| Subject: Re: Lake Ontario Salmon |
Author:
Undertaker
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 05:49:04 02/14/02 Thu
In reply to:
King Davy
's message, "Re: Lake Ontario Salmon" on 16:54:53 02/13/02 Wed
>>>>>>Well, King Davy I don't know if you'll get to read
>>>>>>this since my last post to you didn't get on here.
>>I
>>>>>>would like to respond to the fact that OH,
>>>>>>PA,WI,IN,IL,MI and MN have changed there spending
>>>>more
>>>>>>towards the steelhead fishery because that is what
>>>>the
>>>>>>fishermen want, not what a handful of shop owners
>>>and
>>>>>>guides want. We have had the pacific salmon
>program
>>>>>>for many years now and quite frankly, I don't see
>>>why
>>>>>>we should keep it. For the last two years the
>major
>>>>>>run of salmon have stayed at the mouth of the
>river
>>>>>>and very few salmon have gone up the river. If you
>>>>>>folks want to pen raise them and have them hang
>out
>>>>in
>>>>>>the mouths of the rivers that,s fine with me, just
>>>>>>make sure that the program isn't heavily leaning
>>>>>>towards the pacifics. Stock equal numbers of
>>>>>>steelhead. Just once I would like to see the
>>fishery
>>>>>>focus as much attention on the steelhead program
>as
>>>>it
>>>>>>has on the salmon program. How about letting us
>>>spend
>>>>>>the next several years growing the steelhead
>>>fishery.
>>>>>>My guess is no way because if the steelhead
>program
>>>>>>got bigger than the salmon program everyone would
>>>>>>wonder why we stocked pacifics in the first place.
>>>>>>This whole pacific salmon program was just a pet
>>>>>>project dreamed up by a few state fishery people.
>>If
>>>>>>you fish the area then you must see that changes
>>>need
>>>>>>to be made. How can you say that the fishery is
>>>great
>>>>>>the way it is and that you wouldn't change the
>type
>>>>of
>>>>>>fish we raise. You better read up on what is
>>>>happening
>>>>>>to the west of us because I don't want to be
>>sitting
>>>>>>here 5 years from now saying if we had only... If
>>>>what
>>>>>>we have now is what everyone wants to keep in
>place
>>>>>>then we will all be losers in the end. Our fishery
>>>is
>>>>>>a joke worldwide and everyone knows it. Other
>>states
>>>>>>are saying lets not end up with a Pulaski
>>situation.
>>>>>>We made all the mistakes for the whole world to
>>>learn
>>>>>>from, so why not let us fix it. Why have a heavy
>>>>>>number of fish and people for 4-5 weeks when the
>>>>>>salmon run when we could have steady fishing 8-10
>>>>>>months a year. I'm sure the shops and guides would
>>>>>>rather have steady income year round instead of
>>>>>>crammed into 4weeks a season. Many bank on that 4
>>>>week
>>>>>>period and then when it didn't happen two years in
>>a
>>>>>>row has got to hurt. So, how about it, lets try it
>>>my
>>>>>>way for a while and see what happens. It can't get
>>>>any
>>>>>>worse since the fishery is in the dumps already.
>>The
>>>>>>DEC doesn't have it down to a science either, they
>>>>>>just keep trying different things every year and
>we
>>>>>>have seen what it has produced. It is time we all
>>>>>>stopped walking on eggshells about this subject
>and
>>>>>>get down to the job of correcting this fishery.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Undertaker...my friend...we do agree on many issues
>>>>>here. I agree the salmon river and pulaski during
>>the
>>>>>salmon run is a joke...but that's because the
>people
>>>>>who are fishing it ARE A JOKE. The sad thing there
>>is
>>>>>no easy fix for people who intend to come to our
>>>>>rivers and gig fish. We can pass all the laws we
>>>>>want...but unless we make stiffer fines...that
>>>>>stick...we aren't going to change it. I fish the
>>>>>salmon river more in the summer months for
>>>>>skamania...and Atlantics...then I do in the winter.
>>>>>And PA and Ohio are NOT year round steelhead stream
>>>>>fisheries ...where the salmon river actually is.
