This should make everyone angry!!

[Big fat pike]

1 hour ago, HB2 said:

I  heard at a meeting once that that the natural reproduction rate was as high as 47 %. That's half the fish , a huge number . DEC has no control over that . 

 

The lake surface used to shimmer with dead alwives  after the die off . There are way less in the lake. 

 

It's not our father's LO . It's cleaner . Which doesn't necessarily mean better fishing . But we still have a great fishery I'm grateful for.  

 

I'd like to see them get some new eggs from the West Coast . Raise them at a different hatchery , mark them and see what happens . But I think  DEC said they did not want to do that to introduce more genetics someway . 

 

The salmon run is pretty much over .Pretty much a fly and pin trib trout fishery now .  They got their eggs . Lets wait and see how things go . And let the DEC do their job . 

Ok I just thought that a much higher natural spawn then was is accounted for in stocking would result in more fish less bait smaller fish It would be great if they could get them to eat gobies 

[LongLine]

ifishy - The lake is a big place and crowds follow where the big ones are being caught.  That's why the majority of guys who report great catches don't reveal exactly where they are.  They know others will flock there the next day to catch "their" fish.  The same goes for not naming small tribs.  Fishing pressure will increase the next day.  Word travels fast.

 

Fishermen readily post smiling faces with their catches but very few post pictures of the sunrise or scenery of their outing.

 

I-Bay has a great launch site now, but when I was there, the great majority of fishermen launches were fishing the bay, not the lake. I'm sure the same happens at other embayments.

 

Here's some interesting tidbits from the '23 LOC - Salmon Div..

Spring:  8 of 21 prize winners were from out of state.  All prize winners reported their fish from the west.  The minimum weight for entry was 20 Lbs and 10 prize winners were under 21 Lbs.

Summer:  6 of 21 were out of staters.  9 of 21 at the west end.  10 from east end.

Fall:  6 of 21 were out of staters.  16 at east end, 4 west end.  Minimum weight 25 Lbs with 8 prizes under 27 Lbs.  What was the winner?

Point being Fishermen follow the great catches. (Especially the tourists)

Salmon are supposed to be "eating machines" especially before spawning, yet for over 30 years the average weight gain for 3 yr olds from July thru Sept has only been a couple of pounds.  (30+ Lb'rs were caught in the 90's.)  Safe bet that 2 yr olds pre-2004 were a lot bigger than 2 yr olds post 2004.  When did we lose those two year classes of alewife?

 

HB - A call to the DEC will express concern about the fishery.  As I stated before "Policy makers will do nothing unless 'someone' benefits."  DEC values and asks for stakeholder inputs.  Opinions should be expressed now as DEC is putting their plans together for next year. I think the fishermen should be that "someone."

 

West coast eggs won't help.  I was out there a few years ago and caught basically what we call shakers.  The guide's eyes bugged out when I told him we had 25-30 Lb fish.  Besides, their fishery was in trouble this year & last as the Salmon seasons were cut short and cancelled out there.  
 

BFP- Unfortunately, gobies are bottom dwellers, Salmon are pelagic. i.e. wanderers that don't eat off the bottom. 

 

[ifishy]

Yes fisherman follow reports but they were not following mine I had one of my worst years ever but I think k it was something I was doing wrong current guess is something electrical I did notice late summer my anodes were pretty corroded I changed them and had an improved couple trips will do some more investigation down that path yes many boats were in the bays but there were tons on the lake trolling and there wasn't a single day where I didn't have traffic affect my planned trolling path I don't know that fishing effort has increased in the last ten years but it has not fallen significantly honestly with inline boards and various junk lines even small boats can get an effective spread these days and it can be pricey but doesn't have be  the dec is not run by political Conspiricy yes there is politics but the science heads are not elected so are not fighting for there jobs the science they put out is valid and often the recommendations that go with it are as well. the policy makers however do play to there voters and often use over gross over simplification of the science. The fact is a healthy sustainable population will use a diverse and variable cross section of the gene pool there are also factors that drive the expression of thegenes like prey abundance competition and environmental conditions so these fish could have all the abilities to get bigger but the conditions just aren't there and only changing conditions can bring back the size

[HB2]

Ring ,ring ring

 

Hello is this the DEC ? 

 

Why yes it is  how can we help you ? 

 

Are you aware that the size of kings has decreased over the last 15 years or so? 

 

Why yes we are . 

 

Well we  as fisherman demand bigger and more kings . You guys better do something about it . 

 

 

We are working on it sir . Thank you very much for your input . You have a nice day . .....  

 

Yeah , that call will do a lot of good 

 

 

 

 

[Yankee Troller]

14 hours ago, HB2 said:

Well we  as fisherman demand bigger and more kings . You guys better do something about it . 

