Ganaraska fishway

[torco]

With all due respect Chris, my opinion is that OFAH needs to shift its focus away from an emphasis on outright harvest and more toward an emphasis on creating sustainable fishing opportunities. The value of a quality fishing experience far exceeds the value of a bunch of dead trout (which my local Loblaws says is only about $3.99 a pound). People buy licenses, and tackle, and book space on charter boats, in order to enjoy a fishing experience. If the only thing that mattered was how much dead meat can be taken home at the end of the day, we would all be better off to just go to the supermarket and buy the fish we need - it would be a lot easier and far less expensive.

 

I spent $350 to catch a bunch of coho one afternoon last month off of Vancouver Island. Know how many fish I killed? Zero. Had a great time, and would do it again in a second.

 

When I want a salmon to eat, I'll buy a wild sockeye for $10 at the local market.

 

OFAH's continued insistence on defining the success of a fishing experience by the number of fillets in the cooler at the end of the day is archaic thinking that's simply out of place in today's world.

 

 

I could not have said it better, if it was all about food for the table it would be much more efficient to visit your local grocery store.

 

On another sub topic of this very interesting thread, I would open to piloting a no roe/live bait fishing zone on the rivers. I'd be curious to see if it diminishes some of idiots we see and the total lack of regard for ethical harvesting, alot of you good steelhead anglers don't use roe exclusively anyways. That said this would punish the responsible angler.

[Richard S.]

I could not have said it better, if it was all about food for the table it would be much more efficient to visit your local grocery store.

 

On another sub topic of this very interesting thread, I would open to piloting a no roe/live bait fishing zone on the rivers. I'd be curious to see if it diminishes some of idiots we see and the total lack of regard for ethical harvesting, alot of you good steelhead anglers don't use roe exclusively anyways. That said this would punish the responsible angler.

 

With the lack of enforcement now it wouldn't make a difference, you'd still have guys keeping females for roe and using roe. Lowering the limits is the key in both the lake and streams.

 

 

Rich.

[torco]

With the lack of enforcement now it wouldn't make a difference, you'd still have guys keeping females for roe and using roe. Lowering the limits is the key in both the lake and streams.

 

 

Rich.

 

Definitely agree on the limits. And that is another great point, no enough resources to enforce the current rules as is.

[esoxansteel]

When I view the numbers given over the fishway, and I see actual numbers of just over 6000 fish for 2011, and then a guestimate number by the MNR or the LOMU for the same year at over 9000, which is over 3000 fish, im sceptical at how they add another 1/3rd to the population, by pulling a number out of the hat, maybe its so they do not have to do sampling this year, because they see a rebound in the population because of their gueestimate, or they are given or trying to give anglers a false sence of security based on Corbetts that Steelhead numbers are increasing, which may or may not be true, but base the numbers on actual fish passing through, and not fabricated guestimates by the MNR or LOMU. When I volunteers at the ladder through the boom years from 84 to 91 there seemed to be a strong bond with the volunteers of the Ganaraska Sportsman Associan (GSA) who helped fund the counter, and the MNR with mentoring biologist like Dave Bell, and Arnie and im sorry his last name illudes me, and as a group we came in with realistic numbers to account for the fish who pass through the counter undetected, ie multiple fish passing through at the same time or smaller fish who might not count, but in no way would we guestimate a 1/3rd more fish made it through on a run of 6000, in 1989 when over 18,000 when through counted, that would be a guestimate by todays fisheries management people of over 9000, putting the run of 89 at over 27,000 fish which is way off, FYI their was likely another 10,000 plus fish in the lower river below the ladder that year, and the long gone but classic file factory hole hole held fish till early July, the factory although dilapitated is still there, and the high water marks are still on the river side of the building from the flood of 1980, to give you an idea of how high the water got.

[timmeh]

The loss of groundwater fed streams and spawning habitat is a bigger problem than any roe hunters or charters. No limit reduction or change in regs will make a difference without our coldwater streams. This is going to be the biggest threat to our trout populations in general in the near future.

 

If every angler who pounds the banks or takes a charter gave a single day a year to volunteer helping restore our coldwater streams it would be the best thing they could do to improve the fishery.

