Sturgeon confirmed in merrill!

Discussion in 'Stillwater' started by Drifter, Jul 7, 2012.

  1. Irafly

    Irafly Active Member

    A bucket brigader could have introduced the fish years ago. Sturgeon are hearty enough to be transported easily with the right equipment. Because of the special regulations on the lake, I doubt that the state will allow the fish to be targeted, unless it could be brought to the attention of a sturgeon recovery project.

    If possible I think the fish would be much happier back in the Columbia, but that's part of the reason why this discussion has started in the first, personification! We take that out and keeping the fish in there just seems ridiculous.
  2. Wilken

    Wilken Member

    You lost me there Irafly. You think the fish would be better off in the Columbia but you say that sentiment is a result of personification (by you I assume). Then you say the notion of leaving the fish in the lake is ridiculous when personification is taken out of the thought process? Do you see the contradiction here? So what destination would you pick that is free of personification? Ambiguous much?

    By the way, capturing, safe transtportion and healthy release of this fish would be very, very expensive in a relative sense, given the potential benefits of the outcome. Do you have experience transporting live fish of this size? Just another way for WDFW to waste our tax money and reg fees doing stupid things that don't amount to much in terms of fish conservation or improved fishing opportunities. That fish has been in there for decades to reach that size even if he/she came from a bucket, which does seem likely given the gradient to the lake. I've fished that lake many times and I have a hard time accepting the notion that a sturgeon or two is noticeably affecting the fishing in that lake considering the annual plants and protective regs.

    2 cents worth.
  3. Irafly

    Irafly Active Member

    I'm sorry I lost you. Most of the arguments seemed to be about leaving the fish in the lake for what seemed like personification reasons, versus reality, so I used the same argument (which I then quite obviously contradicted) as others did, but in the opposite.

    I have been part of moving fish this size safely and the cost is not that great. The largest cost is in gas pulling a heavy trailer. Have you been involved in something like this? As I mentioned before, I doubted the states involvement in a project like this, but there are several sturgeon recovery projects out there that with state permission would likely look into the possibility of moving such a fish to help with diversifying genetic stock. If this were to happen I imagine the fish would be better off back in it's natural habitat, it would have the opportunity to reproduce, and it could make the Merrill fishery better. Sounds like a win, win, win to me. So again take personification out, why keep it in there?

  4. zen leecher aka bill w

    zen leecher aka bill w born to work, forced to fish

    The "truck brigade" stocked the sturgeon in Sprague years ago. That one showed up in the late-80's rotenone kill off. I'd bet the Merrill sturgeon made a similar journey via truck.
  5. psycho

    psycho Active Member

    There was a guy caught a few years ago in the Vancouver BC area with some in the trunk of his car. If I remember correctly they released two back into the Fraser river and the other one died,they did not know how long that they had been in the trunk but stated there was no moisture in the trunk except that which had came from the fish.
  6. I don't think sturgeon prey on adult fish, or even juveniles much. They mostly are scavengers and bottom feeders.

    From Wikipedia regarding diet of white sturgeon in the Columbia river:
    "As adults, the white sturgeon’s diet somewhat varies. This is dependent upon the river systems it lives in. In the Columbia River system, dead fish, crustaceans, and mollusks are all popular prey." The piece also mentions the huge shad population in the Columbia providing a large source of dead fish for scavenging.

  7. Irafly

    Irafly Active Member

    They chase and eat live fish, but you do bring up a good point.
  8. Woodcanoeguy

    Woodcanoeguy Member

    I think there should be some worry about this sturgeon rooting around on the lake bottom and possibly destroying the hex habitat.
    Flyfishing Dad likes this.
  9. Flyborg

    Flyborg Active Member

    It's one sturgeon. The eagles and osprey will eat far more fish than that. Merrill's a glorified hatchery destination, especially with all the fucking triploids in it now. It's not a big deal.
  10. Daryle Holmstrom

    Daryle Holmstrom retiredfishak

    Is this thread for real!
  11. Daryle Holmstrom

    Daryle Holmstrom retiredfishak

    I thought sturgeon only ate steelhead fishermen from the Skagit system
  12. Daryle Holmstrom

    Daryle Holmstrom retiredfishak

    As far as what they eat they are like suckers and bottom feed on anything that smells good like Skagit River Spey Guys, (PUN INTENDED)
  13. Irafly

    Irafly Active Member

    It was very for real, but until someone brought it back up, it had run its course. Did you read all the posts?

Share This Page