Colorado Fisherman Forum banner

1 - 20 of 26 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,877 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Personally, I applaud the state for their increased emphasis on warmwater species and I know they are doing alot more with species like wipers, walleye, bass etc. than they were 10 years ago. But it seems like they are still putting alot of money into stocking trout in lakes where IMHO they really don't belong. Pikeview and Quail lakes in Co. Springs are two good examples-every spring the hatchery truck makes serveral trips to each and dumps in trout that, I am told, cost $1.00 each to raise. And very few of those fish are in the lake for more than a couple of weeks. And that $1.00 figure is from 15 yrs. ago-its probably double that now.

Catching 11" stockers just isn't my idea of good fishing. If they put in bass and made it catch and release , you would end up with a sustainable and reproducing population of fish. I just think on lakes that aren't and never will be quality trout waters that we are throwing our money away. Now I know there are fishermen who dearly love their spring trout fishing but it doesn't seem cost effective to me. Just my 2 cents. Ed
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,927 Posts
Actually andy, lakes in the mountains (like grand mesa) are almost all put and take lakes. I prefer put, grow, and take. Its cheaper, the fish grow bigger, and are more like wild fish. Any lake the DOW manages on the grand mesa is put and take.
I agree 100% ed, there is way to much emphasis on trout. I know on the east slope dow does stock wiper, walleye, and bass, but they rarely if ever do that on the west slope . (in fact on the west slope they destroy warm water fisheries because of the squawfish. We also only have one walleye lake, juniata, and that was thanks to a bucket biologist. I'm not counting rifel gap as its fishery is basically non-existant.). Harvey gap and highline lake are two excellent examples in the west slope of lakes where warmwater fisheries are hurt, and in the case of harvey nearly destroyed, and overstocking of rifle gap (although it should be stocked some) has destroyed the walleye fishery.

BUT! Here is the otherside of it. Most fisherman go fishing two or three times a year, tops. They bring grandma ellen and all the kids. They go and throw a hunk of powerbait on the bottom and never move all day. They like to catch fish, and stocker trout provides this option for them. Sadly, or happily, not sure which, these fisherman have the bulk of licenses sold. So you really can't blame DOW, they make more money this way, although they really are hurting fisheries.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
804 Posts
I think any water which cannot carry trout over from one year to the next should be managed differently. There are plenty of lakes here on the Western slope which could be managed as great "warm water" fisheries. Instead they are heavily stocked with mutant stockers which end up dying mid summer when the water becomes to warm.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,399 Posts
It would cost them more then 1$ a fish if they stocked it with other species. The reason is we have trout hatcheries and have the trout available, they have to trade other states for most of the other species they stock and thats probably why they are stocked as fingerlings. Especially when other species have not started biting yet. Plus stocker trout are kind of dumb and will bite just about anything thus you can catch them over and over.
I am tired of catching trout so I know what you mean but I went to pikeview today and would have been skunked if it had not been for the trout.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,229 Posts
I would like to see more emphasis placed on other types of fish. The stocking reports deal exclusively with trout. It would be great to know what numbers and size of fish are being stocked other than trout.

I like trout, they can be great fun to fish for and give a better fight than walleye. But i would like to know what is going on with other types of fish too.

One reason I think we hear more about Salmonids is the fact that a large percentage are raised to catchable size for put and take and like TFB said, for the average person who fishes 2-3 times a year, (unlike us who fish 2-3 times a week) That's ok, its fun, they have a picnic and nice day at the lake. But we like a bit more variety.

Dan

Dan
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
10,399 Posts
Dan said:
I would like to see more emphasis placed on other types of fish.  The stocking reports deal exclusively with trout.  It would be great to know what numbers and size of fish are being stocked other than trout. 

Dan
Thats because the other species are stocked as fry, they are not raised to catchable size before being released. They release 100,000s of them as alot will be eaten and hope the rest grow big.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,511 Posts
A lot of those put and take city lakes are stocked for kids...so it isnt all bad...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16,571 Posts
If you dont want little trout then dont fish for 'em.Pretty simple.I fish lakes for large trout,and I fish other lakes for warmwaters.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,204 Posts
OURAY - good comments, I totally agree.

SLAYERFISH has spoken, get in line!

I love this forum! :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
472 Posts
Ed...you are passionate about bass and that makes you a friend and ally in my eyes. I'll toss out my two cents and add my perspective on what I call...The Good, the Bad and Ugly side of Stocked Trout.

