01-02-2015, 11:19 PM
Tough question....
I personally feel anglers are having an impact although I don't have evidence of exactly how much. I think of how many burbot are harvested in a 2-night derby (up to 4,000), how many people like Ashley Bonser have removed while guiding/fishing (thousands per season) and expand that across other time periods, derbies, and the general angling public and think there are tons of burbot being removed on an annual basis.
UDWR and WGFD have recorded two year's of burbot population declines during annual monitoring. Most of the angling reports have been very slow this fall-winter. In my own experience with fishing different parts of the lake and comparing it to previous years, I have also seen declining catch rates. The spot I was in last night for example, I've fished there several times before and had total catches in the 20-40s per night. I personally feel it's always good to see angler success rates and observations follow what is being documented in the monitoring data.
We had a lot of burbot in the reservoir for a few years after they were first documented. Knowing how burbot are struggling in their native range, you would guess they would eventually reach a population peak and start to taper off. I think anglers responded to the call, targeting and removing burbot, all the while knowing they were benefiting the fishery. Will the lake every be rid of burbot? No. Could the population increase again? You bet. That's why anglers can't afford to give them a break.
I suspect some will disagree with my confidence in angler harvest and it's impact on the population but in the end, the data in front of us right now shows burbot abundance and catch rates are down and that's what's most important. Somebody last night said, "Wow, lots of lake trout but only two burbot!" and my son put it best by responding, "Yeah, quit complaining, that's a good thing!"
Hope that helps some, Ryno
[signature]
I personally feel anglers are having an impact although I don't have evidence of exactly how much. I think of how many burbot are harvested in a 2-night derby (up to 4,000), how many people like Ashley Bonser have removed while guiding/fishing (thousands per season) and expand that across other time periods, derbies, and the general angling public and think there are tons of burbot being removed on an annual basis.
UDWR and WGFD have recorded two year's of burbot population declines during annual monitoring. Most of the angling reports have been very slow this fall-winter. In my own experience with fishing different parts of the lake and comparing it to previous years, I have also seen declining catch rates. The spot I was in last night for example, I've fished there several times before and had total catches in the 20-40s per night. I personally feel it's always good to see angler success rates and observations follow what is being documented in the monitoring data.
We had a lot of burbot in the reservoir for a few years after they were first documented. Knowing how burbot are struggling in their native range, you would guess they would eventually reach a population peak and start to taper off. I think anglers responded to the call, targeting and removing burbot, all the while knowing they were benefiting the fishery. Will the lake every be rid of burbot? No. Could the population increase again? You bet. That's why anglers can't afford to give them a break.
I suspect some will disagree with my confidence in angler harvest and it's impact on the population but in the end, the data in front of us right now shows burbot abundance and catch rates are down and that's what's most important. Somebody last night said, "Wow, lots of lake trout but only two burbot!" and my son put it best by responding, "Yeah, quit complaining, that's a good thing!"
Hope that helps some, Ryno
[signature]