Utah has gone off the deep end on this. They now mandate you kill all smallmouth you catch on the Green River. They are doing this because of the presence of native suckers and chubs, and other assorted rough fish. They would prefer the Green to be gamefish free.

Data has shown again and again, by the very same "scientists" who begged the Utah Wildlife Board for the must kill reg, that trying to control the numbers of gamefish, or by reducing gamefish populations, that it does NOT help native fish species. Data has FURTHER shown that it is basically impossible to reduce gamefish populations, especially smallmouth bass, in a large river like the Green. So why not manage this new fishery (which can grow some BIG smallmouth) and just cut the losses? This regulation is an abomination to a great gamefish, and unenforceable. > > > > > > > > (see my avatar for how I REALLY feel about this)

That is a crime.  You do a real good job bringing these issues to the forum.   It is a shame that there are more resonses to some of the "lighter threads" than these that have real relevnace to our fishing. >

Wow, dude I am stunned.  I'd like to know what published research or precedence there is for them to even consider doing this?  For that matter what other state fishery agencies have done this to control native species?  Why don't they just stock extra of the native species in the river to help balance out the predation being done by the smallmouth???  Are there any other predatory fish in that river?  Or is it just a small stream or creek type deal?  

Did the smallmouth get in from a damed up area or something?

shake all the smallies off at the boat ;D

seriously though, that is incredibly stupid; shows how "democratic" our political system is; the fact that politicians can just run off and do what they want, abusing their political capital is retarded!

dd11

Mismanagement seems to be running rampant out here as of late. We had the fish masacure in the Delta a few months ago when the government tried pumping a flooded island. We have the constant fiasco with Northern Pike at Lake Davis. The useless closure of lakes in Southern California and now this mess on the Green River. I don't know if it's the poloticians or the idiots that they appoint to these fish and game commissions and other boards. Something has to be done. > >

Can you site the mandatory kill reference? I've seen where biologists are going to try to remove pike, channel cats and smallmouth from the Green in Utah (good luck with that), but it's really not that great of a fishery for them for the most part anyway, and there's numerous other lakes and rivers in that area that are much better fisheries.  It seems like they're trying to save the endangered species, not trample on fisherpeople.  I'm sure people don;t care since you can't really fish for them, but biodoversity is important to everything up the food chain.

Can you site the mandatory kill reference? I've seen where biologists are going to try to remove pike, channel cats and smallmouth from the Green in Utah (good luck with that), but it's really not that great of a fishery for them for the most part anyway, and there's numerous other lakes and rivers in that area that are much better fisheries. It seems like they're trying to save the endangered species, not trample on fisherpeople. I'm sure people don;t care since you can't really fish for them, but biodoversity is important to everything up the food chain.

Sure I can send you that data. The regulation is now in the Utah annual fishing regulations brochure. I will send you a link that shows non native fish removal has done NOTHING to increase native fish populations on the Green River.

If they wanted to save endangered species they have other ways to do so which work much better Volfan. And I'm sorry, it DOES trample on our rights as anglers, especially when most in this state and Utah OPPOSE it.

Wow, dude I am stunned. I'd like to know what published research or precedence there is for them to even consider doing this? For that matter what other state fishery agencies have done this to control native species? Why don't they just stock extra of the native species in the river to help balance out the predation being done by the smallmouth??? Are there any other predatory fish in that river? Or is it just a small stream or creek type deal?

Did the smallmouth get in from a damed up area or something?

The Green is one of the larger rivers in the US. There are also lots of Channel cats and some pike in the river. The smallies come up from Lake Powell or from the Yampa, which is a tributary of the Green and one of the very best pike and smallmouth fisheries in the world.

Years ago, the USFWS and various state agencies dumped millions of gallons of rotenone into the Green River to KILL the various fish (considered then trash fish) that they are now trying to save. The smallmouth do very little real harm. They are simply covering their own butts for wiping out native fish 30 - 40 years ago in the river.

What we are dealing with is nothing short of tyranny, lying and doublespeak. In the Colorado River, in which the Green River empties into, more than 5000 smallmouth bass and 3000 largemouth bass have been killed and either left to rot on the banks, taken to the dump, or given to liberal scientists for joke studies.

Can you site the mandatory kill reference? I've seen where biologists are going to try to remove pike, channel cats and smallmouth from the Green in Utah (good luck with that), but it's really not that great of a fishery for them for the most part anyway, and there's numerous other lakes and rivers in that area that are much better fisheries. It seems like they're trying to save the endangered species, not trample on fisherpeople. I'm sure people don;t care since you can't really fish for them, but biodoversity is important to everything up the food chain.

Your wrong, it IS a good fishery for all those species. Their idea of biodiversity is a gamefish free environment. If the native species can't be recovered by killing off gamefish, why do it?

Here is the link showing that gamefish removal has done nothing to help native suckers, chubs, and squawfish:

http://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/crrip/arpts/2006/nna/144.pdf

The study doesn't show anything of the sort, the only thing it shows is that there was an increase in smaller non-native species. It also begins with maintianing that more time is needed for the rebound of the native species.  

The study doesn't show anything of the sort, the only thing it shows is that there was an increase in smaller non-native species. It also begins with maintianing that more time is needed for the rebound of the native species.

It says there has been no increase in native species since the removals began in the Green River. If you asked Steve Yamashita, former assistant manager of the NW Region here in Colorado, he has reviewed tons of data and says there has been NONE to support what is going on. Not ANYWHERE has there been an increase in native species.

You are simply ignoring what is written. The enviros and idealists are ALWAYS going to ask for more time and money for their crusade.

Ok guys, that's enough.