Noxon Reservoir Walleye - public comment period

[Neptune]

No flame brother but just my observation from fishing the Upper Missouri Chain of reservoirs.  If I REALLY REALLY want to catch a trout (like when I have friends or kids with me) I tie on a rainbow trout colored Rapala.  Doesn't matter the size, shape, or depth it fishes I will always catch trout on it.  I (personally) have never caught a walleye on a rainbow trout colored Rapala but have caught them on other colors in the same spread.  Coincidence?  Maybe, but I have other friends with the same experience.

I have many times Jay....in Canyon Ferry...just drag it around on a planer board at about 3mph..you'll catch both Rainbows and Walleye.... 


And just to point out what some may see as obvious(but is being used as an argument here)...Fish are Piscavores...they eat fish...Walleye eat small walleye also...and how many times do you catch Perch on a perch colored lure....

[Desperado]

just to point out what some may see as obvious(but is being used as an argument here)...Fish are Piscavores...they eat fish...Walleye eat small walleye also...and how many times do you catch Perch on a perch colored lure....

Excellent point of info Neptune. 
So then, my fellow fishermen; in the infamous words of the late, but not-so-great, R. King
(why)"can't we all just get along ?"

[Neptune]

I just read where F&G can't plant fingerlings in CF anymore - the walleye just munch them. Now they stock the larger fish which are more expensive. I'm sure they also have to stock more so these things do amount to throwing money down the drain.

I'd support walleyes in western MT if they wouldn't eventually end up in every lake over there. Unfortunately if you support one illegally introduced fishery it will only encourage more. I'm afraid that with the ranting lunatics of WU constantly sounding off on the issue it will happen anyway. Yeah, that is a shot at them... don't move to Montana if you don't like it the way it is. Redneck  wolf hippies they appear to be. MT is supposedly trout central -- somewhat true in upper Missouri and Yellowstone -- but in the Flathead/Clark Fork just about every species of coldwater/warmwater fish has been introduced and still people come into the area from elsewhere and think they can improve it with a bucket of their favorite fish. People need to learn to enjoy what we already have instead of indulging their selfish impulses. Sooner or later one of these selfish illegal introductions will have extremely long lasting negative impacts. Selfish, selfish selfish piled on top of the arrogance that they know something we all don't. We already have a great thing going in MT. Let's keep it, OK?

Flame away... I probably won't answer.

I gotta say RobG that this is probably the most resonable summation of the situation here in Montana that I have read to date!!!  Nice job!

[streamside]

I gotta say RobG that this is probably the most resonable summation of the situation here in Montana that I have read to date!!!  Nice job!

+1

[mtjigalo]

I agree with the last few posts. If you want to fish for walleye, take a trip east of the divide.

[Cornbread]

I would like them to leave the walleye alone and instead concentrate on getting rid of the pike in the pools of the Thompson river. I love my pike fishing but the Thompson river is top notch trout fishing and fly fishing in general. The pike haven't got so large a foothold yet that they couldn't be taken care of, it is a doable project not a waste of money. I would rather they put the money to better use than try to kill off a species that most everyone would like to see stay in Noxon. Are they talking about killing off the large mouth in Noxon, or the small mouth, or the pike? None of those are native and all were bucket introduced and would like the walleye be a complete waste of time and money to try and get rid of. I wish they would just leave Noxon and cabinet gorge alone and spend the money on something better like milfoil management or keeping pike out of the Thompson river etc.

[mtjigalo]

Cornbread. I love the pike and bass fishing in the Flathead and lower Clark Fork so I do understand that my position on walleye in Noxon is a bit hypocritical. I guess I look at those river systems as being so far down that road that stuffing the genie back into the bottle is no longer a realistic option (coupled with the fact that at least population expansion is limited by the fact that dams hem them into their current zones). As far as the Thompson river is concerned, well, that sort of proves the point. You want great trout fishing in that river without the pike? Too late. If you don't want pike there, then you can't have pike in the Clark Fork. I have to laugh at the folks on here that don't enjoy catching or eating trout (cornbread, this is not aimed at you). Really? Ok then, please leave. If you want to catch walleye then go where the walleye are, don't bring them with you. As robg stated earlier, the arrogance is astounding.

