Printable View
So just two years after they poisoned this lake to get rid of the chub and reestablish the trout fishery they find golden shiner bait fish.
See article:
http://www.kpic.com/news/local/26141784.html
I don't understand why people think they still need to use live bait? Fishing tackle and techniques are advanced enough, we can do without. I think they need to make a $10,000 mandatory fine, and 30 days in jail for use of live bait.
Can you post a link of WHY these baitfish are so bad?
Invasive species are bad, but lets be honest, WE are invasive species. If the water gets used, something that isn't "native" will end up in it. The shinners were probably released by a guy that thought it is rediculous to kill an ENTIRE LAKE as a result of a baitfish. How many year classes of amphibians were killed by this masive release of poison? How many birds needed to relocate for lack of food, how many dollars were lost from tourism? I don't care why and how many facts you have, if you try and play mother nature, you will loose. Hopefully this will teach some people to learn to live with the problems we create because we just can not wipe the slate clean.
It's the Tui Chubs that were the issue....totally ruined a great fishery. The lake was rehabilitated about 20 years ago ...which was a great success story till folks reintroduced the chubs...and ruined the fishing/tourism
Even the environmentalists agreed with this 2nd poisoning.
The DoF&W even took measures to be sure the eagles had their food chain.
Anyway it's a long story and the effort was done after considerable study/concern and detail.
Diamond Lake used to be considered one of the best fisheries in the West.
Here is an old Link prior to poisoning Diamond Lake; http://www.umpqua-watersheds.org/unf/dl-poison.htmlQuote:
Originally Posted by Flyrodde
In my opinion, it is an economic issue about losing the 100,000 anglers who used to fish Diamond Lake every year. Diamond Lake is primarily a bait lake, but maybe restricting it to flies & lures only would be an idea, but no, that wouldn't bring 100,000 anglers to the lake every year.
Doug
Flyrodde: i believe Doug's post pretty well responds to your question. One more thing. Next time you catch a rainbow trout or a nice brown trout in upstate New York thank mans meddling for it as they were not native to your neck of the woods.
Tim
I do know that most of the trout I catch have been introduced. But it is a slightly different situation. I do wish that all the Brook trout and Atlantic salmon still swam my native rivers, but they do not. Some of the rivers were damned, some poisoned by industry. What survives is a mere illusion of what was.
This was a man made fishery that when stocks seemed to dwindle, the whole lake was poisoned to start anew. Then again as a baitfish, for whatever reasons, made catching of predatory "sport" fish more difficult, the powers at be tried to wipe the slate clean. At what cost were both "cleansings." How many species struggled to adapt to a purposeful drought and chemical concoction? No one knows these answers, and if they say it was safe and thought out, they are lying.
This is a money loving country, and every decision is ultimately decided by the final dollar. It is a shame this happened and it is a shame when it happens again. We are not learning from our mistakes, but taking an insane approach to how we manage our waste, our energy, our government, and our lives.
Quote; This was a man made fishery that when stocks seemed to dwindle, the whole lake was poisoned to start anew. Then again as a baitfish, for whatever reasons, made catching of predatory "sport" fish more difficult, the powers at be tried to wipe the slate clean. At what cost were both "cleansings." How many species struggled to adapt to a purposeful drought and chemical concoction? No one knows these answers, and if they say it was safe and thought out, they are lying."
1. Is there any fresh water fishery that isn't man made?
2. The Trout did not breed, but the Chub had a wonderful time breeding! The Rainbow Trout were not predators. Even if Diamond Lake was stocked with large Brown Trout, they could not have made a dent in the Chub population.
3. "At what cost were both cleansings?" Diamond Lake was the most popular destination for Trout anglers (100,000) every year. Because some anglers chose to use live bait, Diamond was effectively put out of the angling business for about 4 years. No one staying in the camp grounds and no one staying at the Resort, and no one fishing, for 4 years. Diamond Lake has a lot of insect life that Trout get fat on, but the Chub ate all the food.
