Fishing Forum
Skip to Content


Fishing Forum > Utah Fishing Forum : Utah Fishing General >

Scofield. M.O.T.S.S.

FLASY FISH LURES
fishing ICE TENT FLAG fishing
(Page 2 of 3)
> > > >
Report Post | Register to Reply
Re: [ice_sled] Scofield. M.O.T.S.S. In reply to
Bingo! There were chubs in the lake in small numbers before the 8 fish limit. But there were enough 4 to 5 pound Cutthroat and 3 to 4 pound rainbows that kept them in check.

The DWR had this spectacular idea that Scofield could handle over 2X's the fishing hours that it was currently getting . So the plan was to make the reservoir a fishery where you could "Come fill up the cooler" to incentavise more anglers to use the lake. The large trout numbers were depleted and the smaller trout were caught then taken home in coolers before they could grow to a predatory size. The chubs filled the void and quickly overran the Reservoir.


To me personally this is why it is so frustrating getting told the same story year after year after year. The initial mistake of the 8 fish limit was most likely done in good faith that Scofield could handle the additional fishing pressure and more anglers could enjoy the resource. But the way they are dragging their feet with "The Long Game" and "Cost Effective" solution is not acceptable. The "resource" is without question under utilized now and has been for over a decade. And there is a cost of lost revenue to running with a under utilized Scofield that needs to be considered as a offset to a rotenone treatment. That $$$ number has never been addressed and is very relevant!


In my opinoin the biggest obstacle to doing a rotenone treatment on Scofield is not the price tag. I believe it has a lot more to do with saving face than the money. The DWR needs to come to grips with-

1) The 8 fish limit was a mistake.

2) What they have done the last 10+ years has not worked and just prolonged the inevitable.
Report Post | Register to Reply
Re: [k2muskie] Scofield. M.O.T.S.S. In reply to
And they used rotenone at Pelican. Same process, same results?



<{{{{į>


Fishrmn

"I tolerate with the utmost latitude the right of others to differ from me in opinion."
ó Thomas Jefferson

"The difference between genius and stupidity is; genius has its limits."
ó Albert Einstein
Report Post | Register to Reply
Re: [Fishrmn] Scofield. M.O.T.S.S. In reply to
Way bigger issue at Pelican then Chubs. Be involved and youíll know the ENTIRE story on Pelican.


Location: Lake Katchabigun

Once you know everything about anything its what you learn afterwards that counts.

Skunked, we never get skunked its the fish getting skunked as they just kept missing our lures.
Report Post | Register to Reply
Re: [k2muskie] Scofield. M.O.T.S.S. In reply to
Really?

1) The extensive state wide survey that was done that overwhelmingly showed that the majority of anglers wanted to retonone Scofield.
2) And the number 1 recommendation from the biologist was to retonone Scofield.(for many years)

Thats not enough, and what is really required is to work your way into closed door meetings and tell the executives what they want to hear?

Sounds more like "Lobbying" than getting involved...
Report Post | Register to Reply
Re: [k2muskie] Scofield. M.O.T.S.S. In reply to
My point being, you could just put Tiger Muskies and Wipers in Pelican and give it 20 or 30 years. Or you could do what they've done. Poison, replant, and add the predators.



<{{{{į>


Fishrmn

"I tolerate with the utmost latitude the right of others to differ from me in opinion."
ó Thomas Jefferson

"The difference between genius and stupidity is; genius has its limits."
ó Albert Einstein
Report Post | Register to Reply
Re: [Northman] Scofield. M.O.T.S.S. In reply to
Northman wrote:
Really?

1) The extensive state wide survey that was done that overwhelmingly showed that the majority of anglers wanted to retonone Scofield.
2) And the number 1 recommendation from the biologist was to retonone Scofield.(for many years)

Thats not enough, and what is really required is to work your way into closed door meetings and tell the executives what they want to hear?

Sounds more like "Lobbying" than getting involved...


☝︎☝︎☝︎☝︎☝︎☝︎☝︎☝︎☝︎☝︎☝︎☝︎☝︎☝︎☝︎☝︎☝︎


Fishrmn

"I tolerate with the utmost latitude the right of others to differ from me in opinion."
ó Thomas Jefferson

"The difference between genius and stupidity is; genius has its limits."
ó Albert Einstein
Report Post | Register to Reply
Re: [Northman] Scofield. M.O.T.S.S. In reply to
Hahaha No lobbying on my part as I donít lobby. Folks who know me know I donít play reindeer games. Iíll speak my mind no yelling or screaming Iíll provide justifiable rationale. Plus Iíll do research and provide constructive feedback as an angler.

