Brookies to be legal on Georgetown!! New regs discussion.

[jigmaster5000]

 

[oldschoolben]

are there allot of brookies in georgetown

[mtjohn]

I don't like the fact that they still won't let us use live bait.  I also think that they are silly thinking that they will be able to get rid of the pike by having no limit on them.
MT

[fishinwithbrittanies]

Yeah, someone needs to breed hybridized minnows that can't reproduce.  What would be the problem with live bait if there is no risk of them taking over a watershed or fishery. 

[oldschoolben]

i agree with you mtjohn about your statement live bait would be nice but never will happen

[mtjohn]

I also think that they should have introduced some kind of baitfish to take the pressure off of the perch.  When I was growing up you were able to go to CF and catch hundreds of perch.  Now on a good day you might limit out, and the limit is only 15.  Mind you the perch are bigger, but it is more fun when you can go out and catch fish after fish after fish after fish and so on.
MT

[MTviking]

1.  I don't think the limit on pike matters for the MO tributaries.  If the limit were only 2, how many people would even fill that limit?  Personally I would release all of mine anyhow.

2. I'm a big fan of slot limits on wild populations, e.g. the Yellowstone River.  I don't see any good reason other than greed to keep prime spawners.  (I'm especially sensitive towards Walleye,Sauger,Bass, Ling , Etc.) Keep the smaller ones for eating and let the spawners go.  I can understand wanting the larger trout for smoking but there are plenty of lakes with non-reproducing populations that are stocked annually to supply you with fish for smoking.

3. I can understand not allowing minnows on Georgetown to prevent unwanted introductions but what are you going to possibly introduce into Canyon Ferry or the rest of the MO chain that is not already there.  All of those lakes are already loaded with suckers, carp, etc.  Minnows should be allowed.

[mtjohn]

1.  I don't think the limit on pike matters for the MO tributaries. If the limit were only 2, how many people would even fill that limit? Personally I would release all of mine anyhow.

MTviking,
That is what I am getting at.  The pike are there to stay, just like the walleye were there to stay.  They aren't even trying to manage for the pike, they want them gone, but the only way to get rid of them would be to poison the lake and they can't do that.  They need to introduce some forage for them and set the limit at 2, so that when there are enough of them to where people can actually catch them consistently, they won't get knocked back again.  The last thing CF needs is another fish whose catch rates vary from year to year.  Look at the perch last year, it was terrible, but I hope this year will be better.  The whole goal of having these lakes stocked with game fish is to bring revenue into surrounding businesses, but if people can't catch fish in it there won't be any revenue.
MT

[MTviking]

Viking current regs only allow you to keep 1 fish over 18 inches. Greedy? I think not. Having fished this river extensively from the park to Reedpoint for 30 years I can tell you there are plenty of 18+ inchers in the river, and I've released far more than I've kept.

Well I'm ok with only 1 over 18" although I would much prefer to see "none between 16 and 24 inches and 1 allowed over 24". The one over 24" being for that fish of a lifetime that somebody may want to get mounted.  But again I think it is a shame seeing the mature spawners being taken home for dinner.  There are plenty of 18" trout in the Yellowstone and I would like to see it stay that way.   Just a few weeks ago I was talking to some old timer and he literally said, and I quote  "The Yellowstone has gone to hell, I remember back in the 70's and 80's we would go down with a few guys in the late fall and early spring and fill gunny sacks full of ling and sauger.  Now you can hardly find them".   I didn't even bother wasting my time trying to explain why he can no longer find fish like that.

[doublehaul]

Sometimes I just don't even waste my breath. Old timers that fish the Stone are an interesting bunch. They are able to talk your ear off for hours. Careful while having beers in the Huntley area, you may find yourself marrooned at the bar.