I am not opposed to stocking but think it could be modified a bit too greatly enhance fishing overall. Stocking 10" catchable trout as a gamefish is a bit dissapointing in my opinion but falls under the "best bang for your buck" management philosophy.

Rest assured that is not all the DOW is doing and I am a bit thankful that not all this information gets posted to the public. That would draw a lot of focus to those spots and destroy any effort that has been made.

I too would love to see more advanced management for warm water species which includes taking smaller bass out as needed on an annual basis. Ed, send me an e-mail and I will share a few examples of some really great bass spots managed very well for bass, all 100% public.

Now...on to my rant! ;D

The Good...

Last year it was nice to see hatcheries recycle some of their brood fish and some trout over 30" were placed in public waters (according to the DOW public release). Most of these were put in the fall before the ice fishing started.

Stocking smaller trout in Spinney is a great idea! Because it helps suppliment the diet for much bigger fish. (I wish half the water in Colorado fished half as well as Spinney) Both pike and trout species are greatly enhanced by this effort. I would love to see some of my bass spots get a good stocking of those little trout as forage but NOT put it on the report.

The Bad...

For me, the stocking report is my reference tool of "where not too fish that weekend" as there will be a cadre of anglers elbow to elbow on the shoreline. And I hold my breath when I see one of my bass lakes on this report. Trout are an easy and excellent source of protein for bass but all those anglers in full force ultimately mean a few largemouths are going tp end up on a stringer.

The Ugly...

What infuriates me the most is the small percentage of anglers that follow the stocking report and take advantage of the situation. By this I mean bringing an army of friends and family (license holders or not) casting out everything from fishing poles to straight spools of line and keeping everything they catch. Leaving trash, fish entrails and anything else as they leave is a sure sign of this activity.

Even when I report this behavoir, the local wildlife officials respond with..."Its only temporary".

You would be amazed at how many folks WANT this type of fishing and the DOW has quoted me several times that on the average 70% of Colorado license holders want Bait and Take trout stocked waters as close to their front door as possible. As this mentality persists, the DOW will seek to keep these license holders happy. I won't go into whether that mentality is right or wrong, just know that it exists in large numbers.