[Snidley]

Craig makes a great point, as always. Ontario anglers must face reality and learn to count as a good day, a fish retention less outing. Something clearly not practiced here. It goes without saying that many of the charter guys and even more so the derby guys, take way too many fish usually with some screed about the fish dying anyway or the needs or rights to turn a fishery into a contest, for profit(for a very elite few). With that said the idea that bait anglers are not the biggest problem defies simple mathematics. There must be at least 20k stream anglers in the GTA (there's probably more if casual early season trout opener anglers are counted). If they keep 2 hens per season, or 6 per season like some chap thinks is "reasonable" then you are knocking 20 to 60k HENS out of the breeding pool on top of natural attrition. You guys are targeting the breeding females of the fish you claim to love... for bait. It is unsustainable and everyone knows it. The other pap, usually served up by CRAA is that stream improvement is a panacea answer to fisheries improvement. Well they've been at it for 20+ years so where's the improvement fellas. Bottom line the route to improvement is through large scale stocking just like what is being successfully done about 40 miles due south across Lake O or Lake Erie. Tens of thousands of fish in every stream and who cares if the headwaters are warm. Under those circumstances even bait angling can be allowed without it ruining the fishing for the other anglers. Unfortunately both the thumb twiddling of the MNR toward salmonoids and the misdirection from CRAA/OFAH we won't get large scale stocking nor will we get any semblance of enforcement so we are left with anglers self policing. Given self policing as a policy directed at the general public all I can say is God help us, we are doomed.

[Richard S.]

The other pap, usually served up by CRAA is that stream improvement is a panacea answer to fisheries improvement. Well they've been at it for 20+ years so where's the improvement fellas. Bottom line the route to improvement is through large scale stocking just like what is being successfully done about 40 miles due south across Lake O or Lake Erie. Tens of thousands of fish in every stream and who cares if the headwaters are warm. Under those circumstances even bait angling can be allowed without it ruining the fishing for the other anglers. Unfortunately both the thumb twiddling of the MNR toward salmonoids and the misdirection from CRAA/OFAH we won't get large scale stocking nor will we get any semblance of enforcement so we are left with anglers self policing. Given self policing as a policy directed at the general public all I can say is God help us, we are doomed.

 

Here we go again, stream improvment is working river temps have dropped dramatically over the last dacade. In middle sections where it was baren of trees there are ones now 20 ft high if not highter, don't believe me just check out our web site under before and after projects, the same goes with return mumbers. They are way up as well, the 2011/12 season is the biggest we've seen in 20 years, and catch numbers will account for this. As for stocking yes it works if you want a band-aid solution to the problem and who cares about the headwaters? We do, what about the cold water fishery in the upper credit? Or should we say screw it and stock the crap outta our rivers? What a bunch of crap snidley, never anything positive always negative.

 

 

Rich.

[aniceguy]

I really tried to stay out of this discussion for a whole host of reasons. With about 20 hours a week working on fish related issues and lots lately around these rainbows I’ll drop a few things to this conversation

 

There are several dozen peer reviewed documents that discuss retention vs. reproduction out there so I I’ll try to not make this a 300 page topic just some bullet points

 

THE LAKE

The only factual thing that I agree with Mr Robinson is that the lake did reset its self. In the 80's the lake's nutrient load was much higher than today, those that remember can talk about Pea Soup and lack of clarity, what that allowed was a massive food web to form from algae to zooplankton to the fish we all catch. This allowed the MNR in its lack of knowledge to stock the lake to what it felt recreational anglers wanted in a put delay and take fishery, with minimal account for natural reproduction.

What we had was this massive fishery dependent on hatchery stock, anglers happy MNR happy and here we go.

Invasive creatures come and take clarity from a foot in some cases to 30 feet in some instances now. That reset the food web to a degree that massive stocking could and cannot be supported by Lake Ontario, as they will most certainly eat them elves out of house and home the lake’s food web would crash and what happened on Georgian bay with the Chinook crash would happen here, leaving lake Ontario a very empty piece of water.