 

 

We are working on it sir . Thank you very much for your input . You have a nice day . .....  

 

 

Your post made me chuckle, BUT I doubt they are "working on it." If they are, I'd love to hear about these studies at our lake meetings over graphs of declining fish size. It would offer some hope like the increase in baitfish studies have over the last few years.

Edited October 27, 2023 by Yankee Troller

[HB2]

Ring ,ring , ring 

 

Hello is this the DEC ? 

 

Why yes it is sir , how can we help you ? 

 

Are you aware the size of kings has decreased over the last 15 years ? Are you looking into that ? 

 

Why sir yes we are . Our extensive studies we have been secretly doing concluded that it is strictly bait related . There is a shortage of bait and they have less calories for the fish because of the water being cleaner . 

  Our recommendation to get those 40# kings you demand is a complete stop of all king and trout stockings for 5 years to build the bait biomass to sustainable levels . 

 

Well you can't do that . There must be another solution . 

 

Well sir you can't have your cake and eat it to. The  lakes ecosystem has changed dramatically the last 40 years . If the lake ecosystem was the same as it is currently , there would be no Salmon in LO . Thanks for your concern on the mater . 

[LongLine]

Glad you got the boat all fixed up.  A well running boat makes the fishing trips much more enjoyable.  Sorry to hear you got cut off.  I've had that happen when there were only 3 boats out there.  Some guys are just "clowns."

 

The Lake Unit doesn't work for the hatchery and the hatchery doesn't work for the Lake Unit.  They communicate but both work for the policy makers at the Dept of Fisheries.   The policy makers set the regs with input from all the regional groups, including stakeholders and others.   The policy makers set the budgets.  The regional groups have to submit requests for new pumps, personnel and whatever and hope they get approval.  

 

Each of the regional groups has to "fight" for funds.  While not elected, the policy makers are political appointments.  The policy makers have to review the annual report before publishing, which BTW where the heck is it????   I really appreciate Brian linking the prey fish assessment this year.

 

The policy makers decided to go full bore on the Atlantic program even though the science has shown they won't survive.  Why? Were the "trib guys" were pushing it?   Why the Laker program?  Because the Feds were pushing it?  Why the Sturgeon?  

 

As I've said before: The policy makers want stakeholder input.  Every time there is a policy/regulation proposal emails are sent out from DEC asking for input along with comment periods.  Some guys just want to sit back and make fun of it, and I guess that's their prerogative as there are not only "clowns" on the water but also on the keyboard.

 

I agree with Yank on this one.  I'd like to hear what they've been doing as well as what they've planning to do about the size issue.  How are their upcoming lake projects going to affect the salmon?  Are we just shrugging our shoulders and saying, "live with it?"

 

"Clowns" are funny, aren't they?
 

[HB2]

I have a little more faith in the people who are in charge of what is going on in the lake than some . I'm sure they are quite aware of what is going on out there . They seem to moniter this stuff pretty well with all the data that's available for all to see.  It's in their , and the states best interest to provide the best fishing experience possible . And I mean monetarily wise . 

 

This lake has gone thru huge  changes  in the last 40 or so years. Anyone with a pulse should be able to see that . And know that with way less bait , there will be less and smaller fish . Obviously something is going on . Maybe it's not the bait . I have my theories and bait is part of it. 

 

You can have all the stakeholder  input you want( with the demands for as many kings stocked as possible in the past  might be part of the problem )  but you can't make a silk purse out of a sows ear . For every action their is a reaction . Zebras cleaned up the lake. less bottom of the food chain , less bait , fewer fish stocked ,cleaner water , sight feeding cormerant thrive . 

 

Fertile ground grows great crops . And the lake isn't as fertile as it once was . It seems it is a delicate balance of fish to bait biomass . Maybe they are stocking to many fish ( to satisfy stakeholders) and they are stunted like to many sunfish in a small pond . 

 

I'm not shrugging my shoulders , but you may HAVE to live with it .Fishing has been great last year . And the years  before they cut the stocking .  Time will tell .

 

You may want to hear what they say about how ,why ,and what they are going to do about it .  But you may not like what they say . 

 

 

Edited October 27, 2023 by HB2

[GAMBLER]

Lake Ontario is the best salmon fishery on the East Coast.  Why not make it better?  The money generated by this fishery should only push lake managers to push for more for this fishery.  Unfortunately, NY state puts minimal effort into anything fishing / hunting related.  If the size is declining, why should we sit and wait until they don't reach 20lbs? 

[LongLine]

Yes, I have faith in the scientific research also (as I studied Physics in college.)  I realize that the lake has changed quite a bit since I walked through and smelled piles of alewives on the shores.  I'm grateful for the fishery we have.