>>>>>
>>>>>The state did in 1992 upgrade the steelhead program
>>>>>and down grade the salmon program due to forage
>base
>>>>>problems. In the 80's and early 90's 30% of the
>>>>>steelhead stocked in lake Ontario returned to the
>>>>>salmon river. The salmon actually gets MORE
>>steelhead
>>>>>stocked now then back then...and less then 5% are
>>>>>returning. We have a problem with the steelhead in
>>>the
>>>>>salmon river...that nobody has figured out yet.
>>Right
>>>>>now between the 750K chambers creek fish...and the
>>>>>300K domestic fish NY state stocks over a million
>>>>>steelies a year...into Lake Ontario.
>>>>>
>>>>>Pen rearing has a mix of kings and steelies...but
>>>it's
>>>>>the LAKE FISHERMEN who are doing the stocking. The
>>>>>Stream fishermen...are doing A LOT OF TALKING...but
>>>no
>>>>>action. I fish steelhead all year round....and if
>we
>>>>>didn't put a single king in lake ontario ever
>>>>>again...we still won't get steelhead in the salmon
>>>>>river till Nov. through May. So you'll be sitting
>>>>>around waiting through Sept. and most of Oct. to
>get
>>>>>fish.
>>>>>
>>>>>Here's another thing to think about. I know in the
>>>>>genny...we get banner steelhead fishing when we
>have
>>>a
>>>>>banner king run. Remember...our steelhead are
>>>"WINTER"
>>>>>run fish...that's just the way it is for this
>>strain.
>>>>>You may not see any steelhead without kings till
>>even
>>>>>later then Nov. They absolutely follow the kings in
>>>to
>>>>>feed heavily on eggs.
>>>>>
>>>>>You can't compare our program to PA's and Ohio.
>They
>>>>>have some very nice spring fed streams that cool
>>down
>>>>>a little faster then the salmon river and other
>>>>>surrounding rivers. The fish aren't coming in when
>>>the
>>>>>water is in the 70's. The salmon river stays warm
>>for
>>>>>much longer then Elk and Walnut in the fall.
>>>>>
>>>>>You and Ken keep missing the point that this
>fishery
>>>>>is not JUST for stream fihermen. Go ahead and try
>to
>>>>>lobby for the shutting down of the king salmon
>>>>>program...you have that right...but I'll bet you a
>>>>>trip to Alaska...you won't get to first base with
>>>your
>>>>>plan. The lake has a powerful lobby...has been in
>>>>>place long before the stream fishing ever got
>>>popular.
>>>>>Back in the 80's when I was fishing the salmon
>river
>>>>>you wouldn't count 10 guys on the water in late
>Nov.
>>>>>Yet there were over 750K boat trips a year on the
>>>lake
>>>>>to fish for trout and salmon. That has receeded
>>quite
>>>>>a bit I'll admit as people try different things,
>but
>>>>>there is still 250K trips a year...with a lot of
>>time
>>>>>and money involved.
>>>>>
>>>>>Finally...I have to go back to my soap box....you
>>are
>>>>>placing the blame on a fish...how can you miss the
>>>>>fact that as in hunting....the fishermen have
>caused
>>>>>the problem with how they treat this fishery. I
>>>>>totally agree you go to Erie...no more jerks
>ripping
>>>>>fish...for the most part. Same up in the Huron and
>>>>>Ontario streams across the lake. I was in the House
>>>of
>>>>>Hardy in London not to long ago...and they just
>>>MOCKED
>>>>>the hell out of the salmon river. But not because
>of
>>>>>the salmon...but because of the jerks that snag
>fish
>>>>>AT the salmon.
>>>>>
>>>>>The English revere all salmon....they love to go to
>>>>>Alaska and the NW and fly fish for them....and they
>>>>>would love to come to the Salmon river and fish for
>>>>>them...but they won't put up with the snaggers...so
>>>>>they don't come and spend all that big money.
