Walleye in fingerlakes

[FishingTheFL]

I don't know if they are still doing it... People will argue that Seneca is NOT sick, but the majority agree... Something's wrong...

When we had that mass flooding in Penn Yan 2 or 3 years ago... That's when there seemed to be a noticeable decline... Pike were covered in red slime and now seem to be gone... We pulled 20 + pike over 30" 2.5 years ago... Couldn't mange one Sunday.. Baby rainbow followed my Rapala and caught a sawbellie.

Sent from my VS425PP using Tapatalk

[Bassin Bob]

The initial reason I asked about walleye in Skaneateles is that they simply destroy rainbow populations. They occupy the same strata and follow up rainbow spring soawning. Years ago the state stocked them in owasco. The outcome was not good for the rainbows. Walleye stocking was halted and the trout population rainbow are making a comeback. I suggest you research walleye stocking in trout lakes and you will if more than 50 trout lake were impacted in a very detrimental way. Be careful what you wish for. Just info. Not trying to ensite trouble. The walleye in Skaneateles were definitely stock by someone with little information on the damage that can be done. I refer to previous posts.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Lake Ontario United mobile app

[justtracytrolling]

Owasco is still loaded with walleye and they had nothing to do with the rainbow problem.  Anyone who doesn't see that the walleye weren't to blame  doesn't realize how many  are still in there!!! Besides in this area and rainbows are the introduced species.  I'm all for trout, but they coexist with walleye.

[BSmaster]

 I'm all for trout, but they coexist with walleye.   X2

[Sk8man]

I think a basic consideration is the type of habitat a particular lake might provide walleyes  as a viable place to feed, seek shelter, and spawn. The larger deeper Finger lakes such as Seneca, Cayuga, and Canandaigua seem to be far from ideal conditions in this regard in terms of water temperature profiles and relative absence of  supportive bottom structure and shallows. They and perch are by far the best freshwater fish to eat.

Edited June 14, 2017 by Sk8man

[FishingTheFL]

Cayuga most likely has Walleye in it. I've caught them in Seneca river. Nothing big or ever in numbers but we have caught them bull head fishing

Sent from my VS425PP using Tapatalk

[DJ 17]

I would love to see a walleye stocking program in the central fingerlakes.

[bulletbob]

On 6/14/2017 at 7:54 AM, Sk8man said:

I think a basic consideration is the type of habitat a particular lake might provide walleyes  as a viable place to feed, seek shelter, and spawn. The larger deeper Finger lakes such as Seneca, Cayuga, and Canandaigua seem to be far from ideal conditions in this regard in terms of water temperature profiles and relative absence of  supportive bottom structure and shallows. They and perch are by far the best freshwater fish to eat.

 With all due respect I disagree.. The waters of Cayuga has some walleyes, and they are massive.. I have seen them come out of Fall Creek during the month of April trout fishing. They are caught every year by guys fishing for rainbows, right by the black iron bridge.. Massive , all 10 lbs +....They would provide good fishing in Cayuga .. They  would spawn in the feeder streams,or shallow rocky areas in the lake, and exactly like the salmonids , and the SMB do, they would simply alter their natural penchant for bottom structure ,and would key on the Sawbellies... Actually with the goby population boom, they would have a spectacular alternative food source besides the sawbellies...

We'll never see it however..

the DEC doesn't want them there, just like they  don't want Pike in cayuga in any numbers,, We used to watch them capture Pike in some sort of stationary nets at the South end of cayuga  in spring, and kill them.. Not every year, and not in several years, but I am an eyewitness to it happening. Personally, I think the fingers that contain good sawbelly populations  could have spectacular Walleye fishing, but the DEC is geared for trout, and thats what we'll have to be content with..  bob

[Sk8man]

