Anyone notice the sportfishing changes for Southcentral Alaska?

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • redleader
    replied
    basically pike are cannibals and the large pike will keep the overall population down since they inhabit the same areas and normally when you take out the large ones the smaller hammer handle populations explode, this has been found to be the case in certain waters and as Scott mentioned it could be apples to oranges compared to the susitna drainage.

    Leave a comment:


  • TOMCOD
    replied
    Most of the larger pike are females. The larger the pike, the more eggs they produce. How does that help control the population? I like to catch big pike and would love to catch only large pike (who wouldn't) but not at the expense of trout and salmon.

    Leave a comment:


  • scott_rn
    replied
    Originally posted by redleader View Post
    We have a lake in Colo.- Williams fork reservoir that has a good population of large pike due to a slot limit, this lake does not have a hammer handle or a sucker problem like most of the other waters do and is also one of the brood lakes for kokanee salmon, Powder monkey is right with more larger pike the overall pike population will be lower, kinda bassackwards philosophy that is proven to work. Tiger musky are hybrids and cannot reproduce but are hard to find a source for.
    That's comparing apples to oranges, from my point of view.

    I ran into a adf&g guy at a scout-o-rama recently who said they found the big pike were killing a lot more salmon than they previously thought. It would be interesting to see the data. Actually, I bet it is a boring read.

    Leave a comment:


  • redleader
    replied
    We have a lake in Colo.- Williams fork reservoir that has a good population of large pike due to a slot limit, this lake does not have a hammer handle or a sucker problem like most of the other waters do and is also one of the brood lakes for kokanee salmon, Powder monkey is right with more larger pike the overall pike population will be lower, kinda bassackwards philosophy that is proven to work. Tiger musky are hybrids and cannot reproduce but are hard to find a source for.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mark Collett
    replied
    What in the world did he just say ? Can someone say that in English ?

    Leave a comment:


  • fishNphysician
    replied
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mI71Hsy_PaU

    Leave a comment:


  • ak_powder_monkey
    replied
    Originally posted by ClearCreek View Post
    ak: You can't have it both ways - you say "Sport fishermen have almost NO impact on the pike populations in the Susitna drainage, except to make the average size of pike smaller." Making the average size smaller sounds like an impact to me. If you are indicating anglers will not be able to remove pike from targeted watersheds through sport fishing, I agree; that just "ain't a gonna happen"!
    Yeah almost no impact... I'd say that making the average size of pike smaller can only hurt the salmon and trout population too, small pike eat small salmon just as much as big pike do if not more, at least big pike eat small pike. Stunted predator populations really suck IMO

    I've never heard of tigers reproducing with pike or muskies and producing fertile offspring... interesting... Obviously you don't put a 50" fish in there you stock a bunch of little ones and let them grow big... Obviously its a pipe dream but **** I'd like to catch a 50" freshwater fish... hahaha

    Leave a comment:


  • ClearCreek
    replied
    Originally posted by ak_powder_monkey View Post
    How on earth are sport fishermen gonna do anything to get rid of the pike?

    Sport fishermen have almost NO impact on the pike populations in the Susitna drainage, except to make the average size of pike smaller. The pike have been here for 30+ years even with unlimited limits and a 15 year long campaign to eradicate them, what has come of it? Crappy pike fishing and no more salmon and trout.

    At this point poison is the only way to go, and given our state's political climate, there is no way in hell the department is gonna have the funds to do the job (we're talking tens of millions of dollars)

    So why not make the best of a bad situation and try to grow some fish bigger than 10 inches long?

    Personally I'd like to see some tiger muskies put into play... I'd say a few hundred 50" tigers would do some damage to the hammer handle population
    ak: You can't have it both ways - you say "Sport fishermen have almost NO impact on the pike populations in the Susitna drainage, except to make the average size of pike smaller." Making the average size smaller sounds like an impact to me. If you are indicating anglers will not be able to remove pike from targeted watersheds through sport fishing, I agree; that just "ain't a gonna happen"!

    You are aware there is pretty solid evidence tiger musky can and will back cross with their parental species and produce fertile offspring. I am not sure where the management concept of keeping a lot of large pike in a system to control the smaller pike comes from, but it is not a concept I am aware of that is used anywhere in the lower 48 that actively manages a fishery for a balanced sport fish population.

