Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

This does not bother me much. I enjoy Lakers, but I prefer the other species. Lakers live a long time and consume a lot bait in their lifetime. Nobody eats them. Other than the Niagara, there is not shore fishing for them. Plant more cohos, steelhead, browns and kings. We have more than enough bait year'round on the west end of the lake, but I have seen a lot of vapor screens on the east end. I don't want to see our Kings look like Michigans.

Posted

I'm wondering what effect the flood in Altmar had on the survival rate during spawn season last Fall. Huge fish swimming across the road and through the woods........... can't be good. any input? Steve.........

Posted

No.

This has nothing to do with LO Kings.

The numbers of Lakers in Seneca and Cayuga where just ridiculous.

They should have done this years ago.

Glen

Posted
The DEC ought to be stocking just fish that reproduce naturally in the lakes. Example: Lake Ontario - Atlantic Salmon and Walleyes and forget the rest.

:lol: thats a good one

Posted

"The DEC ought to be stocking just fish that reproduce naturally in the lakes. Example: Lake Ontario - Atlantic Salmon and Walleyes and forget the rest."

Yea great idea o wait didn't Atlantic Salmon disapear do to lack of good spawning ground??? o and walleyes don't they have reproduction problems because the alwieves eat all there eggs, the same alwieves that the fish we now stock keep in check?? :rofl:

Posted

Atlantics and walleye have spawning problems that hinder their ability to reproduce..Why would anyone not want restocking of these fish??? Great eating and both great fighting game fish... :no:

Posted

Glen,

I know this has nothing to do with Lake O kings. But, I would not put it past the state to cut salmon stocking to save $$$$ when they find out more info on Lake Ontario natural reproduction kings.

Posted

The Seneca cut back is due to the fact over 70% of the Lake trout are native. On Keuka Lake 100% are native with no stocking. And the numbers on Keuka are crazy. I don't think this one was a money issue, at least thats what I got from the guys at DEC.

Posted

The up side to the cutback on stocking a sustaining species in other lakes will more likely focus THAT unused expenditure to Lake O. The benefits of salmon stocking in Lake O are apparent in that they control populations of forage and return a great deal more revenue to the state. I would hope that more funding for continuation of pen rearing operations would come from other cutbacks. Those guys from the hatchery drive the trucks ...two of them, all the way from Altmar and spend many hours stocking the pens, as well as hundreds of pounds of feed to at least four or five ports along the south shore.

The salmon are short lived by nature, and are under extreme pressure in all the tribs by sportfishing... unlike the lake trout. In my opinion, I don't think there would be a cutback on salmon and trout for Lake O, but rather a better focus on a popular fishery that still needs human intervention on stocking.

Mark

[ Post made via Mobile Device ] mobile.png

Posted

Well put Mark. In addition, once Man built the seaway and let ALL the exotics in, all bets were off. I personally feel very strongly that the wild success of the Pacific Salmon fishery in the Great Lakes is "Divine intervention." We get a second chance to use the wonderful wonders of the world for recreation and food. The only way to control the exotic Alewives that inhale the hatch of native species like Perch, Walleye, and Lake trout is with good populations of Salmon. Kings and Cohos are the solution, never the problem.

Gambler is right though. This must be watched, as there are lots of things going on that defy Sportsmen and reasonable thought.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...