>>>>>
>>>>>Until the fishing community "laymen" like you and I
>>>>>and Ken start dealing with the poachers of this
>>>>>fishery and put peer pressure on them to either
>>learn
>>>>>to fish...or leave the sport...we won't have any
>>>>>changes. There are laymen and guides linning
>>>steelhead
>>>>>all winter long. Just because there isn't a
>shoulder
>>>>>to shoulder crowd on the river in Feb...I can tell
>>>you
>>>>>that there are plenty of non sportsman like
>>>activities
>>>>>going on. If you guys fish Erie...let me ask you
>one
>>>>>thing. How many long liners you ever see fish those
>>>>>places???????? NOt a one...at least I've never seen
>>>>>it. Not there...not in Huron...not in Ontario...hey
>>>>>not at the Oak..or the Genny...or the other good
>>>>>streams in the western basin. We have a poor class
>>of
>>>>>guys fishing the salmon river raping ALL the
>>>>>fish...especially the steelies.
>>>>>
>>>>>You guys can do what you want...but if I were
>>>>>you....you might want to think about what we at
>LOSA
>>>>>are trying to do. TEACH people to come over from
>the
>>>>>dark side. Teach them how to fish. The fish are not
>>>>>the problem...the so called anglers who use methods
>>>>>that mame or kill these fish are the problem.
>>>>
>>>>Davy, there are a lot of us that would like to get
>>>>involved and donate time to the fishery, but not for
>>>>the benefit of filling the river full of kings only
>>to
>>>>have snaggers come in the fall.
>>>>There is noway that the pacific program would ever
>be
>>>>dropped completely, but I would like to see it
>slowly
>>>>cut back over the next few years. Other species of
>>>>steelhead or rainbows are available to run the river
>>>>at different times. Maybe we should look at the
>brown
>>>>trout for fall fishing options. We use to have great
>>>>runs of steelhead in the spring and I am talking
>>about
>>>>the early 80's. As for the problem of the fish
>>>>returning, its probably a problem with the way they
>>>>are stocked. I know fish have been raised in Oswego
>>>>habor and the returns to the river are still poor,
>>but
>>>>lets not go there now because Oswego river is a
>whole
>>>>other problem to be discussed later.
>>>>Like I said there are a lot of us that would like to
>>>>help out, you just say the word and we'll be there.
>>>>But the fishery cannot be all about the pacific
>>>>salmon. I think the fact that we haven't been asked
>>to
>>>>help out is because some people don't want to hear
>>our
>>>>input on the situation. Hell, T.U. was driven out
>>>>years ago when they tried to make inroads to the
>>>>groups and organizations that control the way the
>>>>fishery goes. I would like to meet with any and
>every
>>>>group involved in the fishery but their meetings are
>>>>not public knowledge, there are alot of things going
>>>>on behind closed doors. So, we need to get these
>>dirty
>>>>little issues out in the open to get them taken care
>>>>of. Like the special group they put together to
>>decide
>>>>on the new regs for the upcoming season, several of
>>>>them being some of the worst offenders on the salmon
>>>>river. What's up with that?
>>>>
>>>>A large black salmon is an easy target for any
>>snagger
>>>>in the river. The only way to break this chain of
>>>>"inbred" snaggers is to remove the one thing that
>>>>keeps bringing them back generation after
>generation.
>>>>I guaranty, you take the pacifics out of the river
>>for
>>>>a few years you'll just about wipe out the snagging
>>>>problem.
>>>
>>>
>>>Well Undfertaker...I don't doubt that if salmon
>>>weren't around...many people would go away. It's a
>>>quick solution to the snagging problem...and I agree
>>>it would work...but again...it's just not all about
>>>the salmon river or the stream anglers. There are
>>>several special interest groups. Why things don't get
>>>done...is that these groups are fragmented.
>>>
>>>The bang on your plan is it's simply not realistic.
>>>The several thousand anglers who come here from ice
>>>out till Oct. to boat fish just aren't going for this
>>>program of getting rid of kings. So if it's not
>>>realistic...it's just another stall situation.
