are so opportunistic than why wont they always gulp up a fat juicy minnow or nightcrawler while i am catching them on a small nymph.

do i think fish have a brain worth a darn? no. i think they are stupid however they are lazy. i did find in a trout book though that they target nymphs a lot of the time because they are defenseless and the fish dont have to work for them (laziness). the fact they are nutritious for them is an added bonus i guess.


----------



## Jeremy28 (Dec 1, 2007)

Just wondering PBH how you can target a 10ft depth with bait? I could be wrong but with bait your either sinking (at a pretty fast rate) or floating? With fly line, your fly will stay with what depth your aiming at (depending on line choice) somewhat consistently. I guess you could put on a bubble (or bobber?) with a really long leader and somedays it may outfish the fly guys. All I know is that Im usually catching fish on a consistent basis cruising around on my little pontoon boat while the bait fishers I see usually aern't doing that good. I've been a baitfisher for all the years that I've fished (powerbait, minnows, worms, lures) (except this year) and even with little experience flyfishing catch A LOT more fish and bigger fish.


----------



## Fishrmn (Sep 14, 2007)

Using a slip bobber, you can put your bait at the *exact* depth that you want it to be. If you want it to be 27 feet deep, you set a bobber stop at 27 feet above the hook.

Fishrmn


----------



## southernman (Nov 14, 2007)

ahhh the fishing snobs . . dont know who teaches this crap, but it never ends....

fishing is recreation, ya know a chance to get out of doors and relax, whether its throwing out a worm and marshmallow and letting it sit for 8 hrs, or flexing the fly wand for 12 hours straight

but the fly fisherman is not more advanced or better than a bait dunker, a tip up ice fisherman isnt less worthy than a jigger, ect ect if you think so you just dont get it

sm


----------



## LOAH (Sep 29, 2007)

Bravo, southernman. Amen to that.


----------



## Jeremy28 (Dec 1, 2007)

Southern Man, I know what you mean, but you gotta admit that there are better ways than others to catch more and bigger fish. Some people like to go fishing just to "get away from it all", crack open a Budweiser, and throw out a line. While others like to fish for the same reasons but also because they are competitive and fishing is, after all, a sport you know. The competitiveness of fishing is what makes it so fun. The feeling you get when you catch a fish and the people fishing around you say " gosh damnit, that little turd just caught another one!" I love that! Thats where the forum comes in and we can debate about what works the best and maybe learn something in the process. Its not that flyfisherman are better than "bait dunkers", its just that we will catch more fish than them.... :wink: 

PS: If any bait fisherman out there want to take me up on a $ bet on who catches the most fish than let me know, I need the money.


----------



## Jeremy28 (Dec 1, 2007)

Back to the original first few reply's where you say that brown's are hard to catch in lakes. Is that a bad thing? We need more "hard to catch" fish in lakes so that they will grow and get big. I would pass up a thousand normal fish for a shot at a trophy any day. A few browns every now and then wouldn't hurt anything. I don't see a downfall even if they overtook a lake of rainbows. You would just be catching browns instead, only they would be bigger and prettier. The fact that they can reproduce more efficiently only saves the DWR time and resources because they wouldn't have to stock as much. Of course this would put a few people out of jobs...wait thats the reason isn't it....gosh I finally figured it out after all this time!


----------



## ScottyP (Sep 12, 2007)

No, I think you still have a lot more figuring out left to do.

Fishing may be a sport but it doesn't have to be competitive. 

There are indeed bait guys who would clean your plow in a fishing contest.

There is no shortage of lakes in Utah with browns. Want a list? 

They won't overtake rainbows in any lake around here, they tend to fill different niches. Rivers on the other hand get dominated by browns in most cases.

Hybrid tiger trout are a better planting option for our bathtub lakes than brown trout are when some diversity is desired. Tigers grow well, fight hard, are more readilly catchable, and they are half brown anyway but they are sterile and easier to manage.