4. How many species? Chub were the dominate species. Rainbow Trout are and were the only Trout stocked in Diamond Lake. How many species were affected by the treating? Chub. The chemical used in the treatment, is spread in shallow water where the Chub lived. It temporarily removes the oxygen from the water.
5. The reason it took years to treat Diamond Lake, was the arguing that went on about the possible threat to the North Umpqua River, that is connected to a small outlet stream from Diamond Lake.
There are plenty of Lakes in Oregon that are not famous for growing big trout and they don't require much of any managing, because anglers flock to lakes like Diamond and that's where the trouble starts.
It's all about $$$$$$
My opinion.
Doug
Many fresh water fisheries are not man made, but I can say that all fisheries fresh or salt and man affected, most in a negative way. While I respect your opinion, amphibians, insects, reptiles and marsh flora where all expected to be killed by the draining and poisoning, so CHUB were not the only species affected. Also, rainbow trout, while not as predacious as brown trout, will and do eat fish.
It was all about money, rainbow trout brought money in. But so would other sport fish. A diverse fishery would have been much better off and easier to maintain. A little research and flexibility would have been much less detrimental to the surrounding environment. They were looking for a quick fix, and it backfired. Hopefully we can FINALLY learn from this mistake before we make more of them.
Moot argument. Flyrodde might be right, it is driven by money. Doesn't really matter what the driving factors are, the lake will be rehabilitated again. Whether draining and rotenone are the correct methods can be argued 'til the cows come home. Two things are for sure the rehabilitation and the fact that introducing an invasive species is illegal. If you don't like the rehab then something needs to be done about the illegal introductions. Either change the law or as I say, if caught, prosecute to the fullest, but that is unlikely in today's society.
Can you name a fresh water fishery that isn't man made?Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyrodde
Let's say that you have a lake with 12-15 inch Rainbow Trout, living with Chub that are 6-10 inches long, there is no way that any of those Rainbow trout are going to start behaving like Largemouth Bass. Then the Chub start breeding & breeding & breeding.
A diverse fishery would have been easier to maintain? Yes that is true! It would be easier to maintain because 100,000 anglers wouldn't bother to go there.
Why was treating Diamond Lake detrimental to the surrounding environment? There was no poison used!
This is what they have learned from treating Diamond Lake; The anglers came back, the Rainbow Trout are growing and things are getting back to normal. According to the history of Diamond Lake, the treatment will have to applied again, or they could just leave Diamond Lake to the Chubs and give up on it.
The perfect solution for fly anglers, would be to restrict Diamond lake to flies only, but that would not be profitable.
Doug
Doug,
Because a fresh water fishery is supplimented by man, does not mean he created the fishery.
If you drain a lake half way and kill all the fish, aquatic insects, amphibians and reptiles how is that not detrimental to the environment? Draining marsh and wet lands, destroying them for years to come? How is this NOT detrimental? They probably created more land suitable to build on. This isn't a plan to help the fishery; this is a plan to make as much money as possible.
I'm not looking for a perfect solution for fly anglers. But there is a solution out there that does not use chemicals and provides a fishery for recreation as well as provides water quality for boating swimming and enjoying the outdoors.
There is didymo, zebra muscles, snakehead, and lamprey in many fisheries, shall we poison those too? There are lake trout in Yellowstone, Atlantic salmon in the Pacific and Pacific salmon in the great lakes. Why not just keep all the species we want on file, poison everything and restock only what WE want. Nature isn't about trying to keep around what has a financial value; it is survival of the fittest. But since it?s all about the numbers, why not just stock the lake with 5lb trout and charge people to fish it. Just poison it every year and stock it in the spring, fish it out and start the cycle again. I guess some people like fishing a sterile environment with no natural wonder and surprise. Just give me my easy to catch fish and draw the largest crowds you can.
