Small planters this year.

Post by **Stacie Kelsey** » Thu Apr 14, 2011 8:55 pm

I find it surprising that people would just toss their stuff on the ground honestly.

natetreat · Post by **natetreat** » Fri Apr 15, 2011 12:57 am

I can't believe the stuff people leave at access points. I always carry a trash bag with me and pick up loads of stuff. Yea, some of the planters this year are tiny! Some of the fish I caught today couldn't even put a bend in my ultralight, and were getting eaten by ducks. They looked like they were smolts! Couldn't be even a year old.

hanapaa808 · Post by **hanapaa808** » Sun Apr 17, 2011 2:29 am

I know everyone is complaining about the small size of the stocked fish......maybe instead of having this conversation here, we should be bitching to the guys on the lakes that actually keep them... What are you really going to eat on a 8" trout? Or how about the the guys that catch and release them all day using power bait and they die anyway? So we can sit here and complain about birds and size of fish but in the big picture it's many fishermen that don't care about preservation of our lakes and fish. Don't get me wrong, I agree with almost everything people are saying on this thread but if we don't start educating others on game management or preservation of what we have we all are just wasting our breath. Think about how many members are on this site to how many aren't. So in reality most of us here are just educating the educated.
Just saying my 2 cents worth.

rjn cajun · Post by **rjn cajun** » Sun Apr 17, 2011 3:41 am

Just out of curiosity is there any programs or public meetings where this can get out to the public and the fisheries department? I`m an advid hunter and the game department holds public meetings for us to voice our opinions on things like tags,license fees, seasons etc. They also use our feed back to help in the feild. Never checked into it so I`m just wondering. We as fisherman see first hand on a day to day basis what`s going on.

natetreat · Post by **natetreat** » Sun Apr 17, 2011 3:52 am

hanapaa808 wrote:I know everyone is complaining about the small size of the stocked fish......maybe instead of having this conversation here, we should be *****ing to the guys on the lakes that actually keep them... What are you really going to eat on a 8" trout? Or how about the the guys that catch and release them all day using power bait and they die anyway? So we can sit here and complain about birds and size of fish but in the big picture it's many fishermen that don't care about preservation of our lakes and fish. Don't get me wrong, I agree with almost everything people are saying on this thread but if we don't start educating others on game management or preservation of what we have we all are just wasting our breath. Think about how many members are on this site to how many aren't. So in reality most of us here are just educating the educated.
Just saying my 2 cents worth.

I keep all the trout I catch on bait and then I'm done. I'll eat teh 8 inchers, they taste the same as the big ones, they just take more of 'em. Some of the fish I caught today were barely 6 inches. Most of the really tiny ones I've seen come from the Arlington Hatchery and they're 3.7/pound, and that's SMALL. The cormorants don't even have to open their mouth to swallow two at once, and they've been hanging out in 2 feet of water for two weeks since they were planted. At this age the fish are so dumb they don't even know what a predator looks like. I dunno, I'm staying away from lakes that were stocked with these little fish forr a while, unless I'm with my wife who thinks they are adorable.

Post by **Stacie Kelsey** » Sun Apr 17, 2011 5:23 am

There are folks that eat the 8"ers. The problem I have is the high-grading. Ripping hooks in hopes of getting something larger. Taking more care how bait hooked fish are released can go a long way. And if it's going to die it should be kept. I passed it along to our Officers. :-/

I'll be posting signs that clearly spell out how the fishing with bait works once I get some clearer definitions from our Officers.

natetreat · Post by **natetreat** » Sun Apr 17, 2011 6:17 am

Stacie Kelsey wrote:There are folks that eat the 8"ers. The problem I have is the high-grading. Ripping hooks in hopes of getting something larger. Taking more care how bait hooked fish are released can go a long way. And if it's going to die it should be kept. I passed it along to our Officers. :-/

I'll be posting signs that clearly spell out how the fishing with bait works once I get some clearer definitions from our Officers.

I have seen guys do that a lot. I have called enforcement on some that caught like 40 or 50 fish, and there were dead ones littering the bottom. I usually make sure to tell folks that when they're using bait they count towards the limit if they keep them or not. But it's not what we pay for, to put in perfectly edible fish, only to have them caught by one fishermen and left to rot on the bottom of the lake.