>>>Probably the other way to get this done...is shut
>down
>>>salmon spawning season to fishing. So the kings come
>>>back but don't allow fishing from 9/1 to 11/15. I
>mean
>>>shut it down completely. That would get rid of the
>bad
>>>anglers also. But that is un-realistic cause the
>>>merchants would be out of business.
>>>
>>>You have to keep asking yourself the same
>>>question...why can't people JUST FISH! Snagging has
>>>been outlawed for seven years. Why can't the legal
>>>ethical fishing community put enough peer pressure on
>>>the bandits to drive them out?
>>>
>>>I'm pretty close to the guys who are making decisions
>>>on the salmon river/lake Ontario fishery...and there
>>>has been plenty of thoughts about getting rid of ALL
>>>pacific fish...including STEELHEADs....and just stock
>>>Atlantic salmon and brown trout. So be careful what
>>>you wish for.
>>>
>>>This is a great discussion...and believe me...while I
>>>like to fish for kings...I absolutely believe you are
>>>right that if kings weren't around neither would the
>>>trash fishermen. But there are just to many other
>>>irons in the fire when it comes to this program
>>>
>>>As far as groups...we publish our meetings every
>month
>>>on several web sites...and we have our own web site
>>>under fishsalmonriver.com. Look under the links
>>>sections...and you'll find LOSA. We have a meeting in
>>>Rochester this weekend. 2 to 4 PM directions are on
>>>the site.
>>>
>>>In March we are planning a meeting in the Fairhaven
>>>area...and we plan to have Fran Verdoleva, Les Wedge,
>>>and Dan Bishop attend. Les is the steelie biologist
>>>and Dan...the chinny biologist at Altmar. You guys
>>>might want to try and attend that one to talk to them
>>>and our group. Our meetings are third Sat. of the
>>>month.
>>>
>>>I don't know why the brown trout doesn't prosper
>>>better and run the salmon river....like they do here
>>>in the west. I catch a lot of browns in the summer
>>>fishing the salmon river...but they are stream browns
>>>not lake fish.
>>>
>>>There is always room for improvement. Maybe I'm
>people
>>>think I'm taking hits off the crack pipe when I say
>>>this...but to me the best situation is to have all
>>>three pacific species in place...and to wipe out the
>>>snaggers with tough laws, (BIG Fines)...peer
>pressure,
>>>and conservation. It works in Canada...it works in
>>>Alaska, it works in Oregon and Washington, Idaho,
>>>Montana...you name it. But the great lakes is way
>>>behind in WHACKING the dregs who rape our fishery.
>>>You start hitting a guy for a $1000 bucks...and take
>>>all his gear...and he won't be back to play the
>>>snagging game any more. Even a moron hasn't got a
>>>grand to piss away.
>>>
>>>But that's a slow process...it shouldn't be. People
>>>should just obey the law...I can see your point...get
>>>rid of the fish get rid of the problem...but who are
>>>you punishing? Guys like me and my friends who love
>to
>>>fish for kings...and the 1000's of people who lake
>>>fish for them. That just doesn't feel right.
>>
>>I have always been for stiff fines and taking of gear
>>and vehicles, but the local judge thinks this is a big
>>joke and only whack these guys with a 50.00 fine and
>>snaggers have this already added into their weekend
>>budget. I don't think you would have to close the
>>river, as I said before, the pen raising has shown
>>that most of the fish don't run the river, no internal
>>instinct to do so. This would allow the lake to have
>>the kings for charters, guys can fish at the mouths of
>>rivers and along shore for them. Yes, some will always
>>run the river and the natural reproduction will always
>>be a factor, but no large runs to draw large crowds.
>>The DEC has spent loads of money on the summer
>>steelhead and atlantic salmon program and neither one
>>is any closer to taking hold as it was when the first
>>fish were put in.
>>As for peer pressure it is not going to happen until
>>the river is taken over by ethical fishermen and that
>>is not going to happen until you get rid of the
>>snaggers. When you tell a guy to stop snagging, he and
>>several of his buddies tell you to go..... Until the
>>ethical fishermen out numbers the snaggers that
>>picture will never come true. It works on other rivers
>>because the snaggers aren't there in large numbers.