----------



## southernman (Nov 14, 2007)

fishing is a pasttime, not a sport jeremy . . . unless youre talking about competitive fishing tournaments, thats something else altogether . .

im glad when everyone around me is catching fish, its the worst fishing trip when i catch a few, and my fishing buddies catch nothing . . well the worst is if* nobody* catches anything (ha ha)
...

i can see a little friendly competition with a buddy, but if you think everybody thinks like you do, you need some little white pills . .

sm


----------



## chuckmiester (Sep 9, 2007)

as far as who can catch more fish, i take back everything i said and i now am going to stick with this. it depends on the fisherman. some bait guys can easily out catch some fly guys, and visa versa. me i like to catch fish so i will probably try a little harder than those guys who throw their line out and crack open a beer resulting in me probably catching more fish.

as for fishing being a sport-it is. is it competitive? to some people. but i think the reason most people go fishing is to get away from the world and relax in the beauty nature offers. this is probably where the phrase 'a bad day fishing is better than a good day at work' comes from. i think most want to get away from all the rush and stress of the world and relax for a day. heck some even call it therapy. 

note: this excludes all those guys in fishing competitions or those who fish for a living.


----------



## LOAH (Sep 29, 2007)

It's a sport?

Crap! Now I need to go get a friggin' uniform.

Hobby all the way. Some will make a sport of it, but I think that's all preferential to the person fishing.


----------



## Grandpa D (Sep 7, 2007)

So is City league Softball a sport or a hobby?
What about Golf?
The list goes on and on.
Who Cares?


----------



## Jeremy28 (Dec 1, 2007)

Scotty P, you don't need to take what other people say so seriously. Of course I know some baitfishers would clean my plow fishing on any given day, but whos to say that I couldn't do the same on any given day as well? You just never know. As far as the "competitiveness" thing goes, sure I like it when everyones catching fish. I mean its not like I have a scorecard, cackling under my breath evertime I put another mark on it. Im just talking about a little friendly competition every once in a while thats all.


----------



## handsomefish (Nov 14, 2007)

Don't forget with a second pole licence good state wide now you can have the best of both worlds
When I fish a lake, I like to throw out a big minnow and then work a lure
Fishing this way I always catch more on the lure because i'm taking it to the fish (covering more ground)
But I catch bigger fish with the bait, If I moved the bait around alittle I might catch a few more than I do now,but I would'nt catch any letting my lure sit :lol:


----------



## chuckmiester (Sep 9, 2007)

grandpa d golf is known as a sport, a very competitive one at that.


----------



## Jeremy28 (Dec 1, 2007)

You see, what we do, is first pick teams via elementary style and then we use our old leisure services jerseys (you know the yellow and blue ones from when you were a kid) and we paint numbers on the back. That way you can just say "hey yellow #8, how many fish are you at?" It just makes it easier to tally the scores at the end of the day instead of a list of names etc. The winning team gets to be called the current "champions" and receives a championship trophy with a fish on it that has everyones name engraved thereon. We also have the "singles championship" held at the same time. This is rewarded to the fisherman/woman that "lands" the most fish throughout the day and no, you can't count a fish unless you get it into your vessel (I knew what you were thinking you little rascal). Finally, the "biggest fish" championship is rewarded to the fisherman/woman that lands the biggest fish. There is a cash reward for this category that varies depending on the "antee" that everyone pays before entering the contest. The biggest fish champion also (stated in the rules) has to be acknowledged as "Mr. Champion" by all participants until a new champion is declared. After all is said and done, we reschedule for the following trip.....so much and so forth.


----------



## ScottyP (Sep 12, 2007)

Okay, I'll try to not take you so serious. Seriously :wink:


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

Jeremy28 said:


> BThe fact that they can reproduce more efficiently only saves the DWR time and resources because they wouldn't have to stock as much. Of course this would put a few people out of jobs...wait thats the reason isn't it....gosh I finally figured it out after all this time!


dude -- you missed the boat!

go back and read the link I posted. In fact, don't go back, I'll post it again: http://www.wildlife.utah.gov/blueribbon/4-step_plan.pdf

Again, the problem you don't see isn't efficiency of stocking a naturally self-sustaining fish. The problem is control of that fish. If you can't control that fish, then you will NOT save money by not stocking fish. You'll actually be spending MORE money by trying to control that fish. In order to manage for quality fish (I think you said you wanted some "big" fish, didn't you?) you MUST be able to control how many fish there are. With brown trout in Utah, that is a pretty hard thing to do!

Which brings me to another point. You mentioned how they reproduce efficiently. That, right there, is a reason why the DWR doesn't stock many brown trout. They don't need to. The streams entering and leaving many reservoirs in Utah have brown trout in them. If you think the reservoirs in those systems don't have brown trout in them, you're a fool. Which only brings us to the "hard to catch" point. They are already there, but no one catches them.