But for the most part, people abide by the rules, or at least I'd like to think they do. But the ruiners ruin it for everybody.

It'd be nice for the fish to get a chance to grow up though.

Uncle Wes · Post by **Uncle Wes** » Mon Apr 18, 2011 2:49 pm

Which brings up the question is bigger better? Obviously the WDFW is going to have to keep the opening day crowd happy. Most of these folks are happy with 8 to 10-inch trout and its what they expect. Usually after the first two weeks their interest dwindles and they move on to other summertime interests. I say put in half as many smaller trout to cover these anglers interest and hold the others in hopes that there size increases. Release them towards the end of May or early June. Change the regulations to match what some of the other areas have gone to. Limit 5 per person, per day, with only two over 14-inches being allowed per limit. The thought on this was to stop some of the high grading that goes on and it seems to be working on several of the lakes I have been on.

For the lakes that are open year round introduce those new stockers at the last possible moment and concentrate efforts of planting the seasonal lakes first. Now I know this sounds simple but with a large operation such as our hatchery department this would take some scheduling and adapting to put a new system in place but I have been told it could be done. Another scenario I would love to see is some of the lakes that have virtually no bank angling and limited parking be turned into special regulation lakes where only two or three over 14-inches may be retained. I'm not saying all lakes but lets pick a few in each area and see what happens. If they are combustion engine lakes then let them stay that way. I can think of a few lakes in several county's that would be great canidates, some are year rounders.

I think there are always going to be those anglers that don't pay attention to rules or regulations, but maybe these steps might limit the amount of wastefulness that goes on. Eyes in the woods is also an effective step to assist with these thoughts. The thing is if you call an enforcement officer be prepared to sign the complaint otherwise you are wasting their time and taking them away from other places where they can make a difference. Okay I'm done rambeling on. Like I said just my thoughts, I'm sure there are many more out there. I will add, this is the most posting on a site that I have done in years, hope you don't mind.

'OL GREY DOG · Post by **'OL GREY DOG** » Mon Apr 18, 2011 4:07 pm

more good rambel'n WES...i'll tell ya tho...i want to see some of those (3.5-4.5 per lb) 10 inchers on some 1s stringer this spring....so's i can point 'n laugh...as far as put'n those fish(see above) in the lakes for a "put 'n take" for the folks that might only go out the 1st month, i dont think that size is what most of them are wanting/expecting to catch either..<shrugs> hard question....

my think'n is they put a lot of trout/$s into lakes that arnt good trout lakes Macintosh comes to mind..dang over grown mud puddle mostly under 10ft deep....gets wayyy to warm for trout..why not plant it with pan fish... improve the access..turn it into a fish pond fishery...throw some cats in....make it a MEAT lake..where anyone can catch a stringer full of dinner...think how all that feed could make it into a killer bass fishers lake...the county "owns" 1 whole side of that lake ..highway 20 yards away from it...not 1 public dock...i'm sure there's lots of other lil lakes just like it....so if they put the time/money/effort they put into the trout they plant, how big of a truck of say..crappie could they put in..or perch??..i dont think it would be hard to lower those % numbers of people that target trout on the open'r ...with a lil education and information about a fun, nonstop action,easyyyy,meat fishery...IMO a bunch of 'em would take 1 look at a "3.5 per pound" trout, laugh and go to a diff lake where a limit will atleast make a meal..lolol...this still leaves lottsss of lakes for trout people.... keeps the riff raff (or "slobs" as the F&G refers to 'em) busy/happy.. if they were there i'd go getta sack full.. done babble'n...DOG

natetreat · Post by **natetreat** » Mon Apr 18, 2011 5:56 pm

'OL GREY DOG wrote:more good rambel'n WES...i'll tell ya tho...i want to see some of those (3.5-4.5 per lb) 10 inchers on some 1s stringer this spring....so's i can point 'n laugh...as far as put'n those fish(see above) in the lakes for a "put 'n take" for the folks that might only go out the 1st month, i dont think that size is what most of them are wanting/expecting to catch either..<shrugs> hard question....