 

HOWEVER, I would like a scientific explanation on why the graph I previously posted on the 4th page of this thread (which shows a big time downward trend in salmon weights starting at around 2002-2004) and this one, which definitely does NOT SHOW ANY downward trend in alewife population starting at the same time. (Even with a couple year lapse) All of which are published graphs.

 

Looks kind of inconsistent to me.  One could argue that the alewives were smaller, but above graphs show there were a lot more of them.  Generally, when portions are smaller, "eating machines" go back for second helpings. Why don't/haven't they?  They have a quota of how many they can eat a day?  Food is/has been there. As density is up, it's not like they couldn't find food.

 

Previously posted data showed 3 yr olds gaining only a couple pounds over the summer.  Why weren't they bigger going into that 3rd year?  i.e. 2 yr olds had to be smaller than pre-2004.  Why...something stump their growth from YOY to 2 yrs? 

 

I hope things get better but when policy makers don't get stakeholder input, they have to assume the stakeholders are really happy with the directions things are going in and move on.  Wait and see...who knows, maybe we'll get Sabre Tooth Tigers back.

[ifishy]

Purely speculation but maybe clearer water means harder to hunt so more calories burned to eat thus a lower net gain.     Also maybe more aggressive e faster growing fish are more likely to get caught so with a lower overall population quality fishing pressure has a bigger effect this has been seen in some smallmouth studies.  I suspect that dec doesn't have clear understanding of why size I'd down which makes it tough to mitigate.   As Yankee has mentioned in the past the dec has stated there is no research on selective hatchery breeding for salmon size so they don't do that,  as stakeholders we should ask for that research. DEC has limited resources for what studies to run. They run fisheries throughout the state not just lake o and they have done good science and made good decisions accordingly.  Lake o salmon size is a worthy endeavor to study and that what we should ask for with the understanding that it is not a fast study

[GAMBLER]

15 hours ago, LongLine said:

Yes, I have faith in the scientific research also (as I studied Physics in college.)  I realize that the lake has changed quite a bit since I walked through and smelled piles of alewives on the shores.  I'm grateful for the fishery we have.

 

HOWEVER, I would like a scientific explanation on why the graph I previously posted on the 4th page of this thread (which shows a big time downward trend in salmon weights starting at around 2002-2004) and this one, which definitely does NOT SHOW ANY downward trend in alewife population starting at the same time. (Even with a couple year lapse) All of which are published graphs.

 

Looks kind of inconsistent to me.  One could argue that the alewives were smaller, but above graphs show there were a lot more of them.  Generally, when portions are smaller, "eating machines" go back for second helpings. Why don't/haven't they?  They have a quota of how many they can eat a day?  Food is/has been there. As density is up, it's not like they couldn't find food.

 

Previously posted data showed 3 yr olds gaining only a couple pounds over the summer.  Why weren't they bigger going into that 3rd year?  i.e. 2 yr olds had to be smaller than pre-2004.  Why...something stump their growth from YOY to 2 yrs? 

 

I hope things get better but when policy makers don't get stakeholder input, they have to assume the stakeholders are really happy with the directions things are going in and move on.  Wait and see...who knows, maybe we'll get Sabre Tooth Tigers back.

Are the alewife as healthy as they were in the early 2000's?  There is data on it somewhere.  I have seen it at the meetings in the past but I can't remember what it said.  If the alewife are not as healthy, a king would have to eat more of them to get the calorie intake to gain weight.  Hunting alewife longer will burn more calories than it would if they got more calories out of fewer alewife.  Just a thought and I will look to see if I can find the data.  Maybe Shreksoff can chime in.  He is the bait guru on the lake.  

[GAMBLER]

Well, scratch that thought.  The alewife weight according to this chart shows the weight has been stable or heavier.  

Microsoft Word - 2019_preliminary_status_of_Lake_Ontario_Alewife.docx (glfc.org)

[jeb1340]

Does anyone know what causes a fish to spawn at 2, 3, or 4 years old? Is it conditions, genetics, other variables?  Also I was looking at an article from the west coast and it was discussing change in diet and reduction in salmon size. The predominant food is now sardines where it was once more varied. Also mentioned that they used to consume eels. I never knew that. I wonder if LO salmon ever ate eels? In the 90s we had eels all over. I can’t remember the last time I caught one. Not saying it’s just eels. I wonder if there are other foods too that they once ate that are now less abundant? 

[schreckstoff]

An interesting article with some similarities to LO.

 

Recent declines in salmon body size impact ecosystems and fisheries

 

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-17726-z#:~:text=Comparing

[GAMBLER]

1 hour ago, schreckstoff said:

An interesting article with some similarities to LO.

 

Recent declines in salmon body size impact ecosystems and fisheries

 

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-17726-z#:~:text=Comparing

Lake Michigan cut stocks 50% and saw a drastic rebound in size.  We made big cuts and size didn't rebound.  Any idea why Brian? 

