Author Topic: There's pike in the Waterbury reservoir?  (Read 5970 times)

rbobby

  • Team IceShanty Regular
  • ***
  • Posts: 160
Re: There's pike in the Waterbury reservoir?
« Reply #40 on: Feb 22, 2017, 09:27 AM »
I guess they've been they're a while, just not a huge population of fish.
That's why there's not much trout!

lowaccord66

  • Team IceShantyholic
  • ***
  • Posts: 5,637
Re: There's pike in the Waterbury reservoir?
« Reply #41 on: Feb 22, 2017, 10:37 AM »
Do you have a different theory as to how they got there?  Because I can't think of another likely scenario, other than human activity.

I am not one to make a baseless speculation but if you talk to a fish bio or do a Google search there are plenty of other ways a species can setup in a different body of water including flooding which your state has seen a bit of in the past. 
Catching Muddy Rock Suckers

shiveringjoe

  • Team IceShanty Regular
  • ***
  • Posts: 405
Re: There's pike in the Waterbury reservoir?
« Reply #42 on: Feb 22, 2017, 10:46 AM »
I am not one to make a baseless speculation but if you talk to a fish bio or do a Google search there are plenty of other ways a species can setup in a different body of water.
Yes there are many natural ways for fish to move, but Waterbury reservoir is at least 15 miles from the closest water with established pike populations and there is a big dam between it and the winooski.

lowaccord66

  • Team IceShantyholic
  • ***
  • Posts: 5,637
Re: There's pike in the Waterbury reservoir?
« Reply #43 on: Feb 22, 2017, 10:57 AM »
"From August 28 to 29, 2011, Tropical Storm Irene delivered rainfall ranging from approximately 4 to more than 7 inches in the Winooski River Basin in Vermont. The rainfall resulted in severe fooding throughout the basin and signifcant damage along the Winooski River. In response to the fooding, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the Federal Emergency Management Agency, conducted a new food study to aid in food recovery and restoration and to assist in food forecasting. The study resulted in two sets of food maps that depict the fooding for an 8.3-mile reach of the Winooski River from about 1,000 feet downstream of the Waterbury-Bolton, Vermont, town line upstream to about 2,000 feet upstream of the Waterbury-Middlesex, Vt., town line."

Point being I'd think flooding moved some pike into the res. Before blindly jumping on the all so popular bucket biologist track....
Catching Muddy Rock Suckers

VTMatt

  • Team IceShanty Addict
  • *
  • Posts: 779
Re: There's pike in the Waterbury reservoir?
« Reply #44 on: Feb 22, 2017, 11:00 AM »
"From August 28 to 29, 2011, Tropical Storm Irene delivered rainfall ranging from approximately 4 to more than 7 inches in the Winooski River Basin in Vermont. The rainfall resulted in severe fooding throughout the basin and signifcant damage along the Winooski River. In response to the fooding, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the Federal Emergency Management Agency, conducted a new food study to aid in food recovery and restoration and to assist in food forecasting. The study resulted in two sets of food maps that depict the fooding for an 8.3-mile reach of the Winooski River from about 1,000 feet downstream of the Waterbury-Bolton, Vermont, town line upstream to about 2,000 feet upstream of the Waterbury-Middlesex, Vt., town line."

Point being I'd think flooding moved some pike into the res. Before blindly jumping on the all so popular bucket biologist track....

More chance of a pike growing wings and flying into the res than it migrating flooded water, lol.

lowaccord66

  • Team IceShantyholic
  • ***
  • Posts: 5,637
Re: There's pike in the Waterbury reservoir?
« Reply #45 on: Feb 22, 2017, 11:02 AM »
More chance of a pike growing wings and flying into the res than it migrating flooded water, lol.
 

Ha!  I expected a logical retort from you!  Nice work!   ;D
Catching Muddy Rock Suckers

VTMatt

  • Team IceShanty Addict
  • *
  • Posts: 779
Re: There's pike in the Waterbury reservoir?
« Reply #46 on: Feb 22, 2017, 11:03 AM »
 

Ha!  I expected a logical retort from you!  Nice work!   ;D

The logical response was posted just before your last one, so no need to explain anything.

shiveringjoe

  • Team IceShanty Regular
  • ***
  • Posts: 405
Re: There's pike in the Waterbury reservoir?
« Reply #47 on: Feb 22, 2017, 11:11 AM »
Just for your information, the dam is over 100' tall with a near vertical spillway and there is a really steep gorge on the little river before you get to the winooski. I also doubt there are any pike on that section of the winooski. Yes Irene caused some big flows in that area but there is nothing in the watershed that "should" have pike.

rbobby

  • Team IceShanty Regular
  • ***
  • Posts: 160
Re: There's pike in the Waterbury reservoir?
« Reply #48 on: Feb 22, 2017, 11:13 AM »
Just for your information, the dam is over 100' tall with a near vertical spillway and there is a really steep gorge on the little river before you get to the winooski. I also doubt there are any pike on that section of the winooski. Yes Irene caused some big flows in that area but there is nothing in the watershed that "should" have pike.

