Quote Originally Posted by HairyVetch View Post
Hi Craig,

I read on this forum there is\was a project underway to remove trash fish from Toronto. Do you know if this also applied to Fall River?

HV,

I spoke with Carson Cox, KDWPT Fisheries Biologist for Toronto/Fall River to get you an answer. Carson said that the commercial fisherman has been spending most of his time on Toronto Reservoir and that he has only set once at Fall River. Both lakes are on the list for roughfish removal. Carson also provided the table and narrative detailing the roughfish removal project at Toronto. I thought you may find the harvest numbers interesting. We don't have a shortage of roughfish in our Kansas reservoirs!





Table 1. Pounds of Rough Fish Removed by Week at Toronto Reservoir

Week Beginning Bigmouth Buffalo Smallmouth Buffalo Common Carp Gar Freshwater Drum
7/18/2011 190 1,640 190 0 0
7/25/2011 2,600 755 250 0 0
8/1/2011 4,590 525 210 0 0
8/8/2011 1,200 200 40 0 0
8/15/2011 300 150 45 15 0
8/22/2011 2,050 470 86 22 3
8/29/2011 1,000 100 82 50 0
9/5/2011 550 800 210 10 205
9/12/2011 425 1,400 340 100 128
9/19/2011 1,275 1,635 345 270 156
9/26/2011 1,000 235 35 40 40
10/3/2011 1,070 780 260 250 90
10/10/2011 1,200 600 290 80 40
10/17/2011 1,075 650 180 210 8
10/24/2011 2,190 1,150 245 1,110 55
10/31/2011 1,015 470 160 235 19
11/7/2011 1,000 300 105 50 15
11/14/2011 1,500 1,185 170 175 30
11/21/2011 1,000 100 0 0 10
11/28/2011 1,300 750 148 150 23
12/5/2011 680 485 33 130 10
TOTAL
27,210 14,380 3,424 2,897 832


Rough fish were removed from Toronto Reservoir beginning the week of July 18, 2011 through the end of the year with trammel nets. A total of 48,743 pounds of rough fish were removed from the reservoir. That represented a total reduction in biomass of 17.4 pounds per acre. The objective of rough fish removal was to improve water quality and to enhance the sport fish population. By comparison, after three years of rough fish removal from Marion Reservoir, 89 pounds per acre were removed which resulted in improvement of fish condition and reduction in blue green algae blooms. Although any reduction in biomass of rough fish was beneficial to water quality and sport fish populations, continued harvest is necessary to recognize substantial improvement.