I don't disagree with what you are saying really....It is one thing to have a few big walleye getting along in Cayuga or if they were in Seneca but to maintain a sustained population of them with an already populated shallows is another matter and that is what I actually was referring to. I fish for walleyes as well as trout and salmon and have been doing so for a long long time. Maintaining a suitable predator to prey ratio that is sustainable is complicated with multispecies. Walleyes are predators so are pike and pickerel and Cayuga has always had a healthy population of both. Add in the landlocks, lakers and some browns and rainbows and you have a lot of chowing machines already. As far as the gobies I'm wondering about the health of the existing fish that are eating them as they are known to store toxins from the bottom and to have botulism as well . As tasty and desirable as walleyes are to eat we miight not want to be contaminating them as well as the other fish. I worry even about the perch. They both are my favorites to eat.

Edited June 16, 2017 by Sk8man

[bulletbob]

A  Walleye would   not eat any more than a similar sized laker would eat.. They would have to share the sawbellies with the salmonids.. You might have a few less lakers, but I doubt it would be a problem.. The Walleyes would suspend and key on the sawbellies, like everything else in the Finger lakes..

 Walleyes are big eaters, but I sincerely doubt they could out compete the Salmonids.. If anything, they would come out the losers... bob

Edited June 16, 2017 by bulletbob

[Chas0218]

8 hours ago, bulletbob said:

A  Walleye would   not eat any more than a similar sized laker would eat.. They would have to share the sawbellies with the salmonids.. You might have a few less lakers, but I doubt it would be a problem.. The Walleyes would suspend and key on the sawbellies, like everything else in the Finger lakes..

 Walleyes are big eaters, but I sincerely doubt they could out compete the Salmonids.. If anything, they would come out the losers... bob

I bet they would probably eat less than lakers.

[Sully]

On Owasco everyone blamed the walleye for the decline of the browns and rainbow. I guarantee the Lakers had more of an effect on the decline of the bows and browns than the walleye did. Not to mention all the other problems that Owasco has with water quality and stream access for the fish to spawn. Fact of the matter is that the Lakers are vacuums and eat everything. Guys are saying the same thing on Ontario too....too many Lakers have a dangerous effect on baitfish levels, thus affecting other fish.

Sent from my E6810 using Lake Ontario United mobile app

[jerktroller]

Yep I'm sure lake trout have an effect on baitfish. Just look at Keuka. But if you think walleye are going to coexist just look at Hemlock. The lake trout numbers weren't that high and the lake was loaded with bait. Local club stocked walleye and a few years later every lake trout I caught was in bad shape and browns and rainbows were almost nonexistent. That would not be so bad if there were lots of walleye to catch but that didn't happen. The walleye stocking led to a few anglers catching an occasional walleye. That was my point about Cayuta. I wasn't comparing it to the deeper Finger Lakes I was just saying that Cayuta was loaded with walleye a few years back but very few people caught any. That is what happens in lakes where walleye are eating alewife (Conesus). Walleye stocking in these places just seems like a waste of time and money. The big Finger Lakes are as clear as they have been in years. Clear water is not exactly ideal for walleye.

[Chas0218]

53 minutes ago, jerktroller said:

Yep I'm sure lake trout have an effect on baitfish. Just look at Keuka. But if you think walleye are going to coexist just look at Hemlock. The lake trout numbers weren't that high and the lake was loaded with bait. Local club stocked walleye and a few years later every lake trout I caught was in bad shape and browns and rainbows were almost nonexistent. That would not be so bad if there were lots of walleye to catch but that didn't happen. The walleye stocking led to a few anglers catching an occasional walleye. That was my point about Cayuta. I wasn't comparing it to the deeper Finger Lakes I was just saying that Cayuta was loaded with walleye a few years back but very few people caught any. That is what happens in lakes where walleye are eating alewife (Conesus). Walleye stocking in these places just seems like a waste of time and money. The big Finger Lakes are as clear as they have been in years. Clear water is not exactly ideal for walleye.