Glad to see some discussion! There has definitely been some points brought up that I hadn't considered. I myself am no expert in this area, and do not try to be. I posted the article in a knee-jerk reaction. I guess my initial anger was that here all this time, money, effort was spent to treat the lake to re-establish the trout fishery, and now they find more bait fish, to start the cycle all over again.
I did find this website about the rotenone treatment of diamond lake. It has a very good FAQ section.
http://www.dfw.state.or.us/fish/diamond_lake/FAQs.asp
I was pleased to see that it is not as harmful to most other species as you would think. It looks like other than fish, zooplankton are most sensitive to it compared to other life. Mammals and birds are not affected apparently. I do take this info with a grain of salt, and hope that the poisoning is only used seldom as a last resort.
As far as having a diverse habitat with multiple species of so called native trout and bait fish, I just don't think it is going to happen. The trout (at least in Oregon's alpine lakes) will lose out every time. Davis Lake in Oregon is another example. It used to be an excellent trout fishery, but someone put some largemouth bass in there, and that is pretty much all that is in the lake now. Fortunately for Davis lake, people like to fish for largemouth more than they like to fish for Chub or Shiners.
As far as the natural wonder and suprise goes... catching a bait fish that was put in the lake by man, would not make me think of "natural wonder". Survival of the fittest? If we want to stick with that theory and not let species have a chance, we might as well kill all living things other than humans...are we not the fittest?
And of course, economics is the bottom line. I whole-heatedly agree with that. How much money will be lost the next time the lake will be treated?
I just wish I knew what was going through the mind of the person that was putting the live bait on their hook. I myself have used live bait often...worms. Trout love em, but they don't destroy the fishery.
Just thoughts...
~ Kurt
Lets see if I have this right. Is it true that we are talking about a man made problem in a man made fishery, stocked with trout by man that man raised in a hatchery, being threatened by species introduced to the man made fishery by man that was probably not breaking any laws or regulations regarding the man made fishery?
Well, I see that the lake is a natural lake. So the lake wasn't man made and at the very least it is not in a natural state due to stockings. Still dealing with a man made problem, right?
Nighthawk: You said: was probably not breaking any laws or regulations regarding the man made fishery?
It is a violation of Oregon law to fish with live fish as bait or to introduce live fish into a body of water without ODFW approval.
Tim
Pennsylvania also limits what type of live bait and there are some waters where live bait of any sort is verboten. Use of species of carp, like gold fish, is not allowed here as well.
I do not like the use of the "nuclear" option (kill everything) to "restore" a fishery to a level that man wants it to be at. The problem maybe out of hand but there are better ways to deal with the problem. Your fish and wildlife folks should have tried introducing a large hybrid predatory fish into the fishery first. Hybrids like the Tiger Muskie are sterile. They will, through a voracious appetite and predation, keep the bait fish and all fish populations under control without overpopulating the lake. When you think they have done their job just let them die off or fish them out.
Of course this would take time and will up set the purist that doesn't have an open mind. It also will not satisfy the instant gratification crowd and it may cost some revenue as well. Might work there and might not but should have been tried.
I hate to say this but it almost sounds like folks out there have the mindset that trout/salmon are the only species that count and all others are garbage fish. Please tell me I am wrong there.
Take a look at this for population control:
51 inches, 41 pounds
http://i65.photobucket.com/albums/h2...y/IMGP0403.jpg
http://i65.photobucket.com/albums/h2...y/IMGP0404.jpg
The lake this monster was in has quite a few of these ranging from this size down to fingerling, lots of big large mouth bass, tons of perch and other pan fish, stocked and hold over rainbow trout too. It is only 88 acres in size. It is spring and creek fed. Oh yea, you are allowed to fish it with live minnows like fatheads and shiners. The lake bed is limestone shale so the water is very low in acid. There is a tremendous diversity of aquatic life in this very small man made lake. Well I guess I am comparing apples to oranges here so I will cease and desist.
