Re: LandLocked Salmon
 

I’m with Slider but before I jump into this, I want to say that I fish for all species, the least of which is trout. I fail to see how anyone could say that trout stocking is ruining any of our fisheries, short of the overpopulation of lake trout perhaps. Luckily, in 2013 NJ has discontinued stocking lake trout since there is no need as those are reproducing populations. Logically, to have a great overall fishery you want diversity and need to stock those species that do not successfully reproduce in NJ waters. Here, both largemouth and smallmouth bass basically take care of themselves reproduction wise although F&W does supplement these populations based on their sample tests.

It is a known fact that the NJ trout fishery (including production and stocking) counts for the majority of fishing license sales in NJ. These sales (along with some other sources including federal funds) is what creates the NJ Fish & Wildlife budget that allows for the production and stocking of nearly 1 million warm water fish each year including Northern Pike, Muskellunge, Tiger Muskie, Walleye, Striped Bass Hybrid, Channel Catfish, Largemouth Bass, Smallmouth Bass, Brown Bullhead, Bluegill Sunfish, White Crappie; Fathead Minnows and Gambusia.

Think about it, without these “trout monies”, there would be insufficient funding for Craig and the boys at the Hackettstown hatchery who do an amazing job not only improving the bass fishery but also every other non-trout fishery we enjoy.

Why not salmon also… especially since we receive them free from MA in exchange for surplus pike. As for where they get stocked, I’m not a fish biologist but F&W does carefully evaluate our waterways when these decisions are made. If you want to know why Aeroflex and Waywayanda and not Round Valley or Merril Creek then contact Pat Hamilton at F&W and ask, she’ll be happy to tell you why. I know that besides suitability (depth, temp, DO), Tilcon was chosen because salmon are often confused with browns and this will remedy that as no other trout will be stocked there. Tilcon also does not get pounded the way many lakes do since it has such limited access and this should help with establishing their population there. Will these salmon ruin the bass/pickerel/perch fishery at Tilcon?... Don’t see it…

To the naysayers who think our fisheries are being ruined by trout, that salmon are a waste of money, or that nothing is done to support “bass guys” who want their own waterways, I would LOVE for you to share your ideas on what you think F&W SHOULD be doing instead of their current management plan regarding stocking (I support catch and release regulations but that is a different topic). If your suggestions make sense within themselves AND with respect to the overall NJ fishery, I would be happy to bring these suggestions up at a future freshwater fisheries forum myself.

Re: LandLocked Salmon
 

You touched all the bases Ugly Stick...Cept maybe adding a few extra words about what kind of shape the state would be in financially if we lost a large group of fisherman, like the anglers that pursue trout..Or any group for that matter..I believe that no matter our choice of fish to pursue we always seem to have a bond with a fellow angler wether he fishs the salt or fresh waters of our state..And when u follow this forum u see the eagerness of fellow anglers are to help one another..Great place to discuss fishing, stocking tackle u name it some one here will come up with an answer...I don't have the answer to my orginal thought bout where or should we stock LL salmon..Then the question came up about stocking sea run browns, then Lake trout in Monksville..What better place or time of year for that matter to kick these subjects around..But as fisherman after the same goal, lets improve our waters even if its not our game fish of choice..Tite lines guys and Happy Holidays------Slider

Re: LandLocked Salmon
 

NJ is a tough place to have a strong viable LL fishery.. Its too far south really IMHO.. They are not as inclined to stay in the thermocline like browns and rainbows.. They are a surface oriented fish by nature, actually a stream fish.. Here in the Fingers, when browns and rainbows are in the thermocline at 50 feet, the salmon are at 25-30 feet...
They do not reproduce here in NY state , anywhere, and are maintained by stocking.. Even with our huge deep cold glacial Finger lakes with inlet and outlet streams that run for many miles, they cannot reproduce.. It seems a waste to have to troll downriggers or run wire for a 15 inch fish on a small NJ lake.. They are here in Seneca and cayuga only a few hours away from N jersey.. Yes they put on a more arial display than browns, and are faster, but they don't get near as big as a rule .. Big fat ones are less prone to leaping.. I have caught some big ones up to 10 pounds here, but thats rare..
They are being decimated up here by lampreys, and the fishery in Cayuga has suffered terribly.. Little ones 10 inches long with lampreys attached.. sickening..
Also thousands are killed because the samll ones are very aggressive and swallow trebles easily, or are caught on downriggers, and can't pull the release and drown.. the trollers never even know they hooked one... If you locate them they are ready biters.. Up here April and may are good months for surface casting or flatline trolling with rapalas[Can't beat a good silver/black!].. After that its all downriggers, wire, leadcore or dipseys until late fall...bob

