Heard A Rumor...

[Montrose]

Still trying to confirm it, but the word I got is Kensico and Rondout will no longer be stocked with Lake trout effective this spring. 

Surveys have shown adequate natural production and the fish earmarked for those lakes will be stocked elsewhere (undetermined at this time).

More to come when I get more info

[shawnhu]

Is that a good, or bad thing?

I would think that it's bad, because I haven't caught any trout from KE yet, and it's close to home for me. 

[Biz-R-OWorld]

where would be options for Lakers to be stocked that arent already stocked with them? How deep does a reservoir need to be to support Lakers?

[Pointer]

Montrose, do you think if it's true it will negatively impact the fishery? It would be nice if the lake trout fishery could be self sustaining in Rondout & Kensico.

Chris

[Pointer]

where would be options for Lakers to be stocked that arent already stocked with them? How deep does a reservoir need to be to support Lakers?

Biz, don't know what the other options would be. I dont think it's a matter of depth to have lake trout, I believe it's more a matter of having 40-50 degree water that contains suffecient dissolved oxygen content to support them. West Branch reservoir is only 50ft or so an it has a few lakers.

Chris

[Biz-R-OWorld]

where would be options for Lakers to be stocked that arent already stocked with them? How deep does a reservoir need to be to support Lakers?

Biz, don't know what the other options would be. I dont think it's a matter of depth to have lake trout, I believe it's more a matter of having 40-50 degree water that contains suffecient dissolved oxygen content to support them. West Branch reservoir is only 50ft or so an it has a few lakers.

Chris

So CFalls should be an option, I would think?

[Montrose]

Not sure where else they might put them...WB, Glenida, and Gilead are the only other lcal lakes I know that have them.  Personally I would not want to see them introduced into any new lakes in the system since it's pretty clear they negatively impact the browns in Kensico.

Chris, I'm sure others like Ken and Tom can better answer your question, but my opinion is this:  The surveys done so far show the lakers have a good foothold in Kensico.  I don't think it will negatively affect their sustainability, but I think some tweaking of the size limits can be expected in the future since they will not be supplemented any longer.  I'd say it's a success story in both lakes given the fact they were stocked initially and are now self sustaining.

[KenH]

In 2008, DEC region 3 estimated that 85% of all Lakers caught in Kensico
were born there. In fact, from 2003-2007 there was already concern that
Kensico was being overstocked as larger and older fish became harder and harder to come by. An increased number of "smaller" Lakers and reduced numbers of Browns have been observed in both Kensico and Roundout.
Because oif this a couple years ago DEC upped the brown stocking number and reduced the Lakers to a small token number for monitoring. I am assuming
that in the case of Kensico they will stop even this token amount of stocking.
I think this is the right thing to do as over the years the really big Lakers have vanished and the number of finclipped ones have become less and less.
In he long term we should see more Browns and less but bigger Lakers.

[Pointer]

Ken, thanks for the excellent explanation. It sounds like ending the stocking of lakers & browns in Kensico & Rondout would be the right thing to do. Do you think stocking lakers in West Branch would be a good idea?

Chris

[Montrose]

Chris, just to be clear, I'm fairly certain the browns will continue to be stocked in Kensico and Rondout.

WB currently gets browns and LL salmon, but I don't think lakers are stocked.  There are lakers in there, but I think they came to be present there through the influx pipe that comes down from Rondout.  Since they are there already and the lake has both smelt and alewives, you could make the argument to put additional lakers in.  I would be in support of that move since the lake lacks a lot of weed cover for other warm water species.

[Nick]

Chris, just to be clear, I'm fairly certain the browns will continue to be stocked in Kensico and Rondout.

WB currently gets browns and LL salmon, but I don't think lakers are stocked.  There are lakers in there, but I think they came to be present there through the influx pipe that comes down from Rondout.  Since they are there already and the lake has both smelt and alewives, you could make the argument to put additional lakers in.  I would be in support of that move since the lake lacks a lot of weed cover for other warm water species.

isnt rondout on the other side of the hudson river?

[Montrose]

That is correct Nick.  It's part of the Catskill system, but is connected to WB via aqueduct.  If you drive along rt. 301, you can see the influx chamber on the opposite side of WB rez.  It's the large brick structure.

[Nick]

they swim through that whole way? wow.

[Chris]

I think that they stock lakers in WB but in small numbers.

[lionpshark]

This is interesting and I was told by DEC that they only put a few (900) lakers in Kensico purely for counting purposes for there diary program that they do. The better question is if they did stock lakers else where , where would be the preferred res by us for new stockings? I'm sure they won't choose a place by our prefrences but it would be cool to hear everyone's prefrences.