[sra61]

Does anyone have a report on how the meeting in T-Falls went last night? I wanted to , but couldn't make it. Was it a waste of time, and what was the general direction they leaned?

[Cornbread]

Does anyone have a report on how the meeting in T-Falls went last night? I wanted to , but couldn't make it. Was it a waste of time, and what was the general direction they leaned?

Not me, unfortunately I got stuck out of state for work. I may be back in MT this weekend but I would like to know how it went if anyone wants to chime in who made it?

[missoulafish]

They are extending the comment period...I guess that means no suppression this year?

http://missoulian.com/news/state-and-regional/fwp-extends-comment-period-on-noxon-walleye-suppression-plan/article_718f8292-9b33-11e2-9e6f-0019bb2963f4.html

[lundin-loading]

this has potential, i really hope that they continue to listen to public opinion/comments and do the right thing on this one!!

[JayHelfrich]

Maybe they want to listen to the actual anglers for once?  Is it too good to be true?

Jay

[GFIceMan]

this has potential, i really hope that they continue to listen to public opinion/comments and do the right thing on this one!!

Me too. And get rid of them!

[Cornbread]

Me too. And get rid of them!

So far after talking with friends at FWP public comment so far seems to be 90% or more for keeping the walleye and 10% or less for getting rid of them. No word yet on if they plan to go ahead anyway with shocking in spite of public sentiment.

The walleye have been here almost 20 years now and they haven't taken over, just like they haven't taken over Fort Peck etc. I don't think how they got here was right but now that they are here I would like to have them left alone especially if that is the general will of the majority of those using the fishery which based on public comment it seems to be.

[PerchAssault]

Great article...

http://www.vp-mi.com/news/article_ee0f0106-96f8-11e2-a377-0019bb2963f4.html

Sounds like this Noxon Warm Water Fisheries Association is going full on to stop it and they have some powerful political figures, biologists and major questions that should be answered first.

They are pushing for a full on EIS for a project of this magnitude, rather than the EA that was done. Perhaps someone knows how to join?


Comment Period on Noxon Reservoir Walleye Draft EA extended to April 19
The comment period for the Draft Environmental Assessment, “Investigation of Suppression of Walleye in Noxon Rapids Reservoir” has been extended for 21 days.  Comments must now be received or postmarked by Friday, April 19. 

According to FWP Region One Supervisor Jim Satterfield, the extension is due to several factors. “We received over 250 comments and a petition on the project,” says Satterfield.  “We also received a number of requests for a comment period extension to review the technical background of the EA.  Given the level of controversy surrounding this issue, I am extending the comment period.”

Satterfield urged interested persons who wish to send comments to read the Draft Environmental Assessment.  The EA can be found on FWP’s website (fwp.mt.gov: click news, then public notices): Investigation of Suppression of Walleye in Noxon Rapids Reservoir.  Comments can be submitted by email at this site.

Copies of the draft EA are also available at the MFWP office, 490 N. Meridian Rd., Kalispell; the MFWP Field Office,  601 N Columbia Street, Thompson Falls; Montana State Library, 1515 E 6th Ave., Helena; MFWP State Headquarters, 1420 E 6th Avenue, Helena; Thompson Falls Library, 911 Main Street, Thompson Falls; and the FWP website at fwp.mt.gov under Public Notices.

In the meantime, routine sampling of walleye in Noxon Reservoir will continue as in previous years.  Captured fish will be tagged and released.  Data collected will shed light on the status, distribution, age structure, and health of the walleye population.

Walleye were first detected in the reservoir in 1991 during fisheries sampling.  These fish are the result of several illegal introductions.  In 2000, standardized annual monitoring was implemented to monitor trends in fish abundance and showed that walleye were naturally reproducing. 

