What type of baitfish or forage is there at Perris?

[Dr. MindBendo]

From what I gather there is Threadfin Shad, Silversides, Goby or Sculpin??? Also does anyone know if Perris gets any Trout plants??? If so, when was the last Trout plant?

[sodapop]

No trout plants this year so far

[kwin]

From what I gather is Threadfin shad, Silversides, goby or sculpin??? Also does anyone know if Perris gets any Trout plants??? If so, when was the last Trout plant?

Threadfin Shad, Inland Silverside, Prickly Sculpin, Shimofuri/Chameleon Goby, Bigscale Logperch are all known species within Perris that could be considered "baitfish". However, Hitch, Sacramento Blackfish, American Shad and Tule Perch all exist in Silverwood where Perris receives its water so it is possible those species could exist within Perris also.

[GdHkSet1]

Threadfin Shad, Inland Silverside, Prickly Sculpin, Shimofuri/Chameleon Goby, Bigscale Logperch are all known species within Perris that could be considered "baitfish". However, Hitch, Sacramento Blackfish, American Shad and Tule Perch all exist in Silverwood where Perris receives its water so it is possible those species could exist within Perris also.

GD, that's a smorgasbord! thanks kwin. What's your take on the striper population there at P?

[Dr. MindBendo]

Threadfin Shad, Inland Silverside, Prickly Sculpin, Shimofuri/Chameleon Goby, Bigscale Logperch are all known species within Perris that could be considered "baitfish". However, Hitch, Sacramento Blackfish, American Shad and Tule Perch all exist in Silverwood where Perris receives its water so it is possible those species could exist within Perris also.


Thank you Kwin. Exactly the info I was looking for. I didn't know what else to call the "baitfish" lol I'm basically trying to find out what the bass might be eating there.

[kwin]

GD, that's a smorgasbord! thanks kwin. What's your take on the striper population there at P?

the few that trickle in with the water from Silverwood grow much bigger and faster than all of the other lakes around here with stripers due to lack of competition amongst cohorts. #densitydependency

[GdHkSet1]

the few that trickle in with the water from Silverwood grow much bigger and faster than all of the other lakes around here with stripers due to lack of competition amongst cohorts. #densitydependency
Thank you.

[bassnet]

the few that trickle in with the water from Silverwood grow much bigger and faster than all of the other lakes around here with stripers due to lack of competition amongst cohorts. #densitydependency

pretty cool stuff- love seeing the nice stripers occasionally caught at Perris and now they seem to be getting more prevalent in the local surf. I thought DV was going to turn into a crazy striper fishery a few years back, maybe the flatheads crushed too much bait?

[DarkShadow]

.... maybe the flatheads crushed too much bait?

DVL fished well a decade ago. Been hearing from the locals that the bite has gotten tough as of late.

I wonder what could be the culprit.

[kwin]

DVL fished well a decade ago. Been hearing from the locals that the bite has gotten tough as of late.

I wonder what could be the culprit.

They didn't go anywhere, just got smaller and more numerous. #densitydependency

[ghost2uu]

They didn't go anywhere, just got smaller and more numerous. #densitydependency

#Lackoftroutplants
#StockPerris
#StockDVL
#Stocksomething
#Trystockingtrout
#Troutprogramsucks
#Whatwillthenextexcusebetonotstocktrout

[Dr. MindBendo]

Why isn't Lake Perris getting any Trout stocked?

[DarkShadow]

Why isn't Lake Perris getting any Trout stocked?

Yeah, I didn't know it wasn't getting stocked either.

Maybe there's steelhead downstream of the dam? Or that frog somewhere around?

[Natural Lefty]

Dark Shadow, there is no stream "downstream" of Perris Lake, so that cannot be it. Perhaps it's those frogs that only trout seem able to eat.

[DarkShadow]

Dark Shadow, there is no stream "downstream" of Perris Lake, so that cannot be it. Perhaps it's those frogs that only trout seem able to eat.


I dunno...i'm sure in the Glaciatic Period, Steelhead once swam up Ramona Expressway....

[Natural Lefty]

Wasn't that in a scene out of the Flintstones?

[Dr. MindBendo]

Every sewer and toilet get stocked with Trout around here except Perris. I even think the local tribe carved on the side of the mountains that it was OK to stock Trout.

53089

[kwin]

Why isn't Lake Perris getting any Trout stocked?