I do LISTEN and thatís an Art many donít have now a days. Itís their way and the past with same results even though the results will be the same. Thereís no closed meeting with DWR or DNR that I know of. Again as Iíve said, itís being involved and doing what one can. Itís providing justifiable rational and not whining Iím an angler not a biologist Iíll educa myself the best I can. Be patient grasshoppers good things will happen things take time. Get involved is my recommendation and thatís what I strive to do.

Go out catch fish and have fun with family and friends!!!Smile


Location: Lake Katchabigun

Once you know everything about anything its what you learn afterwards that counts.

Skunked, we never get skunked its the fish getting skunked as they just kept missing our lures.
(This post was edited by k2muskie on Dec 11, 2018, 2:21 PM)
Report Post | Register to Reply
Re: [k2muskie] Scofield. M.O.T.S.S. In reply to
k2muskie wrote:


Folks things take time and for me I'll side on time as killing off a body of water well as Einstein so accurately said it if one keeps doing the same thing expecting different results its insanity. Along with wasting time and money for us now. I'll give Scofield time as I'm not about doing the same thing expecting different results.



What is it called when one keeps writing the same thing, over and over, knowing that is not what we have said should be done? Poison it many years ago and plant with a variety of fish including predators and institute slot limits similar to Strawberry and Pineview (if tiger muskies are part of the mix). Tell me the last time that was done at Scofield? I'll provide you the answer, "Never". Seems to be working just fine at Strawberry. Strawberry was poisoned in 1990 and 28 years later the chubs are under control and trophy fish are being caught and few if any are snakes.


"The biggest challenge after success is shutting up about it"
- Criss Jami
(This post was edited by kentofnsl on Dec 11, 2018, 2:22 PM)
Report Post | Register to Reply
Re: [k2muskie] Scofield. M.O.T.S.S. In reply to
k2muskie wrote:
... Iíll provide justifiable rationale. Plus Iíll do research and provide constructive feedback as an angler.

I do LISTEN and thatís an Art many donít have now a days.

Followed by this:

k2muskie wrote:
Itís their way and the past with same results even though the results will be the same. ...

Again followed by this:

k2muskie wrote:
Itís providing justifiable rational ...


hmmmmm......something doesn't add up.


FWIW -- rotenone treatments have worked every single time they have been used. Every time. Without fail. What fails is the anglers who fail to understand the management plans associated with past treatments. Many past treatments were simply done on a regular basis as part of an ongoing plan. There was nothing wrong with that.

Today, nobody is asking for an ongoing regularly scheduled rotenone treatment. What we want is a better plan following a treatment. Those plans have been outlined numerous times -- and they would work. The problem with rotenone is not money. The problem is ignorance, or a lack of education and understanding. Anglers cry "foul!" whenever rotenone is brought up (as well as other groups). It scares them. It shouldn't. It's a great tool.


But, what do I know. I never use justifiable rationale. I play reindeer games. I never listen. And i ask for the same thing, over and over.



you guys keep being patient. Let's see how long this takes.



I couldn't help it. It just popped in there.
Dr. Raymond Stantz

Report Post | Register to Reply
Re: [k2muskie] Scofield. M.O.T.S.S. In reply to
  I agree , Joes Valley is a very good comparison. As mentioned the muskies are doing very well there ( and the over populated chubs are disappearing in comparison to 7-8 years ago) Also the cuthroats and splake and occasional rainbow are showing up in trophy sizes. This despite very little stocking until recently. And now I see stocking is happening again in greater numbers. Joes valley seems to really be on an upswing for quality fishing. The process has taken about 10 years now since the management plan.
Scofeild , with its awesome feed and growth rate has a chance to become a premier trophy fishery in the state in the next few years. Poisoning has happened 3 times since the 70's with very short term success. (Even though predatory cuts were stocked soon after treatment)
The DWR made no secret that this would be a 8-10 year process when the current plan was implemented, Its been 2 years... Give it due process
Report Post | Register to Reply
Re: [Lonnie] Scofield. M.O.T.S.S. In reply to
Joes Valley is also nearly a ghost town. Too far from the Wasatch Front to be utilized by very many anglers. I check the camera quite often. I've never seen a boat.
If those cutts and splake and Tiger Muskies were being caught instead of living out their days in peace and quiet, it might be a different story. And again, why wait? Why wait with empty State Park facilities? What has been, and what will be the net loss of revenue at Scofield?


<{{{{į>


Fishrmn

"I tolerate with the utmost latitude the right of others to differ from me in opinion."
ó Thomas Jefferson

"The difference between genius and stupidity is; genius has its limits."
ó Albert Einstein
Report Post | Register to Reply
Re: [Lonnie] Scofield. M.O.T.S.S. In reply to
And while it has been two years of the New Plan, it has been 18 years of dealing with chubs in Scofield for this invasion.