While I don’t always agree with MNR managers caution made sense here, and we can all play a blame game but the truth is stocking decreased for fear we would see a collapsed fishery due to a toppling of the predator pray balance, my understanding is we have come close a few times.

What has happened from then to now is the MNR has changed how they believe this salmonid fishery should be, one that’s driven by natural reproduction via a sustainable fishery, landing on such MNR doctrine’s such as SPOF 2, Ontario’s biodiversity strategy, right down to local FMZ’s and watershed management plans. They attempt when possible to make decisions on a matrix that believe it or not isn’t driven by Angler’s and their wants and needs but rather provincial mandates such as Native rights and beyond, in fact recreational fishing I believe ranks third on their management hierarchy.

As new science comes available, and our province starts to see how our partners in most of these waters work Canada is generally last to react, health care pension’s schools all take the money; I think MNR is less than 1% of the entire provincials budget and shrinking daily and I suspect is about to get another big gutting in the next provincial budget.

NOW

What we have today is an MNR that is so under capacity they can’t buy shoe laces let alone fund multi thousand studies to determine what is sustainable. How our fishery reacts to climate change, angling pressure, environmental factors such as development affecting habitat and more. For the most part MNR has now become a permit review agency with little to no real ability to do on the ground assessment and or habitat work.

They are generally left with small snap shots of watersheds that as a rule had under designed studies, lack of funding, poor timing windows on studies, Massive data gaps modeling software that is decades old or not constructed properly to act as an assessment tool, I could go on forever on this but the end result is that there is not enough clear data to make proper assessment decisions in the MNR today, so MNR airs on the side of caution constantly.

Bottom line here is this, outside jurisdiction science has shown that the bullet number to achieve a sustainable fish population such as rainbows is around 30% retention, regardless if its harvest natural, mortality predation or anything in between.

Without a concrete study being undertaken by MNR (which we see they can’t afford) there is no real way to determine true harvest and the vast majority of things that come from MNR speculative at best.

What we do know with some certainty that at 5 fish in the river environment harvest was a massive concern and did not provide a sustainable fishery, MNR has admitted that. Creel surveys done by CRAA as part of our management of the Port Credit Boat launch during the GOSD we have been able to see harvest in the 90% range, very far from the 33% number.

Does a 2 fish retention create a sustainable fishery, I don’t think so personally but it’s a step in the right direction, we know from many of the literature that a 1 fish with a slot would most certainly lead to a sustainable fishery ( of note the US has a 1 fish with a slot on rainbows) . The other bottle neck here is that Ontario still continues with this archaic two system license, and with a 1 fish slot limit on rainbows, conservation licenses would be told a 0 retention applies, negating their right to harvest.

MNR understands in many cases there needs to be change; the lake has the best manager I have seen …well…ever, so I think it’s all going to the right direction.

So how do we as anglers help create sustainable fisheries when the MNR lacks the ability to do so, simply by letting them swim back that are how because every one sent back to swim is one more we can catch.

 

Harvesting from a put and delay system doesn’t justify anything as fish roam and live in the same body of water. CRAA had a fish we tagged it spawned and returned to an eastern tributary in a few weeks. Tagged fish that were transferred to spawn in the Credit and were caught off ollcott 2 weeks later. While rainbows are slightly less plastic then other trout species they still drift from watershed to watershed, and a fish caught in Burt Dam might have its origins in the head waters of the Wilmot as a two year repeat spawner and suddenly found the concrete wall at the Burt go figure.

OFAH

I think I could write a book here on the group, sadly many have said the points already. What is most amusing is their involvement in the Atlantic Salmon Restoration Program run by the MNR where they are a lead partner. CRAA has a current scientific proposal with the MNR to allow all native, naturalized and desired fish species above Norval to study a competitive interaction; simply put we feel it’s a prudent piece to the eco system of the Credit to see how multi species interact with one another while allowing native fish species caught below dams access to their historical water,it sits as a five year study at this point.

This would include full access to the Atlantic which is having dismal success primarily due to the lack of access to spawning habitat, yet they don’t support a that proposal would give the Atlantic exactly what it needs access to habitat, they’re not supporting such a proposal says they don’t wish even Native fish species to have access to historical water, in effect stop them at a dam and that’s it.