[fishin247]

You know, by some of the reasoning here, I should introduce some exotic fish into CF, and then since its already the lake, the FWP should manage the lake for em.  Woo hoo. Win for me. Hey asian carp that are taking over river systems, well, they're there so let's make em sport fish and set limits. Look like fun to hunt with a bow and arrow. More fun than any ol bass. At least if they have no limit on pike they can attempt to lessen the impact on the fishery. And you guys b***h about the lack of perch already? Well let's have the pike take more out, and maybe, just maybe, the rise in pike has contributed to the decline in perch.  Like what was said about the gunnysacks full of fish on the Stone, "you used to be able to catch tons of perch" or something to that effect. Gee, I wonder...

[fishinwithbrittanies]

I support a slot limit on the stone.  I know there are plenty of fish that size in there but I am glad to see FWP taking measures to ensure it stays that way.

I agree that no limit on pike changes nothing, they are there and they will stay there and me personally I'd like to see Canyon Ferry managed for pike if there numbers continue to increase.  There are enough carp in there to keep them busy.

I had heard the the brookies in Gtown got hit with some disease (whirling disease I thought) which knocked down the numbers and that's why you couldn't keep them anymore.  I know you could keep them when I was in college ('98-02).  That said, I'm glad the numbers have rebounded enough that if people want to they can keep 'em.  I go for the kokes.

[mtjohn]

Fishin247,
The perch fishing at CF continued year after year for at least 20 years.  What made the perch fishing go to hell was the introduction of walleye without the introduction of a different type of forage for them.  If they were to introduce some kind of oily fish the pressure would come off the perch.  Think about Beavercreek reservoir, it has walleye and pike, but you can still catch a limit of 50 keepers in a day.  You can use live bait there, so different types of forage are introduced everytime someone empties their bait bucket.  Different forage equals less pressure for perch. 
MT

[eroknroll]

Pike in Canyon Ferry,  manage them, whatever, great!  Pike in the rivers, kill them all!  Problem is you can't really have one without the other, gotta love bucket biologists who make decisions for everyone else.  They have done great things for many waters.  Anyone know how the population of native Cutts is holding up in Yellowstone Lake and it's tribs?  Or how much is spent every year in vain attempts to kill off the Lake Trout that now reside there? 

[andercee]

I think maybe the state should do a bait handling class like it does for firearms education or the bow hunting course.  People who pass the course and have a certificate could use live bait anywhere.

[mtjohn]

Realistically, if they are worried about introducing a new fish species by allowing live bait, they should do it like a friend of mine said they did in Minn.  They allowed people to purchase rainbow trout minnows, so even if someone dumped their bait bucket, they were just adding to the trout fishery.  We have hatcheries that sit idle this time of year, and I imagine they could produce a few extra rainbows for live bait.
MT

[Lamnidae]

If it becomes a possibility to keep big brookies in Georgetown, I hope people will recognize that the old hogs swimming around in there are no good for eating and send them back to be caught another day.  Ice fishing in recent years at Georgetown has taken on a whole new dimension when you can get your little ratso hook straightened out at any time by a 6 lb. brookie.   We landed a few last summer that looked like something sea-run.  

[missoulafish]

Good post Lam.

[oldschoolben]

yes i agree lam let them go so we can enjoy them for a while caught only one so far but it was a nice fish

[IllynPayne]

I had heard the the brookies in Gtown got hit with some disease (whirling disease I thought) which knocked down the numbers and that's why you couldn't keep them anymore.  I know you could keep them when I was in college ('98-02).  That said, I'm glad the numbers have rebounded enough that if people want to they can keep 'em.  I go for the kokes.

I could be wrong, but I think Whirling Disease only targets salmonids and sculpids.  Brook Trout are members of the Char family.  Regardless, the ban on keeping brookies was put into place because of very low counts in the FWP's gill-nets.  They were apparently seeing a decline in numbers of a period of time.  Also, I agree that the Kokanee are the way to go on GTL.  I haven't heard any reports yet, but I'm sure people have been catching them.

[fishin247]

Mtjohn,
I think your partly right about the walleye introduction and the decline in perch, but I think that that alone didn't do it in. I think that coupled with the buckets full of perch that were caught helped. I think the FWP was too slow in decreasing the limit on perch. Just me supposition here, I'm not a scientist or nothing. I want to say walleye in CF was a bucket bio thing wasn't it?