They don't seem to mind the St. Lawrence and Ontario's water clarity. Those are the 2 main waterways I fish and both are extremely clear in the effect you can see fish in 20 fow with a set of cheap polarized glasses. Either way Seneca would be a prime candidate to stock eyes if they were to choose one of the fingerlakes. They aren't like lakers that like that cold water and with the amount and size of inlets on Seneca I don't think there would be an issue with them coexisting together.

[blueghost1]

sort of off topic....how is the bass and pike fishing in Seneca lake??? It seems trout fishing the spring shallow used to be a pike and smallmouth nuisance off the boards . I don't think I have caught a pike or bass trolling out there in 2 years . Running pump house area shallow in clear water there were smallmouth all over scattering away from boat , now nothing . Are the populations that bad?? I know 3 or 4 years ago there was a post somewhere on here about the amount of dead pike floating after winter. Thoughts??

 

[shaneo19]

It would be my dream to have even a mediocre walleye fishery on Seneca Lake.  Certainly you don't want to deplete the existing species though especially at a time when they seem vulnerable.  As for the problems on Seneca right now with the lake trout, I don't think anyone knows for sure the issue.  My number one suspect is the lamprey.  Happened to see quite a few up the Keuka Outlet just last weekend. 

 

One thing we can rule out is the sawbelly/alewife population being the issue.  They are overpopulated if anything which is probably why there have been quite a few dead ones floating around.  They have been everywhere along the shoreline the past couple months particularly at night.  As of right now there are plenty to feed as many walleye as could be put in but who knows how long that will last.  Could probably even support a few kings :). 

 

One point to make on the Walleye possibilities in the Fingerlakes is that they are likely to be native while Browns and Rainbows certainly are not.  Before the locks systems I would suspect Walleyes were quite common in Cayuga and Seneca Lakes with the Seneca River connection to Oneida and Lake O.  Certainly not complaining about having the silver fish in the Fingerlakes though.

Edited June 18, 2017 by shaneo19

[Sk8man]

One of the important considerations is the extent and type of habitat now available to walleyes. My hunch is that the combination of invasives in the shallows now and the changes in type of weeds now present and distribution of them is affecting the pike and bass populations e.g zebras and shells covering traditional spawning beds, lack of zooplankton for young and minnows to feed on and this would be an obstacle for walleye populations as well. I too would love to be able to fish for them though...

Edited June 24, 2017 by Sk8man

[Lucky13]

On ‎6‎/‎13‎/‎2017 at 1:27 PM, justtracytrolling said:

Owasco is still loaded with walleye and they had nothing to do with the rainbow problem.  Anyone who doesn't see that the walleye weren't to blame  doesn't realize how many  are still in there!!! Besides in this area and rainbows are the introduced species.  I'm all for trout, but they coexist with walleye.

Here is what DEC reported in 2013.  My bold added.

http://www.dec.ny.gov/outdoor/90304.html

Skaneateles Lake

• There are no alewives or rainbow smelt in Skaneateles Lake. The main forage base is yellow perch (young of year).
• Other important prey species are emerald shiner, sculpin, freshwater shrimp and Ephemeroptera (mayflies).
• Ephemerptera create a unique fishery in early-summer, as they are abundant with most species of fish feeding on them.
• Lake trout fishery is maintained entirely by natural reproduction (no stocking).
• The 2012 Skaneateles Lake stocking was 5,000 Finger Lakes Strain Wild (FLW) and 15,000 Finger Lakes Hybrid (FLW X domestic) rainbow trout, and 9000 Atlantic salmon stocked.
• Cisco numbers appear to be down in Skaneateles Lake. During the 1989 Standard Gang Netting 152 cisco were captured, only eight in 2008, and zero in 2012.
• VHS (Viral Hemorrhagic Septicemia) was found in the lake in 2006 and may be a possible cause.
• 2012 angler diary cooperator legal fish/trip was 1.32 lake trout, 0.34 rainbow trout, 0.01 Atlantic salmon.
• Lengths of harvested salmonids by angler diary cooperators have increased in last few years, as have smallmouth bass lengths.