As you may have heard, over the last several years our hatcheries have been undergoing much needed deferred maintenance/upgrades (https://cdfgnews.wordpress.com/2018/05/04/fillmore-trout-hatchery-temporarily-closed-to-public-for-scheduled-maintenance/), have had gas bubble disease issues (https://wildlife.ca.gov/Science-Institute/News/stacking-the-odds-to-stock-californias-waters) and most recently have been infected with a novel bacteria (https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=180707&inline) which necessitated the destruction of over 3 million hatchery trout. As a result, the number of trout available for stocking in southern California over the last 3-4 years has been severely reduced. The limited quantity of trout available necessitates allocation to lakes/streams that depend upon trout to provide viable fisheries.
Lake Perris is not one of those places. An angler survey/tagged trout study conducted 2009-2011 at Lake Perris showed that only 3.5-7% of the trout were reported as caught. Catch rates were OK ranging from 0.14 to 0.37 fish an hour (1 fish for every 3-5 hours of effort), however only 17% of the anglers that fished Lake Perris were targeting trout. Bass, panfish and unspecified target ("anything") anglers far outnumbered trout anglers. The dominant pursuit of other species and the poor return rate of trout at Lake Perris does not justify their stocking in lieu of lakes/streams that have much higher trout specific effort and return rates. The smaller County Park lakes and local mountain lakes/streams are an excellent example of waters that meet those criteria.
Additionally, CDFW has completed an extensive habitat mitigation project at Lake Perris to rehabilitate the warmwater fisheries that were affected by the prolonged drawdown necessitated by a dam remediation project (https://wildlife.ca.gov/Science-Institute/News/Tag/lake-perris). This project unto itself, has set Lake Perris far apart from any other fishery in southern California moving forward.
When the disease issues are resolved and hatchery production can again meet the needs of the lakes/streams that depend upon trout to provide viable fisheries, and if there is excess production (which there very well could be), then allocation decisions regarding lakes like Lake Perris will be re-evaluated at that time.

[DarkShadow]

So essentially, people didn't fish for trout enough at Perris for the DFG to justify allocating an already lessened number of trout stocks from Southern California hatcheries, so now they won't stock any trout....and that will cause people to NOT fish for trout. So, when the DFG revisits this, they will claim from angler surveys that nobody is fishing for trout, so no stocks. Which will cause anglers NOT to fish for trout, and we get stuck in this revolving door?

Curiouser and curiouser....

What I am now noticing lately is that these angler surveys may play a bigger role in fishery management than I originally thought. I thought it was someone's summer internship at the DFG, waiting around the hot *** launch ramp at DVL to ask people how much the bite sucked.

I didn't know that those surveys are used as they are, considering they seem to be a very inaccurate method of data gathering, and it's eye opening to think this determines legislation and whether a lake receives trout stockings or not.

[Dr. MindBendo]

As you may have heard, over the last several years our hatcheries have been undergoing much needed deferred maintenance/upgrades (https://cdfgnews.wordpress.com/2018/05/04/fillmore-trout-hatchery-temporarily-closed-to-public-for-scheduled-maintenance/), have had gas bubble disease issues (https://wildlife.ca.gov/Science-Institute/News/stacking-the-odds-to-stock-californias-waters) and most recently have been infected with a novel bacteria (https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=180707&inline) which necessitated the destruction of over 3 million hatchery trout. As a result, the number of trout available for stocking in southern California over the last 3-4 years has been severely reduced. The limited quantity of trout available necessitates allocation to lakes/streams that depend upon trout to provide viable fisheries.
Lake Perris is not one of those places. An angler survey/tagged trout study conducted 2009-2011 at Lake Perris showed that only 3.5-7% of the trout were reported as caught. Catch rates were OK ranging from 0.14 to 0.37 fish an hour (1 fish for every 3-5 hours of effort), however only 17% of the anglers that fished Lake Perris were targeting trout. Bass, panfish and unspecified target ("anything") anglers far outnumbered trout anglers. The dominant pursuit of other species and the poor return rate of trout at Lake Perris does not justify their stocking in lieu of lakes/streams that have much higher trout specific effort and return rates. The smaller County Park lakes and local mountain lakes/streams are an excellent example of waters that meet those criteria.
Additionally, CDFW has completed an extensive habitat mitigation project at Lake Perris to rehabilitate the warmwater fisheries that were affected by the prolonged drawdown necessitated by a dam remediation project (https://wildlife.ca.gov/Science-Institute/News/Tag/lake-perris). This project unto itself, has set Lake Perris far apart from any other fishery in southern California moving forward.
When the disease issues are resolved and hatchery production can again meet the needs of the lakes/streams that depend upon trout to provide viable fisheries, and if there is excess production (which there very well could be), then allocation decisions regarding lakes like Lake Perris will be re-evaluated at that time.

When would it potentially be re-evaluated? I'm sure there are plenty of fisherman that use to fish for trout that would like to know. I'm also sure the dudes that throw swimbaits would love to know as well.

[Dr. MindBendo]

What I am now noticing lately is that these angler surveys may play a bigger role in fishery management than I originally thought. I thought it was someone's summer internship at the DFG, waiting around the hot *** launch ramp at DVL to ask people how much the bite sucked.