In Washington State WDFW has used rotonone to kill off lakes for rehab, grass carp to control invasive weeds, muskies to control invasive fish populations and various manual methods. I think the dept. tries to use the weapon that best fits the job at hand. To jump to the conclusion that folks here in the west only care about trout/salmon is a gross generalization. Although those are a native species here and we do what we can to protect them. After work tonight I will be tossing poppers for bucket mouths at a lake close to home. By the way the lake of which I speak is managed as both a trout fishery and a bass fishery. Some lakes are managed as a trout fishery and some managed for warm water species and some are managed for both. The problems happen when someone decides that he or she know best what fish should be put in lakes and illegally dumps a bucket full of fish into a lake it is not managed for. Or someone decides that the laws do apply to them and decides that he or she can use live bait where it is prohibited. To pass judgement on a fisheries dept. because they try to manage a lake for the benenfit of the anglers that enjoy that lake is narrow minded to say the least. I remember fishing Diamond Lake over 40 years ago it was a trout lake back then and for years prior to that. Now I guess because some idiot decided to illegally fish with live bait we should dump half a decade of traditional fisheries and let the shiners have it. Right. Why not place the blame on the idiot that broke the law instead of the managers or the people that live in the west? From what I am reading on this topic I am glad I live out here and not where the people are so judgemental.
Quote; I hate to say this but it almost sounds like folks out there have the mindset that trout/salmon are the only species that count and all others are garbage fish. Please tell me I am wrong there."
Eric,
I have never known anyone who thought that warm water species were garbage fish, excluding carp and suckers. Oregon has some great smallmouth bass, walleye, channel cat, crappie and sturgeon angling. I would say that those fish species I mentioned are much easier to manage, because they are stronger fish and there are less anglers fishing for them. Trout, steelhead and salmon fishing has been very popular for years, but I don't think it is a prejudice, but a preference. Also kokanee salmon that are stocked in Oregon lakes are easy to manage, because they spawn and die after a few years and the F&W takes the eggs and starts the cycle over again.
Doug
Talk about judgmental. Judging the entire east off of me or a few others on this board. All I am doing is saying something about what I read on this board. I asked to be corrected if I was wrong but not to be berated like that. I am trying to be fair here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kerry Stratton
You should read my post again. I did not, in any way, shape or form, excuse anyone, bait fisher or fly fisher, from committing an illegal act. They should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Hey, I am just making an observation, trying to find out the mindset about this, learn about the laws and perhaps suggest an alternative to killing every fish in the fishery.
If that's being judgmental then so be it. You will get over it or you won't.
Thank you, Doug. That's what I was hoping to find out. Some of both warm and cold water fishes are treated that way here and it disgusts me. No matter what state or people it comes from.Quote:
Originally Posted by DShock
Eric,
I am sure that people that love to catch smallmouth bass, would love the Snake River Reservoirs (eastern border) and the Columbia River (north) and the S. Umpqua River. When I fished Hells Canyon Res., I caught a lot of smallies and the country is beautiful!
Paul might agree that there are a lot of OR coast lakes that receive little pressure, that have warm water species and trout and sometimes brood stock steelhead.
Don't worry Paul! I won't reveal them!
Doug
I really am glad that my perception of the attitudes is wrong. I just wish more people everywhere would at least make the effort to broaden their horizons for their own sakes. I am glad I was raised to fish for fish and not just one type of fish. I'd be bored out of my skull if I only fished for one type of fish.
Gosh, it's such an awful thing to have to kill every fish in a fishery just because of some dope and for the sake of one type of fish. Perhaps it hasn't been invented yet but there has to be a better way to do control invasive nuisances species than the nuclear option.
Eric,
Diamond Lake is unique. Anglers have flocked there for many years to catch fat rainbow trout. There is a lot of food for the trout and they grow fast. The normal method of fishing is to anchor your boat and still fish bait. There are many Lakes and Reservoirs in OR that get very little pressure compared to Diamond Lake.