Owasco Lake

• The 2012 Owasco Lake stocking was 25,000 rainbow trout, 10,000 brown trout and 10,500 lake trout.
• Lake trout stocking has seen long term reductions.
• The significant walleye stockings occurred from 1996 to 2006. The Owasco Lake Anglers Association stocked from 1996-2001 and DEC from 2002-2006.
• Angler diary cooperator trips dropped below 250 in 2008 and has remained low since.
• Good mix of lake trout, rainbow trout and brown trout (including some real trophies) throughout the 1990s.
• Lake trout angler catch rates increased through early 2000s despite the population declining since the mid to late 1990s.
• The sharp declines in the brown trout and rainbow trout fisheries in the early 2000s coincided with the emergence of walleye in the fishery.
• Walleye and lake trout are both long lived and prey on stocked trout (and themselves!) and the effects of stocking changes take time.
• We maintained viable fisheries for brown trout and rainbow trout during and following peak lake trout abundance.
• The timing of the emergence of walleye in the fishery make them prime suspects contributing to the disappearance of the fisheries for brown trout and rainbow trout.
• So far we have taken steps in an attempt to recover the fisheries for brown trout and rainbow trout.
  • The loss of these fisheries was not discussed as an acceptable consequence of the walleye program.
  • Have not stocked walleye since 2006.
  • Reduced lake trout stocking over the long term.
  • Continued stocking brown trout and rainbow trout.
• We need to determine if this is the desirable direction (preferred by most) to take the fishery. Some anglers prefer walleye over trout, while other anglers prefer trout over walleye. We will not continue to manage the lake for both.
• We are doing a survey in 2013 to assess angler desires.

 

"Bucket Biologists" stocking their idea of a desirable fish into lakes where they are not found have ruined a huge number of fisheries in New York State, and should be discouraged whenever encountered.

[justtracytrolling]

Believe what you want but the rainbows and browns recovered long before the long lived walleye left....and there is still a ton of walleye.  As far as the info provided by the DEC they are only guessing at best.  The lake could be managed for both trout and walleye, but as anglers we just don't seem to get along...sad really!!!!

 

As far as the bucket biologist comment goes I hope you were talking about the browns and bows as they are the introduced species not walleye or lake trout just so we are clear.

[justtracytrolling]

No walleye stocked in 11 yrs and yet they continue to reproduce are targeted successfully...oh and they are fat and healthy.  If we stopped trout stocking for 10 years you wouldn't find a rainbow!!!!

[quality time]

We should be only stocking native fish. The lake trout do well in the fingers because of deep cold water. If you want walleyes you should scrap the Pacific Salmon program in Lake Ontario and stock Landlocks, Walleye, Whitefish and Lake Trout. These are the fish that filled the lakes before early settlers screwed it all up. Certain fish do well in certain lakes for a reason. The lake Trout have provided a fantastic fishery in the Finger Lakes for many years. Everybody wants Rainbows or walleye. Rainbows need clean silt free streams to spawn and Walleyes need 40' deep water. The bigger finger lakes do not have this. Instead of wasting our money on stocking fish will not do well just leave the Lake Trout alone. If you want Walleyes go to Erie or Oneida.

[Bassin Bob]

I have to agree. Walleye will and have destroyed many trout waters. Walleye and Lakers only share the same water for a few months. Lakers spawn fall, walleye spring . Rainbow landlocked browns share the same water 24/7 and walleye cream the trout young. Baby trout are stupid.
Yes walleye will live and fill a void in the fingerless at what cost?
Put walleye in Ontario. Oneida etc. They stopped the stocking in Owasco as it was extremely detrimental to the rainbows. Ask the DEC. Randomly assuming certain fish should be in water you like doesn't mean they should be stocked. I love walleye. I'll travel to various lakes to fish them. But I go to the finger lakes for trout. Why? Because we here in central NY have quality trout fishing. QUALITY. Leave the warm water fish where they belong. Just my thoughts from talking to the DEC and biologists.
Love this site, so much info.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Lake Ontario United mobile app

[Bigfoot]

Time for a reality check. Walleyes are expensive to raise for stocking. Like double the cost of trout. NYS struggles to produce enough walleye for the waters it wants to stock, so some waters are only stocked every other year instead of annually. I don't see walleye stocking expanding to the central Finger Lakes at the expense of fisheries more suited to walleye.