The flip side of this coin is the fact bass anglers are being more vocal about what we want and expect in regards to Colorado fishing. We are license holders too and as our numbers grow, they will help meet those expectations. They can't do everything that we would like but in most cases, they do the best they can with what resources are available in attempt to make everyone happy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,927 Posts
Mattsabasser, if you lived on the west slope you'd be upset with the management over here. They ruin bass fisheries to make way for stockers since we are west of the continental divide they are worried about the chubs. They don't manage warmwater fisheries over here at all. I only blame this partially on DOW, however, as USFWS is in charge of it all. But DOW has the choice of whether they want to comply or not. The agreement making it illegal to stock warmwater fish on the west slope was verbal only.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,877 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
Some have pointed out it costs more to stock bass than trout. I'm sure thats true but the point is, once you get a population going, mother nature takes over and the fish sustain themselves with no additional stocking. I see them doing that more and more on the lakes down at Ft, Carson and I think its because in the long run its cheaper and it gives you something else to fish for. Ed
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,927 Posts
Ed Marcol said:
Some have pointed out it costs more to stock bass than trout. I'm sure thats true but the point is, once you get a population going, mother nature takes over and the fish sustain themselves with no additional stocking. I see them doing that more and more on the lakes down at Ft, Carson and I think its because in the long run its cheaper and it gives you something else to fish for. Ed
Good point ed. I really didn't consider that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,182 Posts
As a side note, I was told by a DOW biologist that getting rainbows to spawn is very difficult. I didn't get into it with him about lakes higher up, but (lakes like Union, Boyd, and Carter and the likes,) he stated that a rainbow spawn is almost non-existent.
---YMMV
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
487 Posts
WAY WAY TOO MUCH EMPHASIS ON TROUT. Much of this state isn't even fit for good trout fishing. Personally wherever trout cannot grow well, they shouldn't be. Some lakes they cannot reproduce in but they grow very well, such as Juniata. Here stocking should be done.
I don't mind some lakes being put and take. I know it's economically important and lots of people love put and take fishing. But NOT EVERY lake needs to be put and take. The DOW HAS to manage every lake for trout over here because they made a verbal agreement not to stock any warmwater gamefish. They think trout won't eat native fish and they are beyond stupid if they seriously believe that. Trout are larger, far more aggressive predators and will take far more and far bigger fish than either a bass or a walleye.
For them to try and kill pike for the sake of stocker trout that cannot grow is unallowable. They blame pike for poor trout fishing when in reality if you look at numbers it's because less trout are being stocked. Even at Spinney, where pike did cause some harm, the majority of the problems with fewer trout being caught was because of the fact that very few could be stocked at that time, so only spinney's self sustaining trout could really provide much fishing opportunity, and reproductive success for trout in spinney isn't high. So pike got all the blame, once again, when they were only a small portion of the problem. I want to see more fisheries managed for pike rather than trout. They claim every lake isn't meant for pike and they get TU and those who are ignorant to preach their lies again.
Colorado is warmer than most all other central states and has a longer growing season than all other central states in the west. It can grow big walleye and big bass. Our walleye are some of the biggest around, and our bass in some fisheries are bigger than any in the west except for texas, arizona, oklahoma, and california. In some fisheries bass are stunted because of the 15" minimum length limit.
You guys know how I feel about the CDOW, they are among the worst fisheries managers in the country, if not the worst, or a close second to washington. And those of you that don't live on the west slope don't know how bad they really are.
The stocking of catchable trout also ruins populations of other gamefish because trout prey upon and take up food and space from other gamefish. Nothing can wipe out bass faster than the overstocking of trout. Mack Mesa reservoir is an example of this, as is Rifle and Harvey Gap.
According to the DOW, trout don't eat other fish hardly at all and don't compete with other fish. So basically the CDOW claims that trout don't take up space and basically don't exist or eat.
Stocker trout are still predators, or else they wouldn't hit lures. Though they aren't the predators that pike, large walleye, large bass, or wild trout are, they still eat fish.
Stocking trout in highline, mack mesa, and harvey gap is not right. The morons even tried to stock connected lakes and rio blanco lake twice with trout. The trout swam off yet died the next day and were floating everywhere. Yet they didn't listen to anglers, so they stocked it again the next year and wasted so much time and money by again thinking anglers know nothing. One word for it all: IDIOCY.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,877 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
Ice-Wow, why don't you say what you really think. ;D In their defense, I believe the Colorado DOW has federal mandates that govern much of what they do in terms of endangered species. I know they had to remove non-native species from any lake that could empty in the Colorado river drainage during times of flood. So I think alot of this might be beyond their control. I don't know much about problems that are specific to the western slope but I don't think all of the blame rests at the doorstep of the CDOW. Ed
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,927 Posts
Ed Marcol said:
Ice-Wow, why don't you say what you really think. ;D In their defense, I believe the Colorado DOW has federal mandates that govern much of what they do in terms of endangered species. I know they had to remove non-native species from any lake that could empty in the Colorado river drainage during times of flood. So I think alot of this might be beyond their control. I don't know much about problems that are specific to the western slope but I don't think all of the blame rests at the doorstep of the CDOW. Ed
Ed, they have the choice whether they want to stock warmwater fish or not, and whether they want to help the endangereds or not. they just choose not to. The biggest part of the blame for this should go to USFWS, but DOW should help out the west slopers. In most cases, I understand the bucket biologists, and they usually make good choices. If it wasn't for them I wouldn't have anything to fish for besides 10" trout, even if they ruin a few lakes I have to hand it to some of them.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
487 Posts
Ed Marcol said:
Ice-Wow, why don't you say what you really think. ;D  In their defense, I believe the Colorado DOW has federal mandates that govern much of what they do in terms of endangered species.  I know they had to remove non-native species from any lake that could empty in the Colorado river drainage during times of flood.  So I think alot of this might be beyond their control.  I don't know much about problems that are specific to the western slope but I don't think all of the blame rests at the doorstep of the CDOW.  Ed
Actually even the USFWS doesn't have to remove gamefish as part of the recovery. They even admitted to me no specific law exists mandating the removals of gamefish, period. Anywhere.
The CDOW only has made a verbal agreement not to stock fish besides trout over here in waters below 6500 feet. Even those areas not connected to trash fish habitat can't be stocked unless they have a guard to prevent fish from leaving the lake. But it's not the law, only a verbal agreement.
The CDOW on the west slope is made up of a lot of environmental liberals who support the native garbage fish and the removals. If they don't cooperate they can't receive federal funds though, so it does also boil down to money.
 
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
Top