Smallmouth and Perch invasive species?

[Anthony Adams]

Utah officials propose non-native fish be killed

By Josh Loftin, Associated Press

Published: Sunday, Sept. 18 2011 10:37 p.m. MDT

SALT LAKE CITY — Wildlife officials in Utah frustrated with the ongoing problem of illegal fish stocking in lakes, rivers and reservoirs may require anglers to kill some nonnative species they catch.

The catch-and-kill regulations, proposed to take effect next year on two northern Utah lakes, are a new approach for Western states struggling with waters ruined by fish that don't belong in specific waterways, such as the northern pike, smallmouth bass and yellow perch. The species occur naturally in some areas, but can destroy ecosystems in others.

The intent of the program is less about eradicating the problem and more to educate people about the impact, which the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources says is far worse than poachers who shoot big game animals.

Eliminating a non-native fish often requires draining a reservoir or poisoning all the fish in the effected part of a lake or river and can cost hundreds of thousands of dollars, said DWR's Drew Cushing.

"It's a really severe problem throughout the West, and it seems like it just keeps getting worse," Cushing said. "The catch-and-kill rule is unique, but we want people to understand that just about the worse thing they can do with these fish is release them."

Cushing said while educating fisherman is the primary purpose of the catch-and-kill rule, they are looking into requiring the people who purposely dump illegal fish to pay for the clean-up. Most nonnative fish are put into waters by people who release them from their aquariums or fishermen who want their favorite sport species close to home.

Even with penalties in place, like in Idaho where the illegal stockers are forced to pay for eradication, catching them can be difficult, said Ed Schriever, chief of fisheries for the Idaho Department Fish and Game. But it is one of the ways in which Idaho officials have battled the problem.

Idaho, for example, prohibits the transport of live fish without a commercial permit, Schriever said. They also have removed the size and bag limits on nonnative fish throughout the state, a step Utah is also taking on some southern reservoirs and rivers where smallmouth bass are a problem.

Educating people is an important step but it may not be the most effective approach, Schriever said.

"There may be some people in 2011 who don't know this is an illegal activity," he said. "But there are people who want their fish in their water and don't care about the implications."

Nevada officials are currently dealing with yellow perch and northern pike infestations in reservoirs near Ely and Elko, said Nevada Department of Wildlife spokesman Chris Healy.

They have tried to encourage anglers to help fix the problem by removing limits, although fish like the northern pike are so prolific that they seem to reproduce faster than they can be hooked. Healy said the department has also used some predatory hybrid fish that don't reproduce.

The most effective answer for at least some reservoirs, however, seems to be "draining it and starting over," Healy said.

[Anthony Adams]

I find it interesting that here were trying to protect these species. While out west they want to eradicate them.

Just seems like we could come up with a catch and deliver to Michigan program.

[Mike S.]

I was going to say, if they only knew how much those fish were loved here in Michigan.....  I could care less if they kill the pike and perch, but spare the smallies.  The other fish are eaters, but we love our smallies.

[djkimmel]

Nowadays we have to look at genetics. Some fish have been in their area long enough that they have evolved to live there better so moving fish any long distance, even of the same species, is not a good idea.

If I were an angler out there, I would very carefully look at what they are protecting by killing these 'invasive' fish since so many fish in so many areas are not originally from there and they do have a anti-bass bias at times out west. If they are trying to protect some other fish that was just planted there years earlier, then I might argue if I liked bass. If they are protecting a truly native fish that is being harmed, then I might go along.

I have always asked anglers NOT to start their own personal stocking programs. It can end up doing a lot of harm even to bass. Some fish are just much better at surviving where they are, not where anglers want to put them.

[Waterfoul]

There are also some lake associations that don't have a clue about planting fish, what will live where, etc....  I fish a 400 acre or so private lake on a regular basis that the Association has tanken upon themselves to "self manage" the fish population.  The lake averages 6 or 7 feet in depth, has good weeds in the spring and fall and some pretty good stumps.  They of course treat the lake for weeds resulting in very little cover during the hottest days of the year.  Several years ago they planted 3000 walleye.  To my knowledge no one has EVER caught one.  Wonder if the thousands and thousands of "weed rocket" pike has anything to do with that.  They also planted several thousand small mouths.  No one has ever caught one of those either.  Water temps in the high 80's, no deep water, and no natural spawning areas have anything to do with it perhaps?

Fish only live where they can thrive... like all those weed rocket pike.

[djkimmel]

I wonder if they are consulting with an 'expert.'