Fly_Guy Posted September 21, 2009 Posted September 21, 2009 This is in relation to the previous thread about rainbow world record controversy. Just for fun to get an idea as to what everyone is thinking.
Wayne SW/MO Posted September 21, 2009 Posted September 21, 2009 I think some heavy duty law enforcement at certain times would improve what's already stocked. I know funds are hard to come by, but I think a "hit squad" could send a message that would stop a lot the damage to the fish trying to spawn. Today's release is tomorrows gift to another fisherman.
vanven Posted September 21, 2009 Posted September 21, 2009 I would like to see them, but only after a detailed ecological study proving there addition would not adversly affect the ecosystem.
Root Admin Phil Lilley Posted September 21, 2009 Root Admin Posted September 21, 2009 I think I've posted this before- MDC have experimented with triloid browns in the past. So there are troloid browns in Taney already but not recently stocked.
laker67 Posted September 21, 2009 Posted September 21, 2009 I would like to see them, but only after a detailed ecological study proving there addition would not adversly affect the ecosystem. We would all be too old to fish for them by then. Taney is a trout lake, I say go for it. I like fly guy's idea of tagging each one. Impose a minimum of a 30 inch limit and one fish. Quit raising midget rainbows {arlees and McClouds}and start raising fish that would test the limits of your fish fighting abilities. They might eat a few million crappie and bluegill, but you have bull and table rock for those fish.
Members Indiana Trout Posted September 21, 2009 Members Posted September 21, 2009 Anybody ever fish for hybrid bluegills? They'll be pretty much gone in a few months. The same kind of folks who walk right by the signs in the trophy area with the power bait and night crawlers will walk right by the signs explaining the difference between a regular rainbow and a triploid and they'll be hauling them out as fast as they get dumped in. A big push by the rabbit cops would definitely be necessary... Sometimes, if you stand on the bottom rail of a bridge and lean over to watch the river slipping slowly away beneath you, you will suddenly know everything there is to be known. --Pooh's Little Instruction Book, inspired by A. A. Milne
Members Zach Beach Posted September 22, 2009 Members Posted September 22, 2009 With Taney being such a great fishery I wonder why, if Triploid Browns have been stocked, some of them haven't grown to enormous sizes. From what I've read they devote all of their time to eating instead of once a year to spawning. So shouldn't there have been some monsters caught. I would like to read that article if you can find it again Phil. I do know that there are big browns caught all the time and that there is no easy way to tell the difference between a triploid and a diploid. I'm just wondering why no one's caught a freakishly big brown. I also think that if they do stock them (rainbows or browns) that they should be tagged or have one of their fins clipped.
vanven Posted September 22, 2009 Posted September 22, 2009 We would all be too old to fish for them by then. Taney is a trout lake, I say go for it. I like fly guy's idea of tagging each one. Impose a minimum of a 30 inch limit and one fish. Quit raising midget rainbows {arlees and McClouds}and start raising fish that would test the limits of your fish fighting abilities. They might eat a few million crappie and bluegill, but you have bull and table rock for those fish. This is exactly what would concern me. By introducing an apex predator it would really throw everything out of whack. Browns are carnivorous and canabilitstic. They would quickly gobble up the smaller resident fish who can not adapt to such a change. Fewer small fish could mean things like algae and bugs growing uncontrolled affecting the quality of water. Poor water kills trout. It is not so much the triploid fish that could really do the damage but the chain of dominoes that their addition could set off over years that could ultimately ruin a great fishery. There are various opinions on this. Some folks view the lake as a giant aquarium that should function strictly for their enjoyment. I am more interested in the long term impact. -Jerod
bigredbirdfan Posted September 22, 2009 Posted September 22, 2009 I voted no on adding these genetic freaks to Taney. I am in favor of boosting smallmouth numbers and I believe they would hurt this process. These two brothers have systematically targeted an abnormal rainbow for the sole purpose of getting into the record books. Pure and simple. Nice fish but cheating the books IMO. BTW are they accountants? Cause they seem to be really good a cooking record books.
Mr. Ed Posted September 22, 2009 Posted September 22, 2009 These two brothers have systematically targeted an abnormal rainbow for the sole purpose of getting into the record books. Pure and simple. Nice fish but cheating the books IMO. You can argue that these fish should have their own classification but I wouldn't call it "cheating". They're not classified separate and these guys are catching them... plain and simple. If I had that fishery to fish I'd be all over those things and I'd bet you would too.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now