>>It's the other way around, the fishermen drive the
>>snaggers out. Nobody wants to walk into a group of
>>snaggers by himself and tell them they need to change
>>their fishing tactics. I would, but only if I had a
>>gun with me and I don't think we need to do that. You
>>need to get the fishermen here in numbers, but once
>>they come and see what goes on they never come back.
>>Again, this place is avoided like the plague by real
>>fishermen because they can't stand to see what goes
>>on. Take the salmon away for awhile, let the fishermen
>>turn it into a real fishery, then bring the salmon
>>back into the picture if you want to. You have to
>>clean the mess up before you can start new again.
>>There is no need to waste more money trying to fix the
>>fishery until this snagging issue is put to bed. If
>>the fines are not going to be stiff, then we have no
>>choice but to remove the salmon. I'm not big on
>>removing any species, but if people want to abuse the
>>fish and the river then shut it down. I would rather
>>see no fishing then what I see going on in the Salmon
>>River now. Maybe we'll all learn a good lesson from
>>this if it does happen. And shame on the state for
>>ever allowing snagging.
>
>
>Back again Undertaker...couple of things that I'm not
>sure you've heard about..so I'll pass it along.
>Actually the early data being collected by us
>fisherman shows the pen reared fish ARE returning to
>their natel streams. Steelhead for instance...at the
>Oswego...95% of the returning fish sampled are pen
>reared. Data is favorable for the kings also...so
>early data says that pen rearing will work to imprint
>fish on a particular river. One of the reasons the
>salmon river was down last year was because Oswego and
>the Oak had mature pen programs and got THEIR kings
>back...meaning less fish to the salmon.
>
>Second interesting thing....we had the region eight
>fisheries manager Bill Abraham at our Jan. LOSA
>meeting. Bill said that a huge number of salmon river
>clipped kings were caught in the Niagara river this
>fall. WHY??? Simple the mighty Niagara had water while
>the Salmon river didn't. The kings passed on their
>urge to swim east and went for the big water. Very
>interesting scenario. So two big reasons salmon number
>were down.
>
>Like I said...I agree if you take the fish away the
>guys will not come...and it would be a quick fix for
>THAT problem...The only other possibility is now that
>Caladonia is raising kings again...you could raise all
>the kings you needed for Lake Ontario there...but how
>would you collect eggs. Right now you'd have to build
>weirs...and that would cost a lot of money the state
>doesn't have...if you could do that...then you could
>shut down the salmon for kings...but the problem would
>simply move.
>
>You are right about the judges...they are not lining
>up with the law abiding fishermen. LOSA is trying to
>launch a campaign to get them in line and stiffen up
>the fines. None of this is going to be easy.
>
>You and your buddies are welcome to join us at a
>meeting sometime...and express your views. We are
>steelhead nuts at LOSA...hence the moniker...Lake
>Ontario Steelhead Assoc. We are working for all the
>salmonids...but hold steelhead close to our hearts.
>Thanks for the great discussions.
I, myself check fin clippings on all my steelhead and anyone near me who has one and I'm not sure what markings you are using for the pen raised fish, but I only got one fish this past year with an adipose fin clip out of Oswego. All other fish had no fin clips. I and several of my buddies fish the Oswego hard for steelhead and can honestly say that this is the worst year we have ever seen for steelhead in the last 12 years. I have a hard time believing a 95% return. I am talking about the river, between the 104 bridge and the dam, not the area below there which I consider part of the harbor. Also there were less salmon seen this year as in previous year in that river. I hope there isn't some number inflating going on here because I'm sure if you guys couldn't show that the pen raising was a success that you would no longer get the fish to raise in the pens.
As for the theory on the Salmon River, I would like to see good, hard data on the river flows this past year and compare them to previous years. This phenomena of our fish showing up in the Niagara is pretty hard to swallow when I have seen those fish ascend the Salmon River in really low water years. Please analyze the data from the power plant and see if this is true. Temperature may have been a problem, I agree, but not water flow. I'm no guide, but spend enough time on both rivers to see that things are not quite right with either river.
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
| |
Feedback: 