<{{{{į>


Fishrmn

"I tolerate with the utmost latitude the right of others to differ from me in opinion."
ó Thomas Jefferson

"The difference between genius and stupidity is; genius has its limits."
ó Albert Einstein
Report Post | Register to Reply
Re: [Fishrmn] Scofield. M.O.T.S.S. In reply to
Your right, It has been 18 years of shoulda coulda woulda. But funding approval was an issue due to prev failures. The biological approach has just been becoming a recent idea ( at least with the use of TM and other frankinfish) But is working ,and better in the long run I believe.
I know they could have done a reboot (poison) then managed like now , and probably spead up the process ( Which was my suggestion in the survey a couple years back) But for whatever reason , the currant method was chosen. (Maybe for future management ideas on other waters) At any rate at this point theres no use crying over spilled milk as they say. Lets let it run its coarse for 3-5 more years and see if we have the success joes valley has had.
As for Joes Valley, I fished it 4 times this year , and there was no shortage of fishermen at all. On one trip I visited with 4 different groups of fishermen from 4 different states who came there(not together) specifically to target the trophy TM. Having fished JV since the dam was built in 1969 That is something that would have never happened before the current management plan.
Report Post | Register to Reply
Re: [Northman] Scofield. M.O.T.S.S. In reply to
Bump👍
Ice_sled
Report Post | Register to Reply
Re: [Lonnie] Scofield. M.O.T.S.S. In reply to
Lonnie wrote:
Your right, It has been 18 years of shoulda coulda woulda. But funding approval was an issue due to prev failures..

This is not true. Funding is only an issue if the funding is not budgeted. Through propper planning, funding is available. Further, past treatments were not failures! They worked! They were part of a plan that included a cycle of treatments followed by a few years of good fishing, then some bad, then another treatment. It was part of the plan, and it worked. The managment plan failed when treatments stopped -- which was probably due to high costs of frequent treatments.




Lonnie wrote:
The biological approach has just been becoming a recent idea ( at least with the use of TM and other frankinfish) But is working ,and better in the long run I believe.

It isn't a new idea. But, you are correct that it is a better management strategy that does work better in the long run. However, it needs a "kick start". You can't just go dump a bunch of fish on top of an overpopulated bunch of chubs and expect results.

Lonnie wrote:
I know they could have done a reboot (poison) then managed like now , and probably spead up the process ( Which was my suggestion in the survey a couple years back)

Many of us know this. Even the biologists know this.


Lonnie wrote:
But for whatever reason , the currant method was chosen.

The reason is simple: public outcry. Rotenone is never the popular choice. People come out of the woodworks to fight rotenone because it is a chemical that kills all aquatic life in the target water. This is never a popular choice -- even if it the correct choice. If managers don't go about planning properly, this choice gets shot down by the uneducated public before it can ever get to the table! So, we see compromises. Unfortunately, compromise doesn't usually mean that both sides end up happy -- rather, both sides cave to a solution that neither are happy with. So we end up with an 18 year long, and counting, problem that doesn't seem to be coming to a good solution any time soon.

Lonnie wrote:
At any rate at this point theres no use crying over spilled milk as they say. Lets let it run its coarse for 3-5 more years and see if we have the success joes valley has had.

No problem. I'm fine with letting it run it's course. But I'm not going to pretend to be happy about this course, or the predicted results. I'll also cheer the day that they come back and say "we've done this long enough. It's time to do something about this issue".

FWIW -- I honestly hope the wipers work. That is the key to this whole issue. they are the fish that will knock the chub population down. The cutts won't do it and the TM's won't do it. Both cutts and tm's will utilize them, but they won't control them. Wipers will. So the success, or failure, of this plan all depends on whether or not wipers can thrive at this elevation. If they can, then we should have good things happen at Scofield, and other mid to high elevation lakes across Utah. If they fail.......well, we all already know what happens if they fail.


Lonnie wrote:
As for Joes Valley, I fished it 4 times this year , and there was no shortage of fishermen at all. On one trip I visited with 4 different groups of fishermen from 4 different states who came there(not together) specifically to target the trophy TM. Having fished JV since the dam was built in 1969 That is something that would have never happened before the current management plan.


I haven't fished Joe's Valley since 2010.




I couldn't help it. It just popped in there.
Dr. Raymond Stantz

(This post was edited by PBH on Dec 12, 2018, 7:11 AM)
Report Post | Register to Reply
Re: [PBH] Scofield. M.O.T.S.S. In reply to
PBH wrote:

Lonnie wrote:
But for whatever reason , the currant method was chosen.


The reason is simple: public outcry. Rotenone is never the popular choice. People come out of the woodworks to fight rotenone because it is a chemical that kills all aquatic life in the target water. This is never a popular choice -- even if it the correct choice.



The reason that a rotenone treatment wasn't done was because a few members of the committee, that was formed, didn't want to lose the trophy trout that they had been catching. So, for the sake of a few people, the majority get to suffer for many years.