Diamond Lake can also be navigated in the winter, on cross country skis. It is also a long hike around the lake.
Here is the Diamond Lake Link;http://www.diamondlake.net/ Check out the Fishing Reports!
Doug
Sorry if my post came across as judgemental but acutally that was what I intended. It appeared to me that the departments responsible were being unfairly judged also. My effort was worth it. Whethr or not you or I get over it is not relevant.
I'm really glad we have so many experts on this site:p
Experts at what? :lol: Aahh, never mind, this is a family site.:shock:Quote:
Originally Posted by ducksterman
Doug,
I checked out the fishery on line and it looked pretty healthy to me but then I am no "expert".:wink:
Oh my, Gee-Whiz, so now I am "arrogant". Well that sure beats being a Coward like the person that uses the reputation button to call people names instead of having the guts to do it on the board or via a PM. Gee I am just crushed. Yeah, right.
I would rather be arrogant than a coward any day. Thanks for the kind rating.
Eric -Quote:
Originally Posted by nighthawk
Tell me if the following language is NOT arrogant - "Hey, I am just making an observation, trying to find out the mindset about this, learn about the laws and perhaps suggest an alternative to killing every fish in the fishery."
Tell us about the fisheries experience, the formal education, the degrees you hold in biology, and the other sciences represented by higher degrees held by the people who work in the fisheries section of the typical fish and wildlife departments around the country, and convince us you are qualified to "perhaps suggest an alternative to killing every fish in the fishery."
Tell us about how carefully you read the Utah decision about access to public waters running through private property so you could intelligently participate in and contribute to that discussion, and convince us you are really interested in "learn(ing) about the laws" that might apply to the Diamond Lake situation. You admitted to not even reading the Utah decision and departed hastily from that discussion.
Talk about guts - you didn't have the courtesy, let alone guts to respond to a very polite, friendly PM I sent you after you made what struck me as a personal attack on me, at the very time you were furthering the attack as you left the discussion of the Utah case. My PM to you and your last post on that thread literally "crossed in the mail."
I am the one who disagreed with your comments about Diamond Lake and commented that you were being arrogant. I thought it was preferable to use a mechanism provided by the administrators of this BB to send that message to you than to get into another public discussion which wouldn't further the thread involved or be of interest to others on the board.
You might recall that I told you in the PM, assuming you read it, which may not be the case, that you couldn't back me down with strong words and pressure. Try again, if you think it is appropriate to do so in this public forum, or otherwise, if you can think of a way to do so.
So, if you think I am a coward and I don't have the guts to be open and public about my response to your arrogance, that is your right and I wish you well holding those thoughts and feelings close as you ignore the things I try to contribute to the good folks and friends I've made here over the past seven or eight months.
I hope you have a better day, knowing that the person who called your arrogance what it is had the courage to step up and address your current rant as politely and positively as the circumstances allow. In the future, if you would like, I will make any comments I have about what you post public, if I think that will further the discussion underway, or if you make any more personal attacks on me.
I ended the PM I sent you by saying that I still expected to treat you as a friend, unless you proved mean or untrustworthy. I don't consider your comments above either mean or untrustworthy, just misguided. So I still expect to treat you in a friendly manner.
John
To all other member of the BB and the administrators - I didn't and wouldn't start something like this - but I won't back down from it if someone else does. I APOLOGIZE to anyone who is offended by any of my comments above.
http://www.nrtoday.com/article/20080...profile=searchQuote:
Originally Posted by Flyrodde
To get back to the less emotional stuff.....
As Backcastwards' [interesting handle] points out...
"Golden shiners were in Diamond Lake for years prior to the rotenone treatment and traditionally occupy it in low numbers, according to Fish and Wildlife.
However, multiple agencies are working to keep all non-native fish out of Diamond Lake."
They..and those of that care are afraid that...the fact that some will fish with live shiners probably means others will introduce the chub..the chub is the culprit.