Re: LandLocked Salmon
 

Good in put Bob, unless we get lucky here in Jersey we mite be wasting our time stocking, but if they take could be lots of fun..Lake Champlain is the only place I know of right now thats having any success with LL"s numerous fish coming out in excess of 4 & 5 lbs..Vermont side seems to be having some good results in natural reproduction..Lake George did ok up till bout 10 years ago, now their fishery has fallen flat, thousands stocked yearly hardly any being caught. The lakes we are stoking here are on small side gas motors not even allowed..Although not sure on Aeroflex..So would possible make good spring and late fall fishing fun here..But suspect your right..Tough job to get these fish to take. Time will tell

Re: LandLocked Salmon
 

Historically, Cayuga Lake was the best LL lake in NY.. I used to catch big ones right from shore in spring including a monster at 31 inches, and 10 pounds..." The lampreys have really destroyed the fishery.. Supposedly, the are going to treat this spring, and kill off the massive numbers of those hideous parasites.. Last time they did it about 10 years ago, the LL fishing bounced back within a year or two, and then declined after several good years as the lampreys increased again... IF the fishery bounces back, its worth the ride up in April and May to fish for LL salmon.. they are not hard to catch when they are close to the surface...
As far as NJ is concerned, I wish NJ fisheries experts every good luck.. perhaps you will get a fair fishery established, but these fish need a lot of room and a lot of food.. Oily food like Herring. [Sawbellies here in NY]. Otherwise they stay small, and just don't seem to do very well.. We have them in Skaneateles Lake, which is gin clear, pristine, deep, ice cold, and not fished hard.. Its a very large Finger Lake.. However. The LL don't do well there, even though there are no lampreys.. In my opinion its because of an insufficient forage base.. They like fatty bait fish, just like any other salmon.. You must remember, ALL Salmon are basically salt water fish, that only spawn in fresh water.. They are active, and need calories.. If their diet/habitat is insufficient, so will the LL population be. bob

Re: LandLocked Salmon
 

I agree with all of Bob's comments. But I think in this conversation we need to level set what we are expecting here in NJ. "Establishing" a LLS fishery here is a relative term and I don't think anyone at F&W is expecting one comparable to the Finger Lakes (lamprey problem aside) or Champlain which is still OK. I prefer to think of this as creating a smaller scale niche fishery that can add a challenge and some additional fun for those interested in pursuing it. Are these fish going to reproduce or grow to 5 -10 lbs here... for the most part no... and that's OK too (even though the state record is an 8lb'er from Aeroflex). If you read F&W's own press release, it states "intended to provide anglers with an opportunity to catch salmon that commonly range from 12" – 17", and an expectation of catching an occasional salmon in excess of 17" (3 pounds)." I think this is what we have now and can continue to expect as long as the program exists. Even though relatively few anglers will utilize this fishery, is it ruining our waterways or a waste of money (which was my point in chiming in on this)... I say absolutely not. Aside from the angling opportunity, I say a more diverse fishery adds to the intrinsic value of NJ's environment which makes it a better place to live. This is one of the principle concepts behind being a conservationist.

Re: LandLocked Salmon
 

I'm not disagreeing with the 'trout monies' aspect. However, when regulations are put into effect that (as a bass guy) tells me I can't fish a certain lake when I want to because of trout stocking, it's horseshit. I don't care about trout and I shouldn't have to suffer not being able to fish my lakes that I want to fish because they decided to 'try' stocking trout there. They won't be able to keep me out of there if they 'close' a part of the season because of stocking.

As far as Tilcon. That place used to be much better with bigger fish. Now a 4lb LMB is hard to come by. The current bank beaters are taking everything out of there, and leaving loads of garbage behind. That place used to be beautiful. Now it's filled with trash all over the place. You think putting trout/salmon in there is going to lessen that? Plus, the bait population there just manages to support the current population of fish and you want to put another predatory fish in there?

Have we learned nothing from the lakers? How they decimated the browns, bass and bait at RVR to the point where bait now has to be stocked itself. There are so many other lakes that you could put fish like LLs into.

And I have sent letters, multiple letters with no response. They're going to ruin Tilcon, and it's the truth. God forbid they ever open up access to that place.

Re: LandLocked Salmon
 

I agree that Tilcon used to be better with bigger fish but unfortunately this is the exact same thing that can be said for any body of water subsequent to it being opened to the public. I personally don’t see the bank beaters taking everything out of Tilcon nor have I seen an unreasonable amount of garbage like at Split Rock. The shoreline access (steep and overgrown) really helps to limit the fishing pressure in addition to it being fairly difficult to get even a yak or canoe in there. Unfortunately, in NJ the bucket brigade exists everywhere and there will always be some garbage left by irresponsible people, no stocking practice will fix this. However, none of that has anything to do with stocking salmon and it is unlikely that the bucket brigade and litterbugs will increase due to the addition of these fish.