[Cornbread]

Great article...

http://www.vp-mi.com/news/article_ee0f0106-96f8-11e2-a377-0019bb2963f4.html

Sounds like this Noxon Warm Water Fisheries Association is going full on to stop it and they have some powerful political figures, biologists and major questions that should be answered first.

They are pushing for a full on EIS for a project of this magnitude, rather than the EA that was done. Perhaps someone knows how to join?

If you find out how to join before I do, please let me know so I can do so.

[J_Edwards]

“The walleye pose a serious threat to the bass and perch population,” said Breidinger.

Stupid. Many, many lakes across North Dakota, Minnesota, Iowa and Wisconsin hold healthy populations of each, I don't understand how Montana waters are so different.

[GFIceMan]

“The walleye pose a serious threat to the bass and perch population,” said Breidinger.

Stupid. Many, many lakes across North Dakota, Minnesota, Iowa and Wisconsin hold healthy populations of each, I don't understand how Montana waters are so different.

Because Noxon isnt as productive as other reservoirs such as Fort Peck and possibly other waters you speak of in 'North Dakota, Minnesota, Iowa and Wisconsin. Bodies of water in the midwest as well as Eastern Montana and North Dakota have many more species of forage fish and inputs of nutrients during years of spring runoff. Noxon is a unique fishery and it really is in danger of completely crashing if walleye are not suppressed. The other factor I look at is Noxon is relatively small as compared to other reservoirs in the country.

I think it would be a sad day in Montana fisheries management if the Noxon walleye are not suppressed.

[Cornbread]

FWIW the "Noxon" fishery is 55 river miles in length and is bumper crop full of forage fish according to FWP own studies. That isn't even remotely small. I'll post more on this when I get a full copy of the study they are basing the need to suppress on.

[J_Edwards]

Because Noxon isnt as productive as other reservoirs such as Fort Peck and possibly other waters you speak of in 'North Dakota, Minnesota, Iowa and Wisconsin. Bodies of water in the midwest as well as Eastern Montana and North Dakota have many more species of forage fish and inputs of nutrients during years of spring runoff. Noxon is a unique fishery and it really is in danger of completely crashing if walleye are not suppressed. The other factor I look at is Noxon is relatively small as compared to other reservoirs in the country.

I think it would be a sad day in Montana fisheries management if the Noxon walleye are not suppressed.

Then why aren't they after pike? They have a hardier diet and compete for the similar forage as the walleye... & LM bass pluck off a lot of young eyes. 

I'm not buying any of this from Montana FWP until I see some real research to back up TU's, whoops I means FWPs claims.

[Firetrap]

Because Noxon isnt as productive as other reservoirs such as Fort Peck and possibly other waters you speak of in 'North Dakota, Minnesota, Iowa and Wisconsin. Bodies of water in the midwest as well as Eastern Montana and North Dakota have many more species of forage fish and inputs of nutrients during years of spring runoff. Noxon is a unique fishery and it really is in danger of completely crashing if walleye are not suppressed. The other factor I look at is Noxon is relatively small as compared to other reservoirs in the country.

I think it would be a sad day in Montana fisheries management if the Noxon walleye are not suppressed.

Horse pucky

[missoulafish]

Canyon Ferry's prey base seems very limited to Noxon. Perch, carp, trout and probably a few other less common species. Noxon has an abundance of pike, trout, LMB, SMB, Lake Superior Whitefish, Lake Trout, Peamouth, Pike Minnow, Mountain Whitefish, Perch, suckers  and who knows what else .

[MatCat]

Size doesn't matter, take Dailey lake.  About 100 acres, Walleye, perch, and rainbows all living happily together, and that's all that is in there.  Doesn't seem to me like one or the other has over run the fishery.  That's a walleye story, now take a look at smith lake near kalispell.  About the same size as Dailey,  Pike, perch, trout, suckers,  the pike have completely taken over that lake.  Now which fish do you think would take suppresion priority over the other, not that Noxon seems like it needs suppression of anything.  Seems like a pretty good balance going on there.