I'm seeing some figures drift out but can you comment on the record yet?
Printable View
I'm seeing some figures drift out but can you comment on the record yet?
This is what I've seen posted in many places:
Smith Bay=17,500
Pisgah Bay=56,000
Total: 73,500 pounds
Someone on facebook was saying 56,000-57,000 lbs,not sure if its true.maybe adam will chime in and let us know.Quote:
Originally Posted by M R Dux
Sent from my SM-S907VL using Tapatalk
I saw those figures as well and I was shocked. Certain figures were being bandied about that suggested 500k pounds might be achievable....From that perspective, it obviously doesn't look great.
Hopefully they just need to iron the kinks out and it will be a dependable method. Lord knows the native sport fish would benefit tremendously if these fish were eradicated.
$500,000 price tag. Do the math. Pretty expensive fish!
Well, it was a test, and positive test results aren't guaranteed. I look forward to seeing a summary report and whether or not the test results warrant enough merit to conduct it again with modifications for better results.
The fact that they saw such an improvement between Smith Bay (which they did first) and Pisgah Bay is encouraging, they tripled their catch in Pisgah.
Whiskers, yep, @~60,000/lbs(if correct total) for $500,000 expense is not good but at least we had a pile of dedicated hard working teams doing this effort and they did their best and hopefully we all learned some stuff going forward. I'm sure if we offered the commercial teams $0.50/lb, ($500,000 total limit) they would have brought in the 1,000,000 lbs until the $500,000 limit ran out.
The KY Afield episode about the Modified-Unified Method is on this weekend!
https://youtu.be/ZcnlmiAn2-I
https://www.facebook.com/KentuckyAfieldTV/videos/1923772837759664/
Art, many thanks for the update on the KY Afield show. Hope for a lot of detailed information for such a large project. Just facts, no spin.
I wonder if the heavy current, lake conditions and weather hurt the numbers? I was talking to a commercial fisherman last fall, he was talking about how when there is current the carp usually leave the bays.
I was very disappointed in the coverage of Ky. Afield on the modified unified method. I become concerned when there is so much secrecy about what actually took place and how many pounds were removed. If the figure of $500,00 was accurate and the removal rate was as low as has been mentioned how many of these dog and pony show.will we go through before all the money is spent with no improvement in the carp issue. There was no shortage of dignitaries but no sportsmen were allowed to attend. I just hope this does not turn into another government waste of tax money with no results.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greenwing
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greenwing
I kind of questioned that too. I know the time I run into Asian Carp the most is in the late summer or early fall when I start idling shallow waters for early wood duck and teal season, not uncommon to run into some really big schools in the backs of bays then. About the only thing I can think of for the trial to be in February would be due to more of the sport fish being out in deeper water, and/or lower numbers of recreational boaters on the water.
I too was disappointed in the KY Afield segment. A little birdie gave me some insight. When the feds (USF&W & USGS) are involved, information is only going to be allowed out when/what the feds say so. One issue the Modified Method folks didn't take into account was one we openly discussed here before they started. The issue was the numbers of man-made structures that they had to clear out before they could be successful.The areas they chose were some that were heavily saturated with stake beds and brush piles. More thought and scouting will probably take place before they try the Modified Method in other parts of our lakes. It was shown it would work in ideal situations.
Guess I’ll be cleaning out a lot of waypoints in those two bays. :banghead
You all have heard the story about the fisherman and game warden in a boat together when the fisherman pulled out a stick
of dynamite. The game warden was busy telling the fisherman how it was illegal to use dynamite to harvest fish. The fisherman kindly handed the game warden the stick of dynamite and asked are you going to keep on talking or are you going to fish. Maybe the state and federal people need to review this story and apply it to the carp. This may be the cheapest and most efficient method to remove large numbers of the carp !!! Are they going to keep on talking or fish?
QUOTE=crp4570;3973339]Guess I’ll be cleaning out a lot of waypoints in those two bays. :banghead[/QUOTE]
Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife
Asian Carp Information
New update posted on the KDFWR website concerning the Modified-Unified Method. (Located under the western Kentucky projects)
This wasn’t my project, but I was there for three weeks helping so I can answer a few questions and share my two cents. The information flow has been super slow, but the government is not known for speed. I think a longer write up is being prepared, but I’m not sure of the timeline.
P.S. redear and crappie are on beds right now. Not sure what this polar vortex is going to do to them, but it’s been an interesting spring to say the least.
Best news I've read in a while. Adam, thank you for being on here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Amartinbio
Do you think there is a need to better educate the general sportsman and angler in to the role of the commercial fisherman in this? I continually read sportfisherman voicing that commercial fishing should be banned on public waters, admittedly in connection with catfish, and that the commercial fishing is negatively impacting the "sport catfishing." Having read the studies from KDFWR hoop nets and blurbs on the KDFWR webpage about the findings from the ride-alongs with commercial fisherman I think that is a valuable narrative to get out there as to how the commercial fisherman are and will be an integral part of this "war on carp" equation.
In my opinion, in that particular case there needs to be more dialogue and interaction between biologists, commercial fishermen, and catfishermen. It’s been a huge topic of debate and there was a special committee appointed to sort out the issue, but there is still a lack of trust there and still a few topics to be decided. It’s a good example of one of the most difficult aspects of fisheries management. How should a fishery be managed when two or more user groups want different things from the same fishery? I’ve yet to discover a “perfect” management option in any fishery, but communication and openness builds trust and tends to reduce conflict.Quote:
Originally Posted by smashdn
I do agree that more education on the topic (how we collect data, what commercial fishermen catch, what harvest does to a fishery, etc) would be helpful for everyone involved. But without building trust, no one will believe what you’re saying in your education efforts (and rightly so).
Im always amazed at how understanding the sport anglers have been on ky and Barkley regarding commercial Asian carp fishermen. There have certainly been some issues and tangled props and cut nets, but I think everyone has realized how necessary these control efforts are.
What you have to look at is not the $/lb of fish caught but the long term effect of 500K lbs being taken from the lake. That will be harder to determine but in the end game. If the fishery improvement is significant enough to generate better fishing (tourism) then its a win..