my think'n is they put a lot of trout/$s into lakes that arnt good trout lakes Macintosh comes to mind..dang over grown mud puddle mostly under 10ft deep....gets wayyy to warm for trout..why not plant it with pan fish... improve the access..turn it into a fish pond fishery...throw some cats in....make it a MEAT lake..where anyone can catch a stringer full of dinner...think how all that feed could make it into a killer bass fishers lake...the county "owns" 1 whole side of that lake ..highway 20 yards away from it...not 1 public dock...i'm sure there's lots of other lil lakes just like it....so if they put the time/money/effort they put into the trout they plant, how big of a truck of say..crappie could they put in..or perch??..i dont think it would be hard to lower those % numbers of people that target trout on the open'r ...with a lil education and information about a fun, nonstop action,easyyyy,meat fishery...IMO a bunch of 'em would take 1 look at a "3.5 per pound" trout, laugh and go to a diff lake where a limit will atleast make a meal..lolol...this still leaves lottsss of lakes for trout people.... keeps the riff raff (or "slobs" as the F&G refers to 'em) busy/happy.. if they were there i'd go getta sack full.. done babble'n...DOG

I'd love to see more warmwater plants and catfish and crappie. Macintosh was one of my favorite lakes to bass fish though, and I think the bass get extra big on account of all the trout they eat. But I don't think that's the intended purpose of trout either, heheh.

'OL GREY DOG · Post by **'OL GREY DOG** » Mon Apr 18, 2011 7:23 pm

be a perfect lake for it...all that shore line bye the bike trail ...lots of easy access/parking along the highway belongs to the county....as under developed, as full of brush, weeds, pilings and stuff as that lake is, them pan fish would be spawn'n and grow'n like crazy in that bathtub warm water...and yea plant some bass...find some killer strain..make 'em C&R only...even crawdads would thrive in that lake....
so? rambel'n/babble'n of a old man ???..yep..but things are going to change...less funds/staff/access to facilities...be'n part of PARKS !!!!...licence fees/tags/punchcards/"endorsements"/ect ALL go'n up ??...i'd bet ya...

i said i'd donate for more/bigger trout program of some kind...i'd toss in another $100 for a crappie dinner or 2...or some deep fry'd catfish...long as it didnt go into 1 of them "put in the general fund" deals but say maybe if most of it stay'd in my county even... and only went for the programs i said i was donate'n to...who knows eh ??look'n into the future i see it that things are going to get worse..i dont see Olympia come'n up with any buck$ to make better..if that is the case the only way improvement/enhancement/REPAIR projects are going to happen is if i pay more...and maybe step up more like 'ol Bob 'n his lady did ... help'n drag fish out of a pond for few hours...looked like fun to me....dont know that i would have gone out the next day and murdered the poor things after befriending 'em like that...just say'n..lolol..DOG

Post by **Stacie Kelsey** » Mon Apr 18, 2011 9:42 pm

Let me share with you how are stocking program works. I can't speak for the rest of the state.

This is just a general picture.

Egg take is in/around December (though some of our hatcheries will get them earlier). Those fish hatch aroun/February. By about June they are 40/lb. or fingerlings. By the next Feb/March they are the size we want them to be. They are stocked in April and May. We will stock some lakes for free fishing weekend in early June but nothing later because of the water temps.

Now, for the hatcheries that are not state run (difference is we don't have the money the PUD funded, etc., hatcheries have) they can get their eggs early, if they've got the warmer water temps and hot feed they can get a fish up to size in no time. That would be our Vancouver Hatchery.

It's a feed issue, a water temp issue and a matter of how much room the hatchery has.

I don't see the kind of anglers Uncle Wes speaks of. The anglers I see would like a larger fish vs. an 8" fish. And they continue to fish, they are not a two week sort of opening day group. We have a few waters that are 5, no more than two over 20" but it hasn't curbed high grading, especially when we put triploids in.

I agree with Uncle Wes that there has to be some good options out there to avoid the high grading issues. We are working on some! Always look to get insight from others though!