[Big fat pike]

1 hour ago, GAMBLER said:

Lake Michigan cut stocks 50% and saw a drastic rebound in size.  We made big cuts and size didn't rebound.  Any idea why Brian? 

Increased competition? 

[GAMBLER]

11 minutes ago, Big fat pike said:

Increased competition? 

Increased competition for a dwindling bait population caused the size reduction in Michigan.  Guys were going an entire season without catching a king over 20lbs!   They cut stocking 50% in one year and over the next couple of years, the size rebounded along with the bait population.  

[Gill-T]

I think salmon do better when they can feed up. From chinook stomach content checks during the March-May period, I always find empty stomachs despite hoards of alewives pinned on the bottom  during the winter into spring transition. I also think the demise of emerald shiner stocks puts year 1 kings behind in development.  Selective forces during the egg and sperm take at Altmar and low tributary water levels favor smaller body sized individuals getting to pass on their genes. 

[HB2]

Looks like the guys up there did an extensive long term scientific study . And they still have no definitive answer as to why it is happening up there . 

 

Well,  short term for us , we will know more mid May when we see spring LOC weights . So we just have to wait and see .  

 

Sounds to me our DEC has not committed to or has an ongoing study as to why this is happening . Maybe they will . I wonder if they don't want to publicize this for bad PR . We  will just have to wait and see . 

 

Hopefully the fishing is as good as it was last year .I guess we will have to wait and see.  It was a madhouse at Wilson for the spring LOC . A lot of boats in out of Sandy some days during the Summer LOC. 

 

The word stakeholder gets thrown around a lot on here . What and and  who exactly is a stakeholder ? From my perspective it's any resident of NY state . Taxpayers foot the bill for the funding of the stocking program .Hopefully it is profitable  or  at least a break even . Some have more skin in the game, ( captains , tackle shops , lodging and restaurants ) but even the kid who works at the Pulaski McDonald's and doesn't fish has skin in the game . 

 

From the study , they are going thru what we are down here . Maybe it will get better.  We can only hope. At this point all we can do is wait and see . 

[LongLine]

Thanx Brian (Gambler) and Brian (schreckstoff)  Very interesting reads.  (BTW  what is a "schreckstoff"?)

 

Points that stuck out to me in the nature article: 
- All the pacific salmon have been experiencing it but to different degrees (They talk length not weight and some fish I caught this year seemed to be "girth-ier for their length than previous years.)  
- The length change over the years is not linear and that it occurs to different degrees in different areas of Alaska but there is a definite downward trend everywhere
- That species are all younger when spawning. (Which is also happening on LO) 
- That the younger spawners have less eggs and there is less nutrient transfer. (which I take as less mass to decompose after spawning)
- That there is no single driver to explain the King length decline. Ocean currents and surface temps are minor effects.
- That they really didn't go into natural vs hatchery (What I think they refered to as "net pen")
- That size has a large economic impact on Alaska

 

I know that it took 510 Kings to get the 2.4 million eggs this year, but don't know how many fish it took to get previous years egg quotas.  Anybody have those figures?  

Apparently, it's happening to Atlantic's in Europe too.  I found these articles based on University of Helsinki research, (Which I think Morgan mentioned a few years ago) 

 

www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/11/181114104356.htm
www.helsinki.fi/en/news/climate-change/salmon-are-shrinking-and-it-shows-their-genes
https://phys.org/news/2022-02-wild-salmon-smaller-linked-aquaculture.html

 

One identifies a growth gene.  One suggests food source lacking Omega (something) in their diet. One said it's evolutionary as they'll die out if they don't spawn early.

 

Nothing I've seen directly says small parents produce small offspring, but we can assume that's generally true based on human & animal husbandry. 

 

Altogether, as we have a single strain of Kings, I'm wondering about the feed and disease treatment chemicals at the hatchery.  Not sure when disease treatment started. Are disease resistant fish smaller?  I know there was a feed change years ago and the DEC staff had to scramble to correct it.  Could something be added to the feed?  (Fish doctors won't like that.)

[schreckstoff]

Schreckstoff is a chemical alarm response that minnows release when being predated to warn others.  Fish nerd joke trying to be clever.

 

 

[ifishy]

58 minutes ago, schreckstoff said:

Schreckstoff is a chemical alarm response that minnows release when being predated to warn others.  Fish nerd joke trying to be clever.

 

 

Thats awesome I will likely now know that word forever.   I now want screckstoff scent to put on my lures to signal predators of a feeding opportunity 

[Big fat pike]

Just a thought if they had the place that makes pellets add the remains of gobies and put them in pellets the hatchery feeds them  maybe they would eat the gobies along with the alewives and might do better

[Gill-T]

Gobies can carry botulism.