Oooooh hit a nerve!

shiveringjoe

  • Team IceShanty Regular
  • ***
  • Posts: 405
Re: There's pike in the Waterbury reservoir?
« Reply #49 on: Feb 22, 2017, 11:17 AM »
I'm not usually one to argue on the internet with strangers but I am definitely annoyed that you found a pike in there.

rbobby

  • Team IceShanty Regular
  • ***
  • Posts: 160
Re: There's pike in the Waterbury reservoir?
« Reply #50 on: Feb 22, 2017, 11:21 AM »
That makes 2 of us.

spot

  • Team IceShanty Addict
  • *
  • Posts: 701
Re: There's pike in the Waterbury reservoir?
« Reply #51 on: Feb 22, 2017, 11:29 AM »
Just for your information, the dam is over 100' tall with a near vertical spillway and there is a really steep gorge on the little river before you get to the winooski. I also doubt there are any pike on that section of the winooski. Yes Irene caused some big flows in that area but there is nothing in the watershed that "should" have pike.

There's another, smaller concrete dam at the head of that gorge, which makes two impassable barriers fish would need to fly over.
May the fish be with you.

Randy

thefishingweatherman

  • Team IceShanty Regular
  • ***
  • Posts: 350
Re: There's pike in the Waterbury reservoir?
« Reply #52 on: Feb 22, 2017, 12:19 PM »
I gotta agree with shiveringjoe and vtmatt on the flooding thing. While Irene did produce astounding amounts of rain across the area, the dam at waterbury res is far too tall and steep for any fish to swim past, even if water was being discharged on the spillway, which drops 140 feet over a distance of 770 feet of exposed bedrock. I can't really imagine a pike getting up that, especially during the extremely high and dirty discharge that would have happened there with Irene. Most of the time, the spillway is not even operational - all the water goes through the turbine. Upstream of the res are mostly mountain brooks and one mid sized river, none of which drain any pike water, that I am aware of anyways.

lowaccord66

  • Team IceShantyholic
  • ***
  • Posts: 5,637
Re: There's pike in the Waterbury reservoir?
« Reply #53 on: Feb 22, 2017, 12:27 PM »
Just for your information, the dam is over 100' tall with a near vertical spillway and there is a really steep gorge on the little river before you get to the winooski. I also doubt there are any pike on that section of the winooski. Yes Irene caused some big flows in that area but there is nothing in the watershed that "should" have pike.

I am now informed.  I could very well be wrong in making my point and that's fine.  This has been better reading than:

"Dang bucket biologists let's get them"  which is a defeatist attitude that casts a black cloud on all fishermen with any anti's.  We keep beating that drum and the next thing you know water bodies will be closed "to prevent the man made introduction of non native species" 
Catching Muddy Rock Suckers

thefishingweatherman

  • Team IceShanty Regular
  • ***
  • Posts: 350
Re: There's pike in the Waterbury reservoir?
« Reply #54 on: Feb 22, 2017, 02:07 PM »
"Dang bucket biologists let's get them"  which is a defeatist attitude that casts a black cloud on all fishermen with any anti's.  We keep beating that drum and the next thing you know water bodies will be closed "to prevent the man made introduction of non native species"

You seem to be suggesting that we ought to ignore the fact that stocking fish into new waterbodies is illegal, lest some cabal of anti-fishing folks get some extra ammo? Can't really buy into that idea. Fact is, the evidence points to illegal stocking in this case, and whoever did it should be held accountable if and when they are caught, however unlikely that may be. If we all just sit silent on the sidelines, next thing you know we'll all only have asian carp to catch someday.

peteinvermont

  • Team IceShanty Regular
  • ***
  • Posts: 225
Re: There's pike in the Waterbury reservoir?
« Reply #55 on: Feb 22, 2017, 02:26 PM »
I know the odds are long, but would it be possible that the pike was introduced to the res by way of bait buckets?  Meaning, a very small pike is caught in a minnow trap, and the bait was (illegally) used then the remaining bait dumped? 

Not that it matters at all, but I was trying to be optimistic and think of a way pike might have been unintentionally into'd there. 

Crayfish2

  • Team IceShanty Regular
  • ***
  • Posts: 378
Re: There's pike in the Waterbury reservoir?
« Reply #56 on: Feb 22, 2017, 02:41 PM »
I know the odds are long, but would it be possible that the pike was introduced to the res by way of bait buckets?  Meaning, a very small pike is caught in a minnow trap, and the bait was (illegally) used then the remaining bait dumped? 

Not that it matters at all, but I was trying to be optimistic and think of a way pike might have been unintentionally into'd there.

I was thinking along those same lines.  Seems highly possible.

thefishingweatherman

  • Team IceShanty Regular
  • ***
  • Posts: 350
Re: There's pike in the Waterbury reservoir?
« Reply #57 on: Feb 22, 2017, 04:48 PM »
I know the odds are long, but would it be possible that the pike was introduced to the res by way of bait buckets?  Meaning, a very small pike is caught in a minnow trap, and the bait was (illegally) used then the remaining bait dumped? 