Uncle Wes · Post by **Uncle Wes** » Tue Apr 19, 2011 12:46 pm

I for one have always been an advocate for bigger is better, even if it means less trout planted. Having worked at Silver Lake in Whatcom County I ran into a lot of folks that only worked the lakes for a few weeks out of the year. I think a lot of the resorts and campgrounds during opening day weekend also attract a lot of these folks. Once the angling gets a little tougher they seem to disappear. That might be an interesting question to ask folks when checking creels. "How many times a year and how many times after the opener do they hit the lake." I work the lakes year round and especially enjoy the Fall & Winter, crowds are down and trout are much larger. I don't know if there will ever be a solution to high grading but I think the 14-inch rule has helped here on the South Sound lakes. Maybe by doubling the fines it would give them a pause to reflect on high grading and get more anglers involved in the eyes in the woods program. I know the funds for triploids are mandated but its to bad we couldn't have that money going to our hatcheries. The larger trout look so much better than the trips that are bought and stocked from private hatcheries. Cudo's to our hatchery folks. Just my thoughts.

Smalma · Post by **Smalma** » Tue Apr 19, 2011 1:24 pm

For decades it has been those trout opening day "warriors" and their license dollars have largely footed the bill for the rest of us hard core anglers. That however is changing as both the quality and quantity of opening day fishing has declined; of the top of my head I think it would be fair to say that in spite of a sigificant increase in the State's population the number of anglers fishing on opening day over the last 30 years has decreased by 1/2. Not only does this represent a lost to the local economies and the agency coffers it always a major loss in the one fishery where many youngsters were recruited to the sport of fishing.

The causes in the decline of opening anglers is pretty wide ranging. From folks being more interested in non-traditional outdoor activities, reduction funds dedicated to supporting the lake trout fishing, and the movement from trout only management for the majority of the lowland lakes. The impacts from hatchery funding problems varies across the state. For example much fo the trout production in the Columbia drainage comes from mitigation found from the dams while in areas such as Puget Sound much of the funding is from the State's funding. Anyone that has been paying attention to the budget issues facing the State should be able to connect the dots as why the numbers and size of trout being planted in Puget Sound basin lakes are not what they once were or what the anglers may desire. All of which leads to that vivious circle of declining effort/lic. leading to more cuts in production.

Tight lines
Curt

Uncle Wes · Post by **Uncle Wes** » Tue Apr 19, 2011 4:29 pm

Ah yes, finances. I used to keep up on the numbers that fishing license's and tags purchased brought in. Don't have a clue anymore. Which could bring up an interesting discussion. How much of that money is funneled back into raising trout and the hatcheries? How much of it is sent to the general fund? Would the WDFW be able to maintain its operations if 100% of that money was put into their budget? As I recall and correct me if I'm wrong it seemed that their was a special tax on tackle that was supposed to be put back into the WDFW operations but found its way to the general fund. Would the fisheries department be self sustainable if it just recieved the licensing and tag sales plus the tax on tackle? I don't have time right now to research it but would be interesting to know. My deadlines are coming up so I have to get my research and articles done. If anyone has any idea I would love to hear more on this and where you got your numbers and information from.

GeryG · Post by **GeryG** » Tue Apr 19, 2011 5:06 pm

Wow this thread is getting pretty long. Thanks for your input Tracy. I would have to agree with the topic of warm water lakes not getting trout plants anymore, and putting those fish in a lake where there survival is better. Example Lake McMurry
gets 17,000lbs of trout planted each year. By May those trout have white grows on them about3-5 per fish at the end of May. Go back in June its up to 5-10 growths. At the end of June and into July, those fish our so ugly, I gag just looking at them. I stop fishing for them in May now. People are not eating these fish, when they get covered in growths, and probably stop fishing for them like me. How many of these fish are dying? There should be no trout planted in that lake, and there are a lot of lakes like that. Plant the trout in better lakes and warm water fish in these lakes like lake McMurry, like catfish, bass both types, crappie, blue gill and what about waleye? I'm sure people would fish these warm water lake if they were planted with other types of fish. Question Stacy our lakes planted with any of the fish I mention above on a yearly basis? And where do you get that info? With global warming these lakes are only going to get worse for trout. Time to start planting other fish in these lakes. And some of them taste better than trout.

Northwest Fishing Reports

Small planters this year.

RE:Small planters this year.

RE:Small planters this year.

RE:Small planters this year.

RE:Small planters this year.

RE:Small planters this year.

RE:Small planters this year.

RE:Small planters this year.

RE:Small planters this year.

RE:Small planters this year.

RE:Small planters this year.

RE:Small planters this year.

RE:Small planters this year.

RE:Small planters this year.

RE:Small planters this year.

RE:Small planters this year.

RE:Small planters this year.