The other factor that needs to be looked at is the predator vs. prey ration in the lake you want to add another predator to. You cannot have a lake full of predators and expect good results. It simply doesn't work that way.

If you want to catch large browns from reservoirs, I would recommend going and fishing the reservoirs that currently have those browns in them. The list of reservoirs in Utah with brown trout (and sometimes BIG brown trout) is much larger than what I think the majority of you know. Here is a small list of reservoirs where a large brown trout could be lurking at this very moment:

1. Baker Reservoir
2. Minserville Reservoir
3. Otter Creek Reservoir
4. Piute Reservoir
5. Jordanelle Reservoir
6. Fish Lake
7. Mill Meadow Reservoir
8. Forsythe Reservoir
9. Flaming Gorge Reservoir
10. Deer Creek Reservoir
11. Rockport
12. Echo
13. Tropic Res

We could continue for quite some time. The fact is, a few of you are asking for something that is not necessary.


----------



## Jeremy28 (Dec 1, 2007)

Thanks PBH for your post and I realize that you know better than me about the needs of our reservoirs, but you would think that once in a thousand fish you would catch a brown in lakes like Minersville but it never happens. I know they're harder to catch but are they that much harder in that they NEVER get caught? You say that the big browns are in there but I don't think that you or anyone could know that for sure. I've never seen nor heard of anyone catching a brown out of Minersville or a lunker brown out of Baker (in the past decade). The streams coming into some of these lakes like Minersville and Baker is more like a trickle most the time and so I don't see many (if any at all) browns coming in. In fact, I've fished the stream coming into and out of Baker and its so depleted of browns right now that you'll be lucky to catch 1 or 2 small ones in a full day of fishing. I wish they would atleast stock enough of them to where every once in a great while you'll catch one. Until someone catches a monster Brown out of Baker or Minersville then I think (just my opinion) that they need to put more in them. I think that Minersville and Baker have more than enough resources to support the effficiently reproducing brown trout without the need to "control" the fish. If the worst happens and the browns are overly populated in a lake thereby limiting the food source (I think thats what you mean by not being able to "control" them) then the DWR could spend about the same amount of $ as before (stocking) but instead only stock them with smaller minnows as a food supply instead. This also brings up another source of food for an overly populated lake of brown trout...The abundancy of brown trout minnows produced from successful reproduction. If a lake is crowded with browns, then you know that there is an exponential amount of minnows being produced as well. A lake can't get too overpopulated because the food shortage will level out the rate of reproduction (more fish will die off, more won't reproduce successfully, more won't reach reproductive maturity as soon, more eggs will be eaten, more minnows will be eaten) Its called "Natural Selection", (google it). An over populated "anything" cannot continue to grow exponentially with limited resources, its a scientific fact. If a lake is driven to overpopulation (which can only happen in a short anount of time) then mother nature will level the playing field to full capacity in time. This combined with the fact that Miners and Baker have a very good food supply in the first place should be enough to support a lake full of browns. Look at the State records for lakes in Utah and you will see that most of the huge fish were caught decades ago when the DWR didn't have as much (if any?) of a role in controlling lakes. It seems to me (just an opinion) that the DWR just wants to have control of the lakes for various reasons.


----------



## Grandpa D (Sep 7, 2007)

I didn't read every post here but what I haven't seen is the fact that Rainbow Trout can be "tricked" into spawning
year round. The Hatcheries use this to their advantage.
Brown Trout on the other hand will only spawn durring their natural spawning period.
The end result is that the State can raise a lot more Rainbow Trout than they can Browns.
The use of Tiger Trout has been a good alternitive, and I hope to see more of them in Utah waters.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

Jeremy28 said:


> If a lake is driven to overpopulation (which can only happen in a short anount of time) then mother nature will level the playing field to full capacity in time. T


Hah! You didn't read the link I posted!!!

The funny thing with Mother Nature is that she doesn't play fairly, like we would expect her to. For evidence of this, look many brook trout lakes that overpopulate. Just like you mentioned, mother nature WILL "level the playing field" to full capacity. The problem? Full capacity ends up being a lake filled with undersized, stunted fish. Starving fish. Fish that continue to reproduce because they don't know anything better. This is NOT what you want to happen. When I speak of "control" I speak of numbers of fish. If you can control numbers of fish, you can control fish size as well (Again, READ THE DOCUMENT).

Look at Baker. Why aren't there any big fish left in there? Numbers of fish. Uncontrollable numbers of fish.