    Colorado has had some success stocking tiger musky in smaller trout reservoirs to control white suckers (that compete with the trout). These reservoirs offer a controlled environment and when the amount of white sucker control is achieved some (most) of the tiger musky can be removed.

    I am sure you realize the logistics of obtaining 50 inch tiger musky for stocking is nearly beyond comprehension. It would be nearly impossible to find a hatchery that would be willing to raise tiger musky that large.

    It is unfortuante pike have found their way (either on their own or illegally introduced) into watersheds where they are not wanted. Even with an unlimited budget to purchase rotenone, this method of eliminating pike would be extremely difficult and bordering on impossible.

    ClearCreek

    Leave a comment:


  • ak_powder_monkey
    replied
    Originally posted by kenaibow fan View Post
    Do you know if there was any in there before the hatchery fish started going up there?

    Because I have talked to people that lived here since the 60's (Sterling/Soldotna) and they say there was steelies in the river before they planted them in the Kasilof!
    Yes, I'm almost sure of it, the Funny River weir has revealed a small run that looks a lot like the runs in the Kasilof drainage. I would bet the whole kenai system gets around 1000 fish per year.

    As for stocking campbell creek with steelhead, they tried that in the 80s, it didn't work. Also if you were to stock steelhead in the Kenai of any genetic origin they would likely not become steelhead, but remain residents, as anadromidity in O. mykiss is controlled primarily by size at smolting age, and not genetics. Take away all the nuitrients from the kenai and you'll probably see some steelhead

    Leave a comment:


  • ak_powder_monkey
    replied
    Originally posted by Erik in AK View Post
    Like Su Salmon? Kill Su Pike.
    How on earth are sport fishermen gonna do anything to get rid of the pike?

    Sport fishermen have almost NO impact on the pike populations in the Susitna drainage, except to make the average size of pike smaller. The pike have been here for 30+ years even with unlimited limits and a 15 year long campaign to eradicate them, what has come of it? Crappy pike fishing and no more salmon and trout.

    At this point poison is the only way to go, and given our state's political climate, there is no way in hell the department is gonna have the funds to do the job (we're talking tens of millions of dollars)

    So why not make the best of a bad situation and try to grow some fish bigger than 10 inches long?

    Personally I'd like to see some tiger muskies put into play... I'd say a few hundred 50" tigers would do some damage to the hammer handle population

    Leave a comment:


  • Bushwhack Jack
    replied
    Originally posted by tcman View Post
    I don't think akpowdermonkey wants to see and expanding pike fishery at the expense of salmon/trout. Based on other opinions he has had on pike I think what he would like to see is that pike should be managed where they are present (or kill the system with rotenone and start anew). This is what I believe as well.
    I agree. I would like to see the pike killed off with rotenone, if I thought it would work. But I don't think you would get ALL the pike. And the problem is it would eliminate all the other fish in the system. So, I think I agree with the philosophy of kill the hammer handles, and let all the big ones go. You are less apt to end up with a stunted population that way.

    Leave a comment:


  • tcman
    replied
    Originally posted by Erik in AK View Post
    No responsible fisherman would ever release a live pike in the Susitna drainage. No, pike are not the sole cause of the decline of salmon runs in the Su but they are the primary obstacle to restoring those runs.
    I don't think akpowdermonkey wants to see and expanding pike fishery at the expense of salmon/trout. Based on other opinions he has had on pike I think what he would like to see is that pike should be managed where they are present (or kill the system with rotenone and start anew). This is what I believe as well.

    Leave a comment:


  • kenaibow fan
    replied
    Originally posted by fullbush View Post
    Hey there ya go. I'd be all for it. I'd even donate funds to help
    you and me both FB, I wouldn't even think twice about that one!

    Leave a comment:


  • fullbush
    replied
    Originally posted by kenaibow fan View Post
    Well no they aren't skagits, but they are steelies none the less. I think they should take some from Yakutat!
    Hey there ya go. I'd be all for it. I'd even donate funds to help

    Leave a comment:


  • kenaibow fan
    replied
    Originally posted by fullbush View Post
    We don't have a run of skagits my man. you would know it if we did, there would be broken sage rods all over the woods. Beavers would be crafting winter huts out of all the broken G-loomis and lamiglasses.
    Well no they aren't skagits, but they are steelies none the less. I think they should take some from Yakutat!

    Leave a comment:

Footer Ad Module 300 x 300

Collapse

Footer Adsense

Collapse
Working...
X