Sk8man

Like most guys I haven't even started...

I would agree and hopefully some benefit would come from it but I also know that the problems on both Seneca and Keuka are very complex and multidimensional. Some folks believe that these lakes are OK as they are and in my view this is a function of short term observation without historical perspective. I first fished Seneca in 1949 and Keuka in 1958. I have fished them for trout both in streams (Coldbrook, Guyanoga, Wilsons, Kashong, Keuka Outlet, and Catherines) as well as the lakes, from shore, and in boats and ice fishing as well. During that extended time frame there have been many changes in these lake and stream environments and many ups and downs in the fish populations and subsequent fishing conditions. I have kept DEC trout and salmon diaries off and on since the early seventies. When I was a kid and teenager I fished many places on Seneca shoreline and in places like the Seneca lake State Park, Sampson, all along the railroad tracks on the west side for perch, bass, trout and pike. For many of those early years there were pronounced weed beds at the north end and along the sides in the shallows out to about 18 ft of water and they were literally packed with those species of fish along with sunfish and bluegills and others. There were minnows of various species swimming in the shallows in huge schools. You could catch panfish at nearly any location. In the Spring you could fill a 5 gallon pail full of bullheads, bluegills or perch off the seawall at the north end or in the canal at the state park before it was a state park. Right up through the 80's and 90's perch fishing in the marina at Sampson state park was spectacular and it was good but less spectacular up until about 2014 or 15. In recent years in my travels around Seneca the former weed beds are pretty much gone or just "spotty" and scraggly and may be different variety of weeds as well. There are zebra shells encrusting about every rock. Gone are the huge schools of minnows and young of fish like the smallmouth and largemouth bass that used to be present. The water around the periphery of the lake appears as a submerged "moonscape" devoid of life and crystal clear most of the time. To those folks who say the lake is fine and will change in cycle I say " I hope so", but deep down I doubt it because of the extent of the changes from the past. Last year while out on Keuka ice fishing for perch and panfish in 20 ft or less water we pulled out one lake trout after another. Some were very skinny and obviously malnourished while a few were spitting up numerous tiny perch that were still alive squiggling on the ice Although I have caught an occasional laker through the ice there before it was obvious that something very different is happening as usually they have fed mainly on alewives and smelt (before they virtually disappeared) but now they are desperate and feeding on the much less nutritious perch. What does all this have to do with the original concern of rainbow creel limits? The point is these lakes and streams have changed dramatically and we should be changing our thinking in line with the changing nature of the environment. Catherine's Creek and Coldbrook which as major spawning streams have likewise undergone radical changes such as stream washouts of banks from flooding, elimination of some deep holes or holding structure, and elimination of brush cover, and trees along the banks. There have been stream improvement efforts e.g. Coldbrook) but the fishing has continually deteriorated from that noted the past. There is more fishing pressure on these resources at a time when they are experiencing significant difficulties. As far as the redds (hollowed out areas of gravel or bedrock areas where the females lay their eggs) being trampled as I mentioned previously. I have seen firsthand masses of ignorant fisherpersons walking in the streams during the first days of the season stepping all over the spawn. Yes many of the spawning trout may have already left the stream earlier as some even winter over in them but these redds (or nests) being destroyed is still a problem. Rainbows are a pretty fragile fish when considering "catch and release" as a potential option and especially so as water temps rise in the streams or lakes . This complicates making a suggestion such as proposing a catch and release only for a year or two for both Seneca Lake and its tributaries. Establishing a complete moratorium would also not deal with one of the large problems thought to be facing Seneca: the apparent over abundance of alewives (and possible lack of predators). Too bad they couldn't be netted and shipped to Keuka

A thoughtful note Trouthunter. We do indeed have much to be thankful for in this great country of ours too and it is a good time to remember those folks that gave their very lives so that we can live the way we do and enjoy these special resources and activities. Happy Thanksgiving to all the LOU "family".

Maybe you could even dig deep and make it a beer

Sometimes you make too much sense Mike As an old time stream guy one of the things that has always bothered me greatly is watching people trample redds without any apparent concern. I would certainly respect a decision to give the rainbows a break for a year or two....(and who knows how many I have left)

Nick - an example of limitations of what goes into the decision making process is the one rainbow limit on Canandaigua. It wasn't really based on the data per se.;it was based on the desire to keep things consistent among the western Finger Lakes. This was even admitted to me by DEC folks. This is truly an inexact science in stocking these lakes right now and setting creel limits as well. There is a lot of "shooting in the dark" and it is understandable given the complexity of present environmental circumstances. Many of these lakes are experiencing difficulties and are in varying stages of trouble and it is unclear whether or if they they are capable of "self-correcting". There are a variety of interests that need to be "balanced". and I like you am willing to leave it in the hands of the biologists for the time being

It can help to take photos at different stages too so you can be sure of getting it back together correctly

Or another option: https://www.jannsnetcraft.com/fly-tying/

As far as bottom coverage goes this may help illuminate that particular issue: http://www.airmartechnology.com/bottom-calculator.html It may be worth mentioning that the transducer is an important component; but only half of the total equation. The unit being used, its capabilities, and how it is adjusted accounts for the other half. An additional factor in the bottom clarity (and target from bottom discrimination) is the type of bottom itself and the signal power of the unit (e.g. signal strength returning from the bottom) which is related to the type of bottom and structure as well. A CHIRP unit should give you increased resolution and better discrimination of target and bottom separation and discrimination between targets, but it needs to be properly adjusted and fine tuned (e.g. sensitivity,etc.) to get the best result regardless of transducer. To get the most from the unit and the transducer it has to be properly matched and located as well. Even a standard unit transducer can excel in some cases when these factors are properly set. Airmars are top notch transdducers. It is unclear what exactly is meant by "deep water" as some may think 100 ft is deep water while my fishing buddy thinks that 600 is where we start fishing in his boat