HB2

When I bought my 21 fter I wanted a roller trailer and was willing to pay more for it . Guy talked me into bunks & I am glad he did. Launch easy, loads easy as my 16 fter and always goes on straight. Safer. & better for hull .

Yes , but all the fish up there are wild , or at least I think . So that makes our problem , a little more fixable. The Creel survey boats with the big orange bumpers ( what a job, how do I get paid for that ) could say to the SR hatchery ," these guys pounded the kings this year, better grab some extra eggs so they have some kings to catch in a few years". Could be as simple as that . Maybe they are doing that already , or I would hope.

Chick Fillet soon!!!!!!!!!!!!! Read many years ago shortly after the Zebra invasion that Ohio was considering dumping raw sewage into lake erie for the bottom of the food chain to eat. Was probably knee jerk and don;t think anything came of it.

Id rather choke on the water and catch more fish

Fully agree w/ the phosphorus thing. Phosphates in fertilizers & laundry detergents way back found its way into the lake and exploded the bottom of the food chain. Legislation & Zebras cleaned out the lake .

We are in what, the 15th or so generation of the original pacific salmon stocks? Could be the fish are evolving from ocean habitat to LO. maybe why nat rep fish are smaller. Mother nature. But that is a different issue. All your reasons may be legit ,Rol . But if the kings ,or any fish or animal,nat repro, the more taken out , the less you have in latter years. To me that is just common sense. So all these guys who go out and boat 50 lakers in an hr and C&R them are actually killing them. Well, that ain't good. But I don't think that's the case. Didn't I see a study somewhere that most survive?

Now I'm even more convinced. Longline , you are always on time .one smart dude. Anglers have gotten more profishent (pun intended ) at catching kings.

Ever hear of compound interest ? We have had harsh winters before. Also hear a lot on here about how much bait is out there. Zebra have been out there since mid 80's . Seems to me they are on the decline or have stabilized. Don't feds stock high numbers of them ? They also nat reproduce. Seems to me they are C&Red more with no trib fishery except for the niagara. I'm sure they eat their share , but once the fish reach 20" or so , they only real threat is a fish hook , or a bear. I'm looking for reason, not trying to lay blame.

And there lies the $ 64,000 question . King numbers are down , way down . We had great ,or at least I did , king fishing 3-5 years back. Then it got king slow so steelhead/rainbows were targeted with great fishing. Now that is slow and rainbow numbers are down . That being considered and stocking being about the same , what caused this ? Maybe taking all these fish had a big impact on our present day fishing . 40% is a lot. Kind of like taking money out of a retirement investment and expecting the same yearly income to live on. A kind of reverse pyrimid effect.

I understand all that , Jimski. I don't think a cormorant cares if it was a stocked or wild fish. I just wonder what percentage of fish, stocked to wild,make it to spawning age.

Good stuff Capn Vince but my point is that if wilds are 40% of the kings out there ,a substantial number , 100 kings,both wild & stocked if both contribute equally, are responsible for 40 fish 2-4 years later. Could be only 20 of the 100 are the ones making the 40 % , but what 20? As the fish roam the lake most of the time. I guess I am thinking about the mature fish available at spawn time to run the creeks.

My question was for mature 3 -4 year old fish .The ones that make the spawn run. So what happens before 3 years is kind of a moot point as I see it.

Playing with the numbers a little to get by the cold weather , can only clean your reels & tackle boxes so much. . So for a round number ,40 % of mature kings are wild fish. So out of 100 kings ,40 are wild. That's a pretty substantial number . So that means that if half of those 100 are lake boxed or stringered in a nat repro stream , 3 years from now there still will be the 60 stocked ( if that stays constant) & only 20 wilds for a total of 80 . take half those fish and 3 years later there are only 76 total , Approx a 25% reduction. 100 mature fish are responsible for 40 mature fish 3-4 years. Am I looking at this correctly ? 3-5 years ago we had banner king fishing , or at least I did. I remember reports from others of the same. Are we paying for that now ?

Questions There is some natural reproduction of Kings in LO . Do we know what percentage of say 100 mature kings in a given year are "wild" ? Also do both the stocked and "wild" Kings both natural reproduce equally ? And one more. What streams are able to sustain the fry till they can return to the lake? Same questions as above for Rainbow / Steelheads . My mind wanders sometimes this time of year. Thanks in advance.

Problem is , some one is going to think this is a good idea. And why not with some of the electronics out there ,this is just the logical next step. Dont see me rushing out to purchace one anytime soon.

So let me get this straight. They want to put billions of dollars worth of commercial & residential property in peril for enviromental reasons. Is the lake and its estuaries that sick.They spent 25 years back in the 60's & 70's getting the levels right after the high water & erosion issues back then . I ain't buying it.

I ask myself, now why would they want to make the high limit higher and low limit lower ?Makes no sence. For enviromental reasons? There is a huge water shortage all over the country. Dont be surpised if soon they want to ship great lakes/LO water to different locations of the country by canal or pipeline for economic development reasons. If you consider this scenario ,it makes more sence. Dont trust them.