. If an Organization can’t support a program to allow a fish such as the Atlantic or other native fish species to naturally reproduce in the wild, the Atlantic salmon, the very same fish they have spent millions of dollars to re-introduce, then that begs the question what does OFAH really stand for…..?

 

 

 

As a conservationist I get very frustrated at the stop still in their tracks methodology of the MNR. We see something that makes sense and want to run with it, we find the science, find the money in many cases and are stopped dead in the tracks of progress even when we cite MNR’s own policy pieces a brick wall comes up, due to this lack of capacity, very frustrating and I ll put some money that in the not so distant future someone will litigate the province and MNR over this very same lack of capacity.

MNR has a responsibility to us all and with their lack of capacity these days we are lucky they even exist.

 

We also need to be very clear on banning bait or angling methods, fishing is a shrinking market and if we ban angling methods, tactics, or bait options we exclude potential new anglers further adding to the declining community.

Edited March 24, 2012 by aniceguy

[solopaddler]

With that said the idea that bait anglers are not the biggest problem defies simple mathematics. There must be at least 20k stream anglers in the GTA (there's probably more if casual early season trout opener anglers are counted). If they keep 2 hens per season, or 6 per season like some chap thinks is "reasonable" then you are knocking 20 to 60k HENS out of the breeding pool on top of natural attrition. You guys are targeting the breeding females of the fish you claim to love... for bait. It is unsustainable and everyone knows it. The other pap, usually served up by CRAA is that stream improvement is a panacea answer to fisheries improvement. Well they've been at it for 20+ years so where's the improvement fellas. Bottom line the route to improvement is through large scale stocking just like what is being successfully done about 40 miles due south across Lake O or Lake Erie. Tens of thousands of fish in every stream and who cares if the headwaters are warm. Under those circumstances even bait angling can be allowed without it ruining the fishing for the other anglers. Unfortunately both the thumb twiddling of the MNR toward salmonoids and the misdirection from CRAA/OFAH we won't get large scale stocking nor will we get any semblance of enforcement so we are left with anglers self policing. Given self policing as a policy directed at the general public all I can say is God help us, we are doomed.

 

 

This is wrong on so many levels it's laughable. Your refrain is becoming tiresome, seriously.

 

I appreciate your obvious passion for the sport and you're no doubt an excellent angler, but your thoughts regarding conservation and improving the fishery are ill conceived.

 

I'm not going to offer a counter argument, it's been done ad nauseum countless times on this and other boards over the years every time you start to spew your rhetoric.

 

No one will ever convince you otherwise, but consider giving it a rest.

[Garnet]

It takes boys and girls to make little trout.

 

If you want dum as stump stocked fish you drive the 40 mile south. Me I will take stream rehab and natural reproduction.

[Snidley]

Anyone fished the Saugeen lately? Is it a fishery driven by stream improvement? No. It's driven by stocking, heavy stocking by a dedicated fishing club that by and large consider CRAA and it's methods laughable. They have worked around the MNR to find a way to re create a fishery were CRAA can't find that path. Would it be an even better fishery if roe as bait was not permitted? Yes, it would be, however just like down here anglers are trained from early on that the way to catch salmonoids is to use eggs. It is not the only way nor even the best way to catch salmonoids but it is the easy way. Sort of like lamplighting in Australia. Or shooting Turkeys in a roost. Or targeting Bass on nests. I take lots of flack from other steelheaders over this issue no doubt. It's always the same guys, roe anglers all, who essentially frame all their perspective in light of a base of fishing with the spawn of a fish they claim to want to conserve. It is absurd obviously and you don't see any other angling group even considering targeting spawning fish to get bait. I repeat, give anglers a self policing environment and you will see carnage as a result. I also suggest that any angler that thinks stocked steelhead are "dumb" or "weak" go down to the Whirlpool in April or May and see just how dumb/weak they are. Or go out to the blue zone in August and deal with the schooling steelies out there. Weak, I think not. Willing biters, yes they are that but it could hardly be considered a negative trait in a gamefish.