Definitely possible, but this is why the state has rules about transporting bait you caught yourself from one waterbody to another. If you are catching your own bait, you're only supposed to use it on the same waterbody. Otherwise, you purchase it from a licensed vendor, and I don't know any of those that sell baby pike. Unless birds dropped at least 2 pike in there, seems pretty likely this is the result of lawbreaking, given the watershed.

lowaccord66

  • Team IceShantyholic
  • ***
  • Posts: 5,637
Re: There's pike in the Waterbury reservoir?
« Reply #58 on: Feb 22, 2017, 05:36 PM »
You seem to be suggesting that we ought to ignore the fact that stocking fish into new waterbodies is illegal, lest some cabal of anti-fishing folks get some extra ammo? Can't really buy into that idea. Fact is, the evidence points to illegal stocking in this case, and whoever did it should be held accountable if and when they are caught, however unlikely that may be. If we all just sit silent on the sidelines, next thing you know we'll all only have asian carp to catch someday.

I can see how it comes off that way and can appreciate the thoughtfulness.  Unfortunately it's difficult to get things across the line 100% with typed words.  Anyways, I am not suggesting that. What I am suggesting is, that it's the default answer posed in a number of these cases, oftentimes without warrant.  In this case maybe not and again I do understand and am happy to be wrong for the sake of discussion.  I think we can all do a better job of being vocal about these things without providing fodder for those that wish to prevent us from fishing.  Birds and the fish thing is interesting. 

I agree with you we can't be silent.  Self policing is very important.  Avoiding the mob mentality and not being perceived as a bunch of beer drinking idiots is also important. 

However, I do laugh over the irony. Our government can decide to shove tank scrubbers where ever they wish.  Anyone ever read about what's happening to the Pacific Salmon with all the supplemental stocking from the feds...of the same species...it's an angle I think should be understood if this topic is to be discussed.

You should google up Kingfisher moving fish and read about it...neat stuff. 



Catching Muddy Rock Suckers

thefishingweatherman

  • Team IceShanty Regular
  • ***
  • Posts: 350
Re: There's pike in the Waterbury reservoir?
« Reply #59 on: Feb 22, 2017, 06:23 PM »
I can see how it comes off that way and can appreciate the thoughtfulness.  Unfortunately it's difficult to get things across the line 100% with typed words.  Anyways, I am not suggesting that. What I am suggesting is, that it's the default answer posed in a number of these cases, oftentimes without warrant.  In this case maybe not and again I do understand and am happy to be wrong for the sake of discussion.  I think we can all do a better job of being vocal about these things without providing fodder for those that wish to prevent us from fishing.  Birds and the fish thing is interesting. 

I agree with you we can't be silent.  Self policing is very important.  Avoiding the mob mentality and not being perceived as a bunch of beer drinking idiots is also important. 

However, I do laugh over the irony. Our government can decide to shove tank scrubbers where ever they wish.  Anyone ever read about what's happening to the Pacific Salmon with all the supplemental stocking from the feds...of the same species...it's an angle I think should be understood if this topic is to be discussed.

You should google up Kingfisher moving fish and read about it...neat stuff.

I appreciate the thoughtful response! I agree that self-policing is the key, or even better, adhering to the law. While I agree that the govt doesn't always get it right, at least science is used to inform decisions these days. Too many people think they know more than anyone else, and decide to take matters into their own hands, like I suspect happened here at the Res with an illegal stocking of pike. Just takes one bad apple with big, grandiose ideas to screw over a whole waterway.

I am reading a book right now called "Totem Salmon" which goes into the history of Pacific Salmon from the time of Native American's arrival to present. It also goes into the decline of the fish's once mind boggling numbers, once the white man arrived, and saw the fish as nothing more than food. The need for regulations became clear, and the government started programs to manage the fish. Initially, not much science was behind these programs, so there was a lot of experimenting happening. Eastern salmon and trout were transplanted out west, and pacific trout and salmon transplanted back east, screwing up fisheries in both places. Today, more science is used, which leads to more well studied approaches, and more conservative programs, which isn't a bad thing. The government is not immune to bad ideas though, which is why we all must keep a watchful eye. Even so, it still beats someone taking matters into their own hands, like is what I think happened with the Res, hence the need for these discussions, and vigilance. In Maine, where fishing regs are more strict than here in VT, pike are spreading to such a degree that in some waterbodies, you are legally REQUIRED to kill them when you catch them... Might not be a bad idea in this case, in my opinion...

 


Follow Iceshanty at Twitter Iceshanty Facebook Page Iceshanty Youtube Channel
Iceshanty | MyFishFinder | MyHuntingForum
Contact | Disclaimer | Privacypolicy | Sponsor
© 1996- Iceshanty.com
All Rights Reserved.