You also mentioned stocking "minnows" as forage. Again, you didn't read the document. Stocking forage doesn't help when a lake is already at "full capacity" or carrying capacity. When the bucket is full, you can't add more to the bucket and expect something good to happen. Fishermen are always wanting to "stock more forage", but that doesn't fix the problem. To fix the problem, you need to control the numbers of fish in the system. Stocking more fish is not always (it is sometimes) the answer to the problem (again, go read the document -- ALL OF IT).

Brown trout are found all over Utah. They are nearly everywhere you look. Stocking additional brown trout, for the most part, is not necessary.


----------



## Jeremy28 (Dec 1, 2007)

I knew you would say that (the part where you say that they would be small starving fish) and your right. BUT, I don't care, no one can know for sure about anything with as much variables in it as a topic such as this. Each lake is completely different and until they try it out on a couple lakes in southern utah than my explanation (Planting more browns to make more numerous big fish) is a possibility depending on the lake. Baker would be the perfect lake to try it out on because its small and it allready has a few browns in it allready. Here's another question for you,... why do they keep planting thousands of small planters in Baker every year if it is overpopulated as you say?


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

Jeremy28 said:


> why do they keep planting thousands of small planters in Baker every year if it is overpopulated as you say?


I don't know.

I haven't looked at a stocking record on Baker for many years.

I DO know that the green sunfish are a major problem in Baker. Remember, green sunfish are a predator. They are an uncontrolled predator. We currently don't have a way to limit their numbers. The system is most likely at carrying capacity. Adding more fish (brown trout) to the system won't help. You have to somehow reduce the number of green sunfish AND somehow control their numbers.

You mention not being able to know without trying. You are somewhat right. But, I want to know what makes you think that this hasn't been thought about, tried, tested, and failed already? Why would you dare to think that this is a new topic?

While DWR managers may not be able to predict with 100% certainty the outcome of many different scenarios, they are able to predict pretty closely. Since the last major management plan to Minersville, the lake has thrived. It's been better for the last 15 years than it ever has been in the past. The currently plan is producing the BEST rainbow trout fishery in the entire state -- and you want to go screwing it up by stocking a bunch of brown trout in it?

On the other hand, you want to take a lake (Baker) that is filled to the brim with green sunfish (a predator, mind you) and you want to add more brown trout to it?

Once again, go read the document I posted.

the solution to Baker is not stocking more fish, it's removing them...


----------



## Jeremy28 (Dec 1, 2007)

OK................ UNCLE!!!!!..........UNCLE!!!!


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

Jeremy28 said:


> OK................ UNCLE!!!!!..........UNCLE!!!!


did you read it?

I'm not asking you to read it because I think I'm right. I'm asking you to read it because it sounds to me like you are interested in why fisheries managers make some of the decisions they do. It's a very interesting read, and I think you'd gain some insightful knowledge from it.


----------



## Jeremy28 (Dec 1, 2007)

I skimmed through it but I will read it later. Thanks though.


----------



## LOAH (Sep 29, 2007)

It's well worth the time to read. It can seem pretty repetitive, but it goes into much greater detail in regards to what you've always heard on this forum (and the DWR) about how much biomass a water body can hold and how they come to that conclusion.


----------



## chuckmiester (Sep 9, 2007)

i wish they would plant tigers into baker. there are plenty of browns in baker. when they killed it and the water got really low there were TONS of dead browns. even thought they were in there not a lot of people caught them. also my friends dad caught a nice brown out of minersville earlier this spring. 

jeremy lake browns are very elusive and even if there are a lot of them in a lake there probably will not be a whole lot caught. this year alone the dwr stocked 4000 browns into baker. how many of those do you think have been caught and kept. like you said you live near there and haven't heard of many if any coming out of there. well they were put in, but probably were not caught.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

Jeremy28 said:


> Thanks PBH for your post and I realize that you know better than me about the needs of our reservoirs, but you would think that once in a thousand fish you would catch a brown in lakes like Minersville but it never happens. I know they're harder to catch but are they that much harder in that they NEVER get caught? You say that the big browns are in there but I don't think that you or anyone could know that for sure. I've never seen nor heard of anyone catching a brown out of Minersville


Funny you say this...PBH didn't you catch a pretty nice brown out of Minersville last winter through the ice?

You also forget that the DWR does do gillnetting samples every year....