[esoxansteel]

Anyone fished the Saugeen lately? Is it a fishery driven by stream improvement? No. It's driven by stocking, heavy stocking by a dedicated fishing club that by and large consider CRAA and it's methods laughable. They have worked around the MNR to find a way to re create a fishery were CRAA can't find that path. Would it be an even better fishery if roe as bait was not permitted? Yes, it would be, however just like down here anglers are trained from early on that the way to catch salmonoids is to use eggs. It is not the only way nor even the best way to catch salmonoids but it is the easy way. Sort of like lamplighting in Australia. Or shooting Turkeys in a roost. Or targeting Bass on nests. I take lots of flack from other steelheaders over this issue no doubt. It's always the same guys, roe anglers all, who essentially frame all their perspective in light of a base of fishing with the spawn of a fish they claim to want to conserve. It is absurd obviously and you don't see any other angling group even considering targeting spawning fish to get bait. I repeat, give anglers a self policing environment and you will see carnage as a result. I also suggest that any angler that thinks stocked steelhead are "dumb" or "weak" go down to the Whirlpool in April or May and see just how dumb/weak they are. Or go out to the blue zone in August and deal with the schooling steelies out there. Weak, I think not. Willing biters, yes they are that but it could hardly be considered a negative trait in a gamefish.

 

 

Man are you ever negative, dont take it out on us because they took Oxycontin off the market, theres a methadone clinic near by im sure, to help you deal with your demons and issues

[solopaddler]

Anyone fished the Saugeen lately? Is it a fishery driven by stream improvement? No. It's driven by stocking, heavy stocking by a dedicated fishing club that by and large consider CRAA and it's methods laughable. They have worked around the MNR to find a way to re create a fishery were CRAA can't find that path. Would it be an even better fishery if roe as bait was not permitted? Yes, it would be, however just like down here anglers are trained from early on that the way to catch salmonoids is to use eggs. It is not the only way nor even the best way to catch salmonoids but it is the easy way. Sort of like lamplighting in Australia. Or shooting Turkeys in a roost. Or targeting Bass on nests. I take lots of flack from other steelheaders over this issue no doubt. It's always the same guys, roe anglers all, who essentially frame all their perspective in light of a base of fishing with the spawn of a fish they claim to want to conserve. It is absurd obviously and you don't see any other angling group even considering targeting spawning fish to get bait. I repeat, give anglers a self policing environment and you will see carnage as a result. I also suggest that any angler that thinks stocked steelhead are "dumb" or "weak" go down to the Whirlpool in April or May and see just how dumb/weak they are. Or go out to the blue zone in August and deal with the schooling steelies out there. Weak, I think not. Willing biters, yes they are that but it could hardly be considered a negative trait in a gamefish.

 

 

I cannot believe you're using the Saugeen as an example!

 

Yes the runs have improved because of stocking, BUT they're not stocking hatchery mutants they're taking wild brood stock from the river, rearing them to smolt size and releasing them. They're not tampering with what's already a vibrant wild strain.

 

In addition they've opened up miles of headwater nursery waters for steelhead to spawn in. The Saugeen is likely the largest coldwater trib in southern ON when all of it's substantial feeder streams are factored in.

 

YES the run was given a kick start by stocking, BUT the fishery is intended to be and WILL be self sustaining and viable.

 

I cannot believe you are criticizing the efforts of CRAA, seriously?

Have you fished the river at all this past year? I'm guessing not because you seem to look down on it for whatever reason. How are you making out fishing the estuary in your kick boat?

 

I can tell you this the Credit has fished better these last few months than I've ever seen it. Not since the early 80's have I experienced angling of this quality.

 

Best part is they are mostly WILD fish and CRAA is entirely responsible.

 

You really need to rethink your misguided perceptions.

[aniceguy]

Thanks Mike your comments are realy apreciated!

[Richard S.]

Hey Snidley, do us all a favor, take your negative attidude and move to the states if you like the way they manage their fishery. Hell I'll even start taking donations to help cover the one way ticket needed. You sit at home and clam to know so much about the fishery when you really know nothing at all. Your answer to everything is CRAA, MNR, and OFAH are bad. They do nothing and oh yeah while we are at it lets stock, stock, and well stock some more. You need to get new material this crap you spew is boaring.