"The biggest challenge after success is shutting up about it"
- Criss Jami
Report Post | Register to Reply
Re: [kentofnsl] Scofield. M.O.T.S.S. In reply to
There were VERY few big trout being caught once the UDWR stopped the supplemental feeding. Once the fingerling Rainbows stopped, the Tiger Trout stopped reaching trophy size.



<{{{{į>


Fishrmn

"I tolerate with the utmost latitude the right of others to differ from me in opinion."
ó Thomas Jefferson

"The difference between genius and stupidity is; genius has its limits."
ó Albert Einstein
Report Post | Register to Reply
Re: [PBH] Scofield. M.O.T.S.S. In reply to
PBH wrote:
The reason is simple: public outcry. Rotenone is never the popular choice. People come out of the woodworks to fight rotenone because it is a chemical that kills all aquatic life in the target water. This is never a popular choice -- even if it the correct choice.


It should be pointed out that in the Scofield angler survey, respondents who favored use of rotenone outnumbered those that opposed by a 2:1 margin! However, as is demonstrated in these endless Scofield threads, the opponents are a very vocal minority, and in this case, got their way.


Northman's point about the DWR ( more specifically, certain managers) trying to save face with their current actions is a very valid one.





I caught you a delicious bass.
Report Post | Register to Reply
Re: [doggonefishin] Scofield. M.O.T.S.S. In reply to
doggonefishin wrote:


Northman's point about the DWR ( more specifically, certain managers) trying to save face with their current actions is a very valid one.


I will give the UDWR credit for preceding forward with getting the permits to do the rotenone treatment, should the current experiment not reach its desired results. Otherwise, it would take several more years after a decision was made to rotenone, and start over, to work through the approval process.


"The biggest challenge after success is shutting up about it"
- Criss Jami
(This post was edited by kentofnsl on Dec 12, 2018, 9:04 AM)
Report Post | Register to Reply
Re: [doggonefishin] Scofield. M.O.T.S.S. In reply to
doggonefishin wrote:
Northman's point about the DWR ( more specifically, certain managers) trying to save face with their current actions is a very valid one.

☝︎☝︎☝︎☝︎☝︎☝︎☝︎☝︎☝︎☝︎☝︎☝︎


<{{{{į>


Fishrmn

"I tolerate with the utmost latitude the right of others to differ from me in opinion."
ó Thomas Jefferson

"The difference between genius and stupidity is; genius has its limits."
ó Albert Einstein
Report Post | Register to Reply
Scofield. M.O.T.S.S. In reply to
After wading through this thread for 44 posts, here is my reaction:


Sorry - I just couldn't help myself.

Smile
Bob Hicks, from Utah
I'm 76 years young and going as hard as I can for as long as I can.
ďFree men don't ask permission to bear arms.Ē - Glen Aldrich
ďBe who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter, and those who matter donít mind.Ē - Dr. Seuss
Report Post | Register to Reply
Re: [dubob] Scofield. M.O.T.S.S. In reply to
Go catch some perch. That, by the way, would be the one thing that would really cause the UDWR a headache at Scofield.


<{{{{į>


Fishrmn

"I tolerate with the utmost latitude the right of others to differ from me in opinion."
ó Thomas Jefferson

"The difference between genius and stupidity is; genius has its limits."
ó Albert Einstein
Report Post | Register to Reply
Re: [Fishrmn] Scofield. M.O.T.S.S. In reply to
Fishrmn wrote:
Go catch some perch. That, by the way, would be the one thing that would really cause the UDWR a headache at Scofield.


&#11000;<{{{{&#10631;į>


Smile
Bob Hicks, from Utah
I'm 76 years young and going as hard as I can for as long as I can.
ďFree men don't ask permission to bear arms.Ē - Glen Aldrich
ďBe who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter, and those who matter donít mind.Ē - Dr. Seuss
Report Post | Register to Reply
Re: [dubob] Scofield. M.O.T.S.S. In reply to
Laugh




<{{{{į>


Fishrmn

"I tolerate with the utmost latitude the right of others to differ from me in opinion."
ó Thomas Jefferson

"The difference between genius and stupidity is; genius has its limits."
ó Albert Einstein
Report Post | Register to Reply
Re: [Fishrmn] Scofield. M.O.T.S.S. In reply to
Fishrmn wrote:
Go catch some perch. That, by the way, would be the one thing that would really cause the UDWR a headache at Scofield.


<{{{{į>


Well, perch ARE kryptonite for chubs. That would be one way to get rid of them. And usage for at least ice fishing would certainly go up. WinkWinkWink



While factually correct, before some dimwit takes the above too seriously and grabs his bucket, the above is written 100% tongue in cheek. Perch would also have a downside.





I caught you a delicious bass.
> > > >