[fishinwithbrittanies]

I could be wrong, but I think Whirling Disease only targets salmonids and sculpids.  Brook Trout are members of the Char family.  Regardless, the ban on keeping brookies was put into place because of very low counts in the FWP's gill-nets.  They were apparently seeing a decline in numbers of a period of time.  Also, I agree that the Kokanee are the way to go on GTL.  I haven't heard any reports yet, but I'm sure people have been catching them.

Yeah, I wasn't really sure about the whirling disease thing, I just heard about the population decline, but I also thought if it was whirling then the trout population would have seen it too.  I am far from a biologist and probably shouldn't have ever said that...ha ha.  I know that there was a decrease in the numbers that FWP was worried about though

[MTviking]

Pike in Canyon Ferry,  manage them, whatever, great!  Pike in the rivers, kill them all!  Problem is you can't really have one without the other, gotta love bucket biologists who make decisions for everyone else.  They have done great things for many waters.  Anyone know how the population of native Cutts is holding up in Yellowstone Lake and it's tribs?  Or how much is spent every year in vain attempts to kill off the Lake Trout that now reside there? 

Gotta love government offiicials, FWP etc. that are so easily influenced by the special interest groups with cash, i.e. Trout Unlimited to make decisions for the rest of us.  It is true that a lake trout will eat a native cutthroat whenever given the opportuntiy, same with pike.  But the biggest threat to the native cutthroat by a long shot, the second biggest threat is not even remotely close,  is the rainbow trout.  Cuttbows are a very common occurence and the pure strain native cutthroat population's genetics are being diluted by the crossbreeding.  You will not find a pike or lake trout on a Cutthroat red but you're pretty likely to find a rainbow trying to spread its seeds.

In regards to Canyon Ferry, maybe the non-native perch fishery has taken a hit from the supposedly non-native walleye and from the native northern pike but what the hey?  You are giving a little to gain a lot in most peoples opinion.  In general, stand alone perch populations do not make a very attractive fishery.  They are very very prolific and quickly outnumber the lake's carrying capacity if not kept in check.  The biggest problem on Canyon Ferry is food supply and spawning structure.  Perch require flooded vegetation for successful spawning.  Lakes that can provide that are abundant with perch, e.g. Lake Upsata, regardless of predators.

 If I were in charge of canyon ferry management I would start by sinking lots and lots of timber/brush along the shorelines to provide spawning habitat for perch. Then heavily stock ,probably, spottail and golden shiners for benthic/shoreline forage and emerald shiners & Cisco for pelagic/open water forage.  Then I would stock more pike to keep the walleyes in check and also stock kokanee, crappie, bluegill, channel cats,  largemouth and smallmouth bass to balance everything out and make trips to canyon ferry much more interesting.

[MTangler]

Sometimes I just don't even waste my breath. Old timers that fish the Stone are an interesting bunch. They are able to talk your ear off for hours. Careful while having beers in the Huntley area, you may find yourself marrooned at the bar.

Hey now.. Whats that supposed to mean?
 

[doublehaul]

Always entertaining none-the-less.

[copperjohn]

Never met a pike I didn't Kill.  Slimy good fer nuttin beeches.

[MTviking]

Never met a pike I didn't Kill.  Slimy good fer nuttin beeches.

Well stay away from my home waters and your ok with me.

[fishin247]

Hey viking, what do you mean native pike?

[MTviking]

Pike are native to Montana.  Maybe not native to Canyon Ferry but native to Montana.

[The Fishing Sage]

On the topic of the brookies. I've been fishing Georgetown since I was a little one. I have never noticed a drop in the brook trout population, I've speculated that maybe the FWP was dropping the nets in the wrong places, IE the middle of the lake where the brook trout aren't frequently located. Also on a side note, has anyone noticed the rainbow brook hybrids in the lake?