walleye rant

[SSKY]

I know I have complained about this in the past, and I will continue to do so until i am an old codger that cannot make his way down the ramp. (likely worse at that time) World record sauger 8 12 1971. Lake Cumberland record sauger 7 pounds 7 oz In "1983" I think that is a resonable enough time to dispell the early impoundment reason for a large fish to exist as they were not stocked. That being said the conditions that existed for that sauger also exist for the native walleye strain that we know are here and they are the only fish that should be stocked in the lake, the ones that that came from here. Sorry for the rant ignore it if you do not care.

[birdstrike]

Do you mean the only FISH stocked in the lake or the only walleye stocked in the lake? Is there any evidence that the Rockastle strain fish will do any better/ worse than the Lake Erie fish. Is one easier to harvest in the nurseries? Will the competition from stripers likely limit the growth of either walleye to the 10lb range? If they are using the Dam spawners for their brood stock, are they trying to genetically isolate the lake spawners. Because they think these fish will have a better chance of natural reproduction in Cumberland??? Just asking. I want to agree with you on this one, just trying to see both sides of the argument.

Steve

[kygorski]

Where is the money going to come from?This isn't being sarcastic, the states are strapped for money now.Even a walleye stamp wouldn't help.When I lived up north, a small lake was stocked with walleye, there was a small chance they would reproduce, these fish were bought by sportsmen who cared, of course at that time employment was very high, money wasn't a problem, the drive lasted two years, and it worked. Then the catch and eat guys came.

[birdstrike]

I think SSKY was referring to stocking one fish over another. May be no real cost increase in that. If it was shown that the Southern Walleye could successfully reproduce in the Cumberland, at least as well as the Erie fish, I say he's right. It should be the fish to stock. If it's just a put and take thing, why bother. I would rather see numbers of good fish that a few trophies.

[MASBASS]

[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON Jan-31-06 AT 04:47PM (EST)[/font][p]I am not positive about this, it was what I was told by a member of the DNR fisheries dept one and a half years ago. There are two strains of walleye they can purchase to stock in the lakes. The use to stock one strain then several years ago they switched to the other strain because of the cost difference. The second strain did not do well so now we have less keeper size fish. He told me that they had secured the money to start stocking the better strain this past stocking season. I was told once that the cost difference was 2:1 One of the strains was the Erie strain do not remember the other. Wizard can you help on this I know you have spoken to them several times about this. The reason they switched was a large cost difference I do know that.

[JoeB]

It had nothing to do with cost, it had to do with viability of the fish.

[MASBASS]

That may be true all I know is the man told me it had to do with the cost at the time and availability of the strain they use to stock is the reason they changed.

[SSKY]

No offense Joe B but I don't think the viabilty of the native fish to this river drainage was the issue. The walleyes in the lake 20 years after impoundment that were caught would dispute that notion, and the spawning ideal would be compared to the stripers,they don't. As to if native walleye could spawn in the lake,there are still sauger in the lake as of today and the state record sauger was caught in 1983 at the lower end of the lake and you can catch them as of today, and the strain from here is still claimed to be in the drainage of the lake. I know it is a money issue, but in the long run I cannot see how it is not better to stock the native strain fish that evolved here and adapted to the conditions that are here.

[SSKY]

Both sides of the issue. I think that no one would want erie smallmouths stocked in dale hollow to prop the fishery to have bigger numbers of fish caught. The fish there are more numerous and that is the goal for the walleye on cland. So if it was done there would be more smallmouths to catch and then everyone would be happy. It would not matter about the history of the lake just more fish caught. If that was done the lake would be average and have no special intrest that it has now. The native strain walleye on cland have never been given the chance to be stocked to numbers to see if they could do the job of providing a fishery as the stripers have.

[JoeB]

SSKY, I know this is a hot button issue with you and I'm not trying to start an argument, but the conditions that the native walleye adapted to no longer exist. They adapted to a river environment that no longer exists and did extremely poorly after the lake was impounded. Yes, Sauger exist in the lake, and there are some big ones. In the early 80s, I caught one at the mouth of Harmon that weighed 7 lbs. But, existing and flourishing are different things. I don't think anybody would describe the Cland sauger fishery today as good. It can only be described as remnant. I would hate to think that I had to catch one on any given day. However, before impoundment, I'm sure the sauger fishery was quite good. Like the native walleye, they didn't adapt well to the lake environment. Today though, I think the debate is moot. The erie walleye is here and even if native fish were restocked, they would surely hybridize with the erie fish. Given the erie strain's lake environment adaptability, I would expect their genetic make up would completely over shadow that of the native fish after a few generations. As you know, there is still a population of native fish in the Rockcastle, and natives were stocked in Woods Ck lake a few years ago on an experimental basis. Woods Ck has no erie strain fish to compete with them so we'll see in a few years if they grow to the giant proportions that our grandfathers caught from the Cumberland River. I hope they do.

[JoeB]

PS I still maintain that money was never the issue in deciding to stock the erie walleye. Walleye (any strain) are very inexpensive to raise as long as there is an egg source.

[SSKY]

Joe B I agree with your opinion and I also see that the striper population flourishes without stocking. It is amazing to watch them swim up from La. up the river and jump the dam then rest in our lake. Again just joking, no offense. Question for you, the erie strain makes its way all the way up the southfork up to the shoals in the winter all the way to Tenn. If the fish can hybridize I see no way that the same scenario could not have happened in the Rockcastle river.If not then there would be a easy egg pool to get and then stock only those in the lake as stocking seems to be necessary anyway. I understand the genetic dilution but I thought an F1 hybrid bass in texas with florida strain and local fish was a good thing?