Hunting Washington Forum

Other Activities => Fishing => Topic started by: Dman on July 13, 2007, 10:08:46 AM

Title: More Wa. fish trivia
Post by: Dman on July 13, 2007, 10:08:46 AM: 1. What freshwater Washington Game fish has been caught in Wa.. for at least two decades, but was only just formally recognized this year by State Fish and Wildlife?

2. How many rivers in Washington carry all five species of Pacific salmon?

3. What sterile form of hybrid trout was stocked in Mayfield lake and other smaller select lakes, beginning in the 1990's to control squawfish?
Title: Re: More Wa. fish trivia
Post by: Curly on July 13, 2007, 10:38:20 AM: 1. ?

2. 1?

3. Tiger Trout? I thought that tiger musky were the only fish put in Mayfield to control squawfish. It was in 1988.

These are tough trivia questions IMO.
Title: Re: More Wa. fish trivia
Post by: jackelope on July 13, 2007, 10:41:51 AM: Quote
What sterile form of hybrid trout was stocked in Mayfield
hybrid trout?? sure about the trout part?
oops i guess crusty's wondering the same thing...tiger musky were planted in 88 to control pike minnow or squawfish depending on who's asking.
1-tiger musky
2-5
3-tiger musky
Title: Re: More Wa. fish trivia
Post by: WDFW-SUX on July 13, 2007, 11:07:46 AM: 1. is THAT FISH THAT WAS PLANTED BY THE UW IN LAKE WASHINGTON ITS LIKE A HYBID TROUT steel head or something???
Title: Re: More Wa. fish trivia
Post by: Curly on July 13, 2007, 11:18:37 AM: WDFW has been stocking Tiger Trout to control squawfish but I wasn't aware of any being placed in Mayfield. It wouldn't surprize me too much, but why would they put tiger trout in there when they have been putting tiger musky in there for almost 20yrs?

I doubt the answer to #1 is Tiger Musky since WDFW is the one that has been stocking them. I think they have been officially recognized since '88.

I'm very curious in the answers. Those are good questions.
Title: Re: More Wa. fish trivia
Post by: jackelope on July 13, 2007, 11:36:15 AM: I'm going with tiger trout for #1...tiger musky was a guess...and apparently probably not a good one. i know tiger trout are grabbing a lot of attention now in the basin lakes with the big fish in them...lenice, nunaly, etc.
Title: Re: More Wa. fish trivia
Post by: Dman on July 13, 2007, 11:44:15 AM: 1. Northern Pike, Pend Oreille River

2. Puyallup, Skagit, Nooksack, Columbia

3. Tiger Trout were introduced to many lowland lakes in the 1990's experimentally and specifically in Mayfield to see if they would have an impact on Squawfish. The Tiger Musky stocking effort became more prevalent afterwards.

D
Title: Re: More Wa. fish trivia
Post by: jackelope on July 13, 2007, 11:51:06 AM: Quote
Tiger Trout were introduced to many lowland lakes in the 1990's experimentally and specifically in Mayfield to see if they would have an impact on Squawfish. The Tiger Musky stocking effort became more prevalent afterwards.

from tacoma power's rec website...
Quote
Coho salmon, rainbow trout and cuttroat trout can be found in Riffe Lake. Here they live with landlocked coho and chinook salmon, cutthroat, rainbow and brown trout, as well as Crappie, largemouth and smallmouth bass, brown bullhead and bluegill.

Most of the same species can be found in Mayfield Lake with one addition. The tiger muskie was planted in 1988 to see how well it would survive as a sport fish and biological control for the undesirable pike minnow population.

you know...i cheated, but thats where i came up with tiger muskies in '88. never saw any mention made of tiger trout.
and i'm 99% sure the stilliguamish carries all 5 salmon species, thats why i said 5
Title: Re: More Wa. fish trivia
Post by: Dman on July 13, 2007, 12:20:21 PM: That's why I chose the Mayfield question, I knew you couldn't cheat and surf it up ;)

We knew about it because we have property there and local's were catching them in the lake, I know it was advertised in Lewis County paper's but I too did not see any mention of it on the recent link's.
On the Stilly, you are correct from the standpoint of all five species being native to the system, though it's Chinook are ESA listed and the run very marginal at best -without continued recovery efforts it will never be a 'viable' run -meaning harvestable and self sustaining. I improperly lumped the Stilly with the Nooksack sub basin, good catch. The Stilly is WRIA 5, it's own sub basin.