[BillM]

Anyone fished the Saugeen lately? Is it a fishery driven by stream improvement? No. It's driven by stocking, heavy stocking by a dedicated fishing club that by and large consider CRAA and it's methods laughable. They have worked around the MNR to find a way to re create a fishery were CRAA can't find that path. Would it be an even better fishery if roe as bait was not permitted? Yes, it would be, however just like down here anglers are trained from early on that the way to catch salmonoids is to use eggs. It is not the only way nor even the best way to catch salmonoids but it is the easy way. Sort of like lamplighting in Australia. Or shooting Turkeys in a roost. Or targeting Bass on nests. I take lots of flack from other steelheaders over this issue no doubt. It's always the same guys, roe anglers all, who essentially frame all their perspective in light of a base of fishing with the spawn of a fish they claim to want to conserve. It is absurd obviously and you don't see any other angling group even considering targeting spawning fish to get bait. I repeat, give anglers a self policing environment and you will see carnage as a result. I also suggest that any angler that thinks stocked steelhead are "dumb" or "weak" go down to the Whirlpool in April or May and see just how dumb/weak they are. Or go out to the blue zone in August and deal with the schooling steelies out there. Weak, I think not. Willing biters, yes they are that but it could hardly be considered a negative trait in a gamefish.

 

Time to stop using that 'I've fished for 30 years' excuse because it's obvious you haven't stepped foot on the river bank (Especially the Saugeen) in quite some time.

 

If you like mutant stockers so much, move to the southern shore of Lake Erie and have your fill.

[Snidley]

Who said stocking had to be from brood stock. Certainly not the Americans as they also take striped eggs only. Stocking most definitely should only be from wild fish and at no time did I ever say it should be otherwise. The originating strain is important as well. The Saugeen is a better fishery today because of large scale and CONSISTENT stocking and even though it is a great fishery today if they stop stocking it will fall precipitously. Fortunately there are no plans that I am aware of to stop stocking and transferring fish at the Saugeen.

 

Any fishery with any species other than Carp, where anglers insist on carrying off the fish they catch in large unsustainable numbers will be doomed to shortages. This is magnified with steelhead due to the fact that "traditional" roe anglers will always keep hens over bucks because they get meat and bait as opposed to meat only. I guess it makes them feel better but in a highly populated area like the GTA the skewed numbers taken will always outstrip the natural reproductive capacity of the river enhanced stream improvements not withstanding. I hope things are better at the Credit and steam improvements are no doubt a good thing but the continued insistence of anglers keeping hens will simply mean that at the end of the day there will just be more and fuller stringers as the new anglers ape the experienced ones, including the executives of a "conservation" group, that demonstrate by action that roe collection as a fishing tactic is ok. Roe collection/prioritized retention of hens is not ok in any fishery faced with shortages. Period. In addition roe use under such circumstances is only allowed in Ontario no where else that I know of would permit it.Since it appears that addiction to eggs for bait is an unchangeable tradition in this province, and the MNR has clearly decided that this is the case, then there has to be a large scale stocking effort to replace the lost breeders with replacements just like they have done down south and, to a lesser extent, on the 'Geen.

Edited March 24, 2012 by Snidley

[BillM]

[Grimace]

I am way out of my league here but I have a couple of questions for the (many) people that know way more than I.

 

I attended the Lake Ontario Trout and Salmon Symposium last April in Port Credit. I was very impressed with the event. Of the talks given that day, the one that stuck in my mind the most was Dr. Tom Stewart's presentation on Lake Ontario's offshore food web called 'It's a Jungle Out There'.

 

Here is the link to Symposium, this is the page with the seminars on it. Attached in that page are the PDF's with each one's content. http://lakeontariofishingforum.com/speakers.html

 

This is the PDF for 'It's a Jungle Out There'. http://lakeontariofishingforum.com/2-Foodweb_Update.pdf

 

 

My question's. If we keep overstocking fish, will they not eat too much of the food and induce a bait fish crash?

 

And if the large amount of Fleas are eating all of the plankton and the Alewife have nothing to eat, won't stocking of trout and salmon then be kind of pointless?