 

We think of sawbellies as baitfish, and they are. We don't tend to think of them as predators, but we should. They vacuum up newly hatched fry of both lake trout and walleye in huge numbers. I have one source (Saunders) that blames the destruction of the native walleye population in Owasco on the introduction  the sawbelly (Alewife). Some think that the current problem on Seneca s related to the abundant sawbelly population. DEC had cut laker stocking due to the number of wild lakers present, however that natural recruitment doesn't appear to be happening. Sawbellies will eat lake trout fry during the first two months of life. Given Seneca's huge Alewife population, it's a wonder any wild lakers survive. Less stocking and less reproduction, (plus a large, hungry lamprey population) equals lousy fishing.

 

I have read that walleyes can live for 20 years. No wonder that they are still present in Owasco. Give the sawbellies time, history will repeat itself, and the walleye will be nothing but a memory.

[mako20]

Time for a reality check. Walleyes are expensive to raise for stocking. Like double the cost of trout. NYS struggles to produce enough walleye for the waters it wants to stock, so some waters are only stocked every other year instead of annually. I don't see walleye stocking expanding to the central Finger Lakes at the expense of fisheries more suited to walleye.
 
We think of sawbellies as baitfish, and they are. We don't tend to think of them as predators, but we should. They vacuum up newly hatched fry of both lake trout and walleye in huge numbers. I have one source (Saunders) that blames the destruction of the native walleye population in Owasco on the introduction  the sawbelly (Alewife). Some think that the current problem on Seneca s related to the abundant sawbelly population. DEC had cut laker stocking due to the number of wild lakers present, however that natural recruitment doesn't appear to be happening. Sawbellies will eat lake trout fry during the first two months of life. Given Seneca's huge Alewife population, it's a wonder any wild lakers survive. Less stocking and less reproduction, (plus a large, hungry lamprey population) equals lousy fishing.
 
I have read that walleyes can live for 20 years. No wonder that they are still present in Owasco. Give the sawbellies time, history will repeat itself, and the walleye will be nothing but a memory.

Hey guys.
I have caught 2 walleyes in skn in the last month. I remembered this thread and wanted to post this pic from 10-13-18.




Sent from my iPhone using Lake Ontario United mobile app

[GAMBLER]

On ‎6‎/‎24‎/‎2017 at 6:07 PM, quality time said:

We should be only stocking native fish. The lake trout do well in the fingers because of deep cold water. If you want walleyes you should scrap the Pacific Salmon program in Lake Ontario and stock Landlocks, Walleye, Whitefish and Lake Trout. These are the fish that filled the lakes before early settlers screwed it all up. Certain fish do well in certain lakes for a reason. The lake Trout have provided a fantastic fishery in the Finger Lakes for many years. Everybody wants Rainbows or walleye. Rainbows need clean silt free streams to spawn and Walleyes need 40' deep water. The bigger finger lakes do not have this. Instead of wasting our money on stocking fish will not do well just leave the Lake Trout alone. If you want Walleyes go to Erie or Oneida.

If you scraped the Pacific Salmon stocking on Lake Ontario, Lake trout and Landlocks would suffer too many alewives kill Landlocks and screw up natural reproduction of lake trout.  Without the kings keeping the alewife in check, the lakers would gorge on them due to availability, and it would make the already low natural reproduction lower.  Eating too many alewife is also bad for walleye natural reproduction.