D
Title: Re: More Wa. fish trivia
Post by: Dman on July 13, 2007, 12:23:21 PM: -I meant to say lumped with Skagit sub basin, not Nooksack.
Title: Re: More Wa. fish trivia
Post by: jackelope on July 13, 2007, 12:38:41 PM: Quote
That's why I chose the Mayfield question, I knew you couldn't cheat and surf it up

so not to start a pissing match at all, but why does tacoma power say tiger muskies were stocked in '88 and you say tiger trout in the 90's and tiger muskies after that?
Title: Re: More Wa. fish trivia
Post by: jackelope on July 13, 2007, 12:40:36 PM: p.s. there's lots of kings in the stilly.
we always see them and fish behind them for dollies and steelhead. works like a charm if your timing is right.
maybe "lots" is a strong word...but they're pretty easy to find if you want to fish egg or flesh fly patterns behind them.
Title: Re: More Wa. fish trivia
Post by: Dman on July 13, 2007, 12:53:55 PM: "Tiger Musky stocking effort became more prevalent afterwards"

More prevalent, as in greater numbers, etc.. I didn't say they weren't stocked in the '80's, I stated there was a greater effort in stocking the Tiger Musky after the Tiger Trout stocking proved realtively fruitless. There was a lot of apprehension at the time about stockin a large quantity of Musky in the lake, that's why the trout idea was pursued from what I remember.
Title: Re: More Wa. fish trivia
Post by: jackelope on July 13, 2007, 12:56:16 PM: gotcha.
Title: Re: More Wa. fish trivia
Post by: Dman on July 13, 2007, 01:14:42 PM: I looked up the Stilly historic Chinook returns also. What's interesting is the same amount of native Chinook are returning now, as in 1974 the last year of record, roughly 850 fish annually. It seems the river has never had a sustaining Chinook run (in several decades at least) and is likely benefitting from Skagit strays annually. The return has dipped as low as 300 fish in recent years.
Title: Re: More Wa. fish trivia
Post by: jackelope on July 13, 2007, 01:21:15 PM: which is wierd, kind of, because i fished exactly 1 day this year with chinook in the river, and there was probably 10 fish in 1 hole we fished behind on the north fork, and then we cruised up to fortson mill and saw several kings, like probably 30 in the fortson hole. i might only see 3-5 sockeye every year in their.
Title: Re: More Wa. fish trivia
Post by: Dman on July 13, 2007, 01:39:42 PM: I have not fished the Stilly, but it seems a very small river? I know in river's like the Carbon that are smaller, a couple hundred King's would seem like a lot, only 8-10 would fit in each hole the entire length. King's also will spend a long time in the river, I know in Issaquah Creek at the hatchery I've seen the same group of Chinook for several weeks in the same hole once they start spawning, you can tell by the marking's, decay, etc..
Title: Re: More Wa. fish trivia
Post by: jackelope on July 13, 2007, 01:52:54 PM: main stem is pretty good sized down near the mouth but gets smaller upstream pretty quick. the north fork, which is where i fish mostly, is real small...almost like a little trout stream, as is the south fork. north fork is fly only except for mid-winter, december or january for a month or 2, not really too sure, when you can fish bait for hatchery brat steel. it's very fun fishing, almost like spot and stalk, and the summer steelhead are known for eating surface flies...skating wakers or big caddis flies in a downstream swing across the water and a fresh chromer steelhead explodes on it.
you are right..it doesn't take much fish to crowd a small river, and i also don't think too many salmon or steelhead head up the south fork at all, so most that go up the main stem end up in the north fork.
the kings we do see are big!!
it's cool to be standing over one of those pools looking in and see 4 or 5 different species all in the same pool at the same time...you can really tell who the bullys are.
Title: Re: More Wa. fish trivia
Post by: Dman on July 13, 2007, 02:00:46 PM: Aye, the native King's are real bruiser's. I am going to film some of the Chinook battle's in Issaquah Creek this year. I kid you not, they were throwing water 12 feet in to the air sometimes, very territorial in the river.
Title: Re: More Wa. fish trivia
Post by: jackelope on July 13, 2007, 02:18:53 PM: here's a good picture so you can see the size of the river.
one of my fishing buds on the north fork stilly just below fortson mill...
this past winter believe it or not...
(https://hunting-washington.com/smf/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi79.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fj139%2FBAILEYDAD%2Fscottystilly.jpg&hash=f745bd8c30942d1eaede9977a7650ab9c9c0bcf2)
Title: Re: More Wa. fish trivia
Post by: Dman on July 13, 2007, 03:59:52 PM: Nice pic, looks cold. I called on the flasher tape, should hear something soon.