Flyrodde...I'm not sure I can agree with...."WE are invasive species"....are you saying we have no place on this earth?????????????Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyrodde
We are probably the top predators...but invasive...I don't believe so.
Howdy boys........
I'm a metalsmith by trade, and a fisherman. Not a game biologist, maybe something of an envronmentalist, but mostly because I'm interested. I've been following this thread closely, as well as others in the past on this subject. I've seen firsthand some before and after scenarios. The McCloud river and Hat Creek in N. CA, and Diamond Lake in OR.
Here's a link to an informative paper regarding Rotenone use. It is a bit long, but well worth any and all of you reading. Once men get into the picture and start managing a fishery, anywhere, anytime, the natural condition is gone, long gone. It appears that it then is necessary to ever on "manage" the fishery. There will always be at least two opinions on it, and as many of you have observed and stated, usually, it is essentially a financial issue when you boil it down. Check out this link anyway, it's interesting and informative.........................ModocDan :)
http://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/...otenonebro.pdf
Dan -
Excellent article. Thanks for posting the link.
John
Here is a link with info about Diamond Lake insects;http://www.dfw.state.or.us/fish/diam...ertebrates.asp
Doug
Here is an update on electro shocking for Golden Shiners, in Diamond Lake;ODFW-Diamond Lake Electro Shocking
From: ODFW News
Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2008 2:14 PM
To: ODFW All Staff
Subject: ODFW electro-fishes Diamond Lake
Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife
Contacts at (541) 440-3353:
Laura Jackson
Holly Truemper
Internet: www.dfw.state.or.us Fax: (541) 673-0372
For Immediate Release Thursday, August 7, 2008
ODFW electro-fishes Diamond Lake
More bait fish are found
ROSEBURG, Ore. ? ODFW biologists from around Southern Oregon are converging on Diamond Lake to electro-fish for golden shiners, a bait fish recently found in the lake during routine trap netting.
?The electro-fishing crews have found 204 golden shiners so far this week, most of them concentrated in one spot, and many of them ripe for spawning,? said District Fish Biologist Laura Jackson. ?Crews are e-fishing nightly from three boats for two weeks so we can cover the entire perimeter of Diamond Lake and more quickly get a handle on the shiners.?
Jackson said crews are targeting the northwest corner of the lake where most of the shiners have been found. The total number of shiners found in the lake since July 17 is 224.
?After such a successful rotenone treatment in 2006 to rid Diamond Lake of tui chub, we are really disappointed to find another invasive fish in the lake. We hope to knock back or at least control the shiners with the combination of predacious rainbow trout stocked last year and this summer, and e-fishing as much as possible right now to disrupt their spawning season,? Jackson said.
After next week?s electro-fishing, ODFW will evaluate its efforts and future actions.
Golden shiners are native to the East Coast and have the potential to spawn in Diamond Lake, although they are not as prolific as tui chub and require warmer water to successfully reproduce.
ODFW documented that golden shiners were illegally released into the lake in 1977. However, they did not affect the lake like the tui chub that were discovered in 1992 and quickly reached a population of 98 million prior to the 2006 rotenone treatment. During mechanical removal before the treatment, golden shiners composed less than 10% of the fish netted.
Golden shiners are a popular bait fish although it is illegal to use them in Oregon?s fresh waters. Anyone witnessing an angler using live bait fish should get as much information as possible, including a description of the person, boat, vehicle, boat number and license plate and call Oregon State Police at 541-440-3334.
The mission of the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife is to protect and enhance Oregon's fish and wildlife and their habitats for use and enjoyment by present and future generations. The agency consists of the Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission, a commission-appointed director and a statewide staff of approximately 950 permanent employees. Headquartered in Salem, ODFW has regional offices in Clackamas, Roseburg, Bend, and La Grande with ten district offices located throughout the state. For additional information, please visit www.dfw.state.or.us.
Karl, End Quote.