----------



## handsomefish (Nov 14, 2007)

Jeremy28 said:


> Thanks PBH for your post and I realize that you know better than me about the needs of our reservoirs, but you would think that once in a thousand fish you would catch a brown in lakes like Minersville but it never happens. I know they're harder to catch but are they that much harder in that they NEVER get caught? You say that the big browns are in there but I don't think that you or anyone could know that for sure. I've never seen nor heard of anyone catching a brown out of Minersville or a lunker brown out of Baker (in the past decade). The streams coming into some of these lakes like Minersville and Baker is more like a trickle most the time and so I don't see many (if any at all) browns coming in. In fact, I've fished the stream coming into and out of Baker and its so depleted of browns right now that you'll be lucky to catch 1 or 2 small ones in a full day of fishing. I wish they would atleast stock enough of them to where every once in a great while you'll catch one. Until someone catches a monster Brown out of Baker or Minersville then I think (just my opinion) that they need to put more in them.


I take it you want to catch a big brown? Big browns aren't as hard to catch as most poeple think, If you rethink how you fish. First you have to lose some sleep alot of sleep. Browns that get big (really big) got that way by feeding at night
As far as your discription of depleted section of stream this is one of the things I look for (there's a reason for the lack of small fish)


----------



## southernman (Nov 14, 2007)

PBH said:


> did you read it?


i did, and it was **** informative, thanks . .

boy the dwr and all involved sure did a great job at panguitch!

now i hear they got wipers in newcastle? very cool

more tigers, less stunted brookies on boulder mtn, more cutts in streams, id say the dwr has really done a pretty **** god job in the last 2-3 yrs . . looking forward to next spring ,,,**** i hate winter

sm


----------



## chuckmiester (Sep 9, 2007)

southernman said:


> PBH said:
> 
> 
> > did you read it?
> ...


+1


----------



## ScottyP (Sep 12, 2007)

jeremy28, I used to think there were very few whitefish in special regs section of the lower provo. I never caught a single whitefish in several years of fishing between olmstead and deer creek dams. Caught a few below bridal veil but none on the artificials stretch. I was convinced that they weren't in there in any type of numbers. Reality is they are there. Plenty of them. I helped with an electroshock survey and was amazed at all the whitefish floating up. Recently I started fiddling around with nymphing deeper runs and low and behold started pulling in a bunch of whiteys. They were there all along but being as I mostly fish dries and when I would nymph it was in shallow fast runs to active fish, I was never catching them. My whole point is that if you fish Minersville, Deer Creek, Jordanelle, etc. and you catch a bunch of rainbows but no browns, it is not because they are not present, but you are not targeting them properly.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

southernman said:


> boy the dwr and all involved sure did a great job at panguitch!
> 
> now i hear they got wipers in newcastle? very cool


1) The scary thing is that some of the business owners up at Panguitch are trying to push the DWR, RACs, and Board to change the regulations at Panguitch back to the old statewide regs...

2)They are growing fast too...very fat and healthy. I have seen some up around 18 inches long and probably pushing 4 pounds.


----------



## chuckmiester (Sep 9, 2007)

i hope they keep the regs the way they are right now. i know i am not a fish biologist or anything but after getting to know panguitch, it has some great potential to produce many trophy trout.


----------



## southernman (Nov 14, 2007)

wyoming2utah said:


> 1) The scary thing is that some of the business owners up at Panguitch are trying to push the DWR, RACs, and Board to change the regulations at Panguitch back to the old statewide regs...
> 
> 2)They are growing fast too...very fat and healthy. I have seen some up around 18 inches long and probably pushing 4 pounds.


yeah that would be nutty . . the slot is awesome, people can still keep their 4 trout, but the nice ones remain . .i mean if youre on vacation, you gonna want to eat trout everyday . . jeeesh

sm


----------



## southernman (Nov 14, 2007)

and i hope the fish cop is out there everyday with ice fishing coming up, with the spotting scope, fining all the violators!


sm


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

and I hope the fish cop is at Minersville every day...

...and at Kolob every day too...


...and everywhere else every day too!


Shouldn't the responsibility of following the regulations be placed on fishermen themselves? It's such a sad world we live in...


----------



## flyguy7 (Sep 16, 2007)

So when we gonna do this flies vs bait contest at tibble for browns? Sounds like a blast. Count me in. Loser buys the beer? _/O


----------



## Jeremy28 (Dec 1, 2007)

Your on flyguy! Anytime. I live in St. George though.


----------