 

I am not trying to be facetious in any way here, I am genuinely asking these questions. The answers might seem obvious to the people 'in the know', but for a weekend warrior like myself who only reads the odd piece and attends the odd seminar they might seem a bit more elusive.

 

Thanks for any replies that I might get. I probably should have started a new thread but seeing as this thread has taken this turn I figured I would just go with it. My apologies to the OP if this is looked upon as a highjack.

[gaspumper]

Jeees here I thought we were talking about fish going through the ladder at the Ganny.

[Sinker]

The Saugeen is a better fishery today because of large scale and CONSISTENT stocking and even though it is a great fishery today if they stop stocking it will fall precipitously. Fortunately there are no plans that I am aware of to stop stocking and transferring fish at the Saugeen.

 

 

 

Why do you think it would fall precipitously? Whatever that reason is....that is what you have to repair. I know nothing about the saugeen, but I know if fish have proper habitat, they will reproduce succesfully.

 

I'm sure there is a lot more to it than that, but its a good start. Its not going to happen over night, but they will eventually reproduce themselves if they have the habitat. You can stock it till the end of time, but if they can't reproduce, stocking will NEVER end. Create some habitat so they will reproduce, and then spend that saved money from raising fish somewhere else, where its needed.

 

Habitat is the key, I don't care what anyone argues. If fish can't reproduce, you won't have fish.....pretty simple isn't it?? That theory works with any species, not just your beloved rainbows.

 

Now, feeding all these fish is another story. I know nothing about lake huron's bait situation, but I've heard its not good.

 

S.

[Snidley]

Grimace a great deal depends on what species you are concerned with. Steelhead/Rainbows have a much more diverse forage base than Salmon, that's one of the reasons they are the most widely distributed non native fish in the world. Given a depressed abundance of shad and smelts in Lake Ontario then Steelhead will eat Gobies, bugs, crustaceans I'm told they even eat fleas. Salmon will starve in the same situation. The true bottom line is that there are lots of Steelhead in Lake Ontario but distribution is not so great and the reason is obvious to most anglers (but not so much here). Ontario has entered into a Devils bargain with New York that mandates massive stocking in American tribs while Ontario will attempt "sustainable" natural reproduction with only very limited stocking (and a lot of the MNR stocking is in fact from old brood stock from a suspect original strain of rainbow. In many cases even this is not the total story as MNR stocking technique often means dumping the stockers off breakwalls and in harbours. It is a horrible waste of a shallow resource). We are now living with the results. Tons of fish in New York tribs, maybe even more abundance than is healthy, and, despite what the coffee clatch here is selling, a lot less Steelhead in our tribs to a level that makes killing any of what is available here a tragedy that anglers adamantly refuse to acknowledge. Roe angling/collection exacerbates this situation greatly.

Edited March 24, 2012 by Snidley

[Snidley]

To Sinker's point over harvest will consistently trump natural reproduction. That's why, in places where natural reproduction is the management technique, minimal limits, retention of stockers only, slot sizes, roe bans, bait bans, gear restrictions and outright ban on harvest is the norm for virtually every jurisdiction where Steelhead and Salmon are found...except Ontario. Habitat is most definitely NOT the key, it is far from simple and this does apply to any species that people like to eat(or use their spawn for bait). You are correct on one point, stocking will NEVER END in an urban fishery where there's 4 million potential anglers that need homes, industry, waste disposal etc. It's a reality fundamental to an abundant fishery.

[crossover]

Cool video

[Garnet]

I like to watch people progress in their fishing. I'm thinking of one person in particular 4 years ago caught every few fish at the Ganny 3 years ago we started helping him a little started to catch some and ate everyone. Last year in caught a lot and kept way to many.

 

This year he caught tons and kept almost nothing. In these 4 years he constantly upgraded equipment he has also start some friends steelheading is learning how to Tye Fly's and the circle continues.

 

Making trout fishing difficult No Thanks I like to see kids show up on the river with not great equipment put their hours in upgrade and become great anglers.

 

Tons of rules so you can play your little game No Thanks.

 

Stream Rehab and natural reproduction makes great Anglers.