Wood Creek walleye

[SSKY]

I really just want to learn, I do not see how stocking a river strain native walleye in to a small impoundment with little to no flow will prove anything. I do not think that native smallmouths would do any good there as they as they would at lake linville at Mount vernon with the structure that is there with no flow. It would seem that if you wished to pick a lake for an experiment laurel would be the one to choose instead of a creek pond. Or even better, try it where they came from and see what happens, Why not try?? It has not been tried for a long time and the old reasons are OLD and continue to be OLD. Stock the native strain with todays knowledge in the lakes where they came from and then if they fail to deliver, If stocked like stripers, then so be it,If they can't live in the lake as they have proven that they can.

[JoeB]

I give! Obviously, you're a professional walleye complainer akin to the paid protesters who show up at the world bank every day. The reason that Woods Ck was chosen instead of Laurel is that it is a giant conspiracy to irritate you and insure that KY's walleye fishery is always subpar. I wont mention the fact that Wood's Ck has no erie strain walleye to hybribize with the southern strain.

[birdstrike]

Wood creek feeds into the Rockcastle, which as we all know is where the strain presently still exists. If you are going to stock walleye into Wood Creek, you would certainly want to stock the Rockcastle strain or take the chance of hybridizing the final hold out of the pure southern strain. In that respect, keep stocking Rockcastle walleye in WCL. Will they grow and reproduce as well as the same fish might in C-land? Of course not, but I think our Fish and Wildlife folks know that.

Now then for Cumberland... a fish and wildlife study showed that the strength of a year class of stocking is quite obvious two years after that stocking. That in fact the average fish captured in the spawning areas is a 17 inch 2 year old fish. So, why not spend a couple of years stocking nothing but the Southern Strain walleye in Cumberland and see what we get? It would be a good estimate of their survivability and growth rate. One problem is that genetic studies are needed to tell the fish apart and I imagine that is quite expensive for the state. So that opens a whole can of worms- how to tell, without tagging, which walleye would be the newly stocked Southern stain and which were naturally spawned from the Erie Strain. Anyway, it would be a good start, and maybe we'll see that soon.

I think Fish and Wildlife are heading in the right direction with this. And I actually admire their patience with this matter. They have isolated a control group of fish for study. They may not be ready to produce half a million fingerlings a year yet. Remember the hatcheries have lost an entire year's worth of fish due to disease in the past. I'm ready for the re-introduction of the southern strain too, but for now, why not spend a little time doing some research before dumping fish in the lake. That's your point, isn't it? That the state started stocking the Erie strain based on assumptions, theory, and availability, without fully understanding the consequences?

Resectfully, Steve

[SSKY]

Good post Steve, I would also like to see the results of that. It is what I am waiting for. We have not given the southern strain a true chance yet on Cumberland. The state tried to do it in the early years to establish a hatchery with the native fish but they did not have the technology to do it. I would think that by now we can figure it out, which I know we can. There is no need to let our kentucky native fish to go by the wayside if we can do it just because it is easier. If it can be done we will all benefit from it Down the road. Sorry if I offend those that disagree, but I will stick with the fish that came from here to do better as they were made here.

[SSKY]

Thanks Joe B that is not the case.

[JoeB]

Please tell me about the technology that was lacking in that early hatchery. Tell me how today's hatchery would produce a heartier fingerling.

[SSKY]

If I am not mistaken that article was in Ky afield about the hatchery that was tried in the early years of the lake to propagate and stock the river strain walleye. Tell me if i am wrong. I Know that our biologists have much more info than then and would know better methods of doing so than at that time.

[JoeB]

I'm asking about your statement. You said that the early hatchery at Blue Heron didn't have the "technology" to produce native strain walleye. What "technology" are you refering to??? Since their only egg and milt source was from the native fish, I think it's safe to assume that they produced 100%, blue blood native walleye. Those fish didn't work. The walleye fishery floundered and went to hell in a handbag. Now, please tell me about the new space age technology you've refered to that would change that? What is taking place in our hatcheries today that is so vastly different from how those fingerlings were produced? If you dump a bunch of native fingerlings into Cumberland today, wont you end up the same thing we have now? Or are you suggesting that all the walleye in the lake be eradicated and start from scratch??

[birdstrike]

Scott, Thanks for continuing to bring up walleye related questions. There are a lot of folks like me that read with interest and maybe even learn a little in the process. As one of the few who has taken the time to find a successful pattern for catchin walleye, you get my respect. Hope you continue the cause of generating interest in the species.

Joe, Thanks for being the voice of reason in many of these walleye discussions :) And for egging SSKY on! I can tell you're a dedicated sportsman, scientific in nature, and truly in touch with the ecology of LC.

Keep up the good work gentlemen!

Steve

[SSKY]

Greers ferry lake Ark, where do the fish that they stock there come from? Why do they do that stupid stuff? i understand the point of having a numbers fishery. Then, so would you be in support of stopping the liberal limit on Ky bass as they seem to do much better in the lake setting compared to largemouths and we can have a spot fishery. Hybrid striped bass will survive much better than the true stripers even after release, and we could have a plenty, the large gizzard shad problem is gone and with plenty of hybrids there would be none. Would you support stocking only hybrids in lake cumberland as it would be cheaper and there would be more fish, Only the size of the fish would decrease, and the stocked fish would do much better.

[SSKY]

Hey Steve, with that last Pwt tournament did you pick up any early walleye tips. The guy that fished shadraps on boards on the bluffs at midcreek made me think. I have not tried that thus far. I have done semi well casting a fluke with a 1/4 oz jig head and letting it fall to the bottom at about 10 feet on a dead line then jigging it about 2 feet then letting if fall back to the bottom. Mostly caught larger walleye but I was fishing for striper on the same spots.

[birdstrike]

I've got two days to fish this week. I'm thinking Laurel Lake or Cumberland tailwater. I got some walley divers in rainbow trout color that need to be tried out in either spot. It's a little early to be heading up the South Fork. Did that last year about this time and fished in the freezing rain for nodda. Where would you fish for walleye right now? And does the under the lights at night trick work in the winter or is that a summer phenomenon?