With respect to the lakers at RVR, I will acknowledge that it was an error in population management (years of stocking and assuming that they would not reproduce) which has caused a significant shortage in forage that has affected the other species there. Recent population studies there show that the numbers of game fish are not as much of a problem as the size of those fish. Granted, I am over-simplifying the laker issue but if anything, this has been a valuable lesson for F&W. Also note there is no scientific evidence I am aware of that lakers are a problem in Merrill or Monksville.

F&W studied the fish population (including baitfish) at Tilcon as part of their evaluation. If anyone has any scientific evidence supporting that the bait population there just manages to support the current population of fish I would love to see it and would even deliver it to F&W myself. It is worthy of mention that the introduction of salmon to Aeroflex and Waywayanda has ruined neither and they are both holdover trout lakes so they have no closed period. With respect to F&W doing something that helps the bass guys… they stocked smallmouth in Tilcon.

I encourage the writing of letters to F&W and if they go unanswered, attend any of the freshwater fisheries forums and pose your questions and comments during the meeting. The staff will have to respond and do it on the record.

Now…everyone is entitled to their opinion but…

I think most would agree that it is a selfish attitude that does not represent the best interest of the fishery or the sport in general to consider it suffering and unreasonable to only be able to fish certain lakes for a less than 3 week period at the end of march/beginning of April. To say that it is ruining a fishery and is horsesh!t because it inconveniences a few individuals personal agenda for a small period of time is simply ridiculous.

In addition, to publicly state the intent to commit the illegal act of poaching (violation of the terms of a NJ fishing license), by fishing during the closed period, is un-sportsman like to say the least. Better hope Chief Barno doesn’t read this…

Re: LandLocked Salmon
 

I will admit, I tend to be a lot more emotional about this place than other other place in NJ and tend to get slightly heated when I read changes like this as I've been fishing it for a long time. I won't break the law or my fishing license agreement. I'll just argue about it over the internet like most people. ;)

I will however, disagree (and this is obviously just my opinion) that a lake should be closed for a 2-3 week holdover period. I feel a catch and release timeframe would a much better practice especially when I would not even be fishing for the fish that it's closed for. Why block out everyone just for 200 8" fish to get used to waters there? I don't think this should be considered poaching especially. I'm not keeping anything (nor do I ever, except salt water fishing), and everything gets thrown back.

I had this issue with Shadow Lake for a LONG time. Now, that's a whole different lake setup to begin with but, one of the better times to fish was over the closed period due to the time of year and the springtime warmup. Obviously, this no longer matters because they're discontinuing the trout there.

I'm just concerned that the state has so many big trophy trout lakes and lakes that are better suited for stocking trout/salmon. Why do they want to put these fish in an 80 acre lake? Just because its springfed and hits 50' in one spot? Now I know they put 400 smallies into Tilcon last year (or the year before, either way). So now you have a possible 4 total predatory fish (SMB, LMB, Pickerel, and LL's) chasing forage throughout the water column. I've caught LMB at 30' depths on the bottom. Smallies will be there too and even deeper.

I just honestly hope that it doesn't hurt the fishing there. This could end up hurting the gamefish population there and then what? Maybe an apology that they'll never make? Congrats, we ruined a another lake? We wasted so many smallmouth on Audrey just to have the pH drop and turn into a LMB lake anyway. Where are they going to start putting those smallies?

All that being said, if this is considered a trout holdover lake like RVR, then it will never close, correct?

And for the record, I honestly really do appreciate you having this conversation with me because I can vent about things (even if things never change) and actually get some kind of logical answers. :D :D :p

I'd like to attend more meetings but with my work schedule, the early evenings and Saturday's are tough to get to due to locations. I wanted to go to the December 7th meeting but had to work. :mad:

Re: LandLocked Salmon
 

It’s all good Chaos…the fact the so many people here have such a passion for the sport is what keeps the forum interesting. I haven’t seen enough data on either side to debate whether spring trout stocking should be a closed period or just a catch and release period but it is an interesting question. My personal opinion is that it isn't that big of a deal being a closed period. Maybe Mark B. can chime in here on the reasoning behind F&W’s policy surrounding this.

Lake Audrey… ok, that was another fail but not entirely the state’s fault. I don’t know why they thought the neutralization would be permanent but bottom line is it didn’t work.

I can’t say that F&W gets it all right all of the time but no one does. I do believe that they are a very bright bunch of people who work hard and overall do an excellent job for very modest if not meak salaries because they really believe in what they are trying to accomplish. Because of this, in any given situation, I support that they are making well researched educated decisions that will succeed until proven otherwise.

I too love Tilcon and after talking with F&W at the last forum believe that the introduction of salmon should work out fine – just have some faith and believe in it. They know that there are a number of anglers that don't want to see anything about that place change so they didn't take the decision lightly. And yes, since it will be a holdover trout lake the same regulations (no closed period just catch and release) should apply.