LOL this is soooo true

[Natural Lefty]

Kwin, I went to Perris Lake today and I can confirm that I caught a Shimofuri/Chamelion Goby today as an incidental catch. I just checked online. I didn't have a camera but I took a good look at it for a few seconds before putting it back. It was my first of that species, and I always like catching new kinds of fish, even if they are small. It was a pretty little thing. That was the only fish I saw caught. The weather was great today but the fishing was slow. I have caught several of the other species that you mentioned, either at Silverwood or Perris. In addition, I have caught quite a few of what appear to be Sacramento Splittail at Silverwood, but not in recent years.

About the trout in Perris, my experience is that most trout caught in Perris have been of a put and grow nature. They seem to be able to survive the summers in deep water, and sometimes I have caught them and seen others catching them in June or July. A lot of trout were usually caught in the spring too, after a few months of growth, and they grow very fast there. I have always liked catching the "holdovers" there, as do many others.

[DarkShadow]

LOL this is soooo true


DFW - "Why aren't you guys fishing for trout?!"

ANGLER - "Because you haven't stocked any since 2018."

DFW - "Well...if you guys aren't fishing for them, we won't be stocking them, then."

I'm still confused at all this.


This is like me going to Somalia, and telling a starving kid that I won't give him any food because he obviously doesn't like eating.

[Natural Lefty]

I believe they were stocking trout when those surveys were done, but I wonder if the surveys adequately accounted for all the trout that were caught there, or the quality of the trout, many of which were 1 - 2 1/2 pound "holdovers." Also, with the water level back up, the trout habitat should be better. Some other fisher people asked me yesterday why they weren't stocking trout. They thought it was because the marina is being remodeled. I told them that I don't think that is the reason, because they could stock trout at the launch ramp if they want to.

By the way, what are the warm water fish habitat improvements that are being implemented, Kwin? The fishing was really good for awhile after the water was raised again. Last year, however, there were hordes of baby Bluegill and Bass, so the numbers were good but not many larger fish or variety being caught from shore, at least. (I only fished from shore and the Sail Cove fishing pier.) I didn't see any Crappie or Redear, for instance. There should be some good fishing when those juvenile fish grow up, though.

[kwin]

DFW - "Why aren't you guys fishing for trout?!"

ANGLER - "Because you haven't stocked any since 2018."

DFW - "Well...if you guys aren't fishing for them, we won't be stocking them, then."

I'm still confused at all this.


This is like me going to Somalia, and telling a starving kid that I won't give him any food because he obviously doesn't like eating.


There were 48000 lbs of trout stocked 2009-2011 when the surveys took place. Lots of trout to be caught, little effort expended to catch them & few trout returned to creel. Not a difficult concept to grasp.

[kwin]

I believe they were stocking trout when those surveys were done, but I wonder if the surveys adequately accounted for all the trout that were caught there, or the quality of the trout, many of which were 1 - 2 1/2 pound "holdovers." Also, with the water level back up, the trout habitat should be better. Some other fisher people asked me yesterday why they weren't stocking trout. They thought it was because the marina is being remodeled. I told them that I don't think that is the reason, because they could stock trout at the launch ramp if they want to.

By the way, what are the warm water fish habitat improvements that are being implemented, Kwin? The fishing was really good for awhile after the water was raised again. Last year, however, there were hordes of baby Bluegill and Bass, so the numbers were good but not many larger fish or variety being caught from shore, at least. (I only fished from shore and the Sail Cove fishing pier.) I didn't see any Crappie or Redear, for instance. There should be some good fishing when those juvenile fish grow up, though.

1,484 brush piles, 26 crappie condos, 32 tree stump structures, 109 rock piles, 135 catfish spawning caves, 191,860 sq ft gravel, 13,500 lbs catfish stocked

[Natural Lefty]

Oh wow. Thank you for the information, Kwin. There are still tons (literally) of brush in the lake naturally, too, leftover from when the water was lower for such a long time.

By the way, I caught a tagged trout at Perris around that time (somewhere around 2010 but I don't remember exactly), when I was fishing for panfish at Sail Cove. I returned the tag and was informed that it had been stocked only 5 days earlier.

[kwin]

Oh wow. Thank you for the information, Kwin. There are still tons (literally) of brush in the lake naturally, too, leftover from when the water was lower for such a long time.

By the way, I caught a tagged trout at Perris around that time (somewhere around 2010 but I don't remember exactly), when I was fishing for panfish at Sail Cove. I returned the tag and was informed that it had been stocked only 5 days earlier.

Thank you for returning the tag. The average time at large for tagged trout was 23 days though a few lasted a couple months before reported being caught.

[Natural Lefty]

You are welcome. It's interesting that the average time in the lake was less than one month for tagged trout. Before the lake was drawn down for the dam repairs, I think around half of the trout that I saw caught at Perris, or more, looked like they have been in there at least a few months (silvery, large, full finned, with pink meat and delicious if eaten). When the lake was drawn down, however, the trout fishing wasn't nearly as good, but that is when I caught the tagged trout.

[etucker1959]

53100 I thought that Paris only had pike, perch, zanders, wels catfish, and carp? My understanding is they never stocked and will never will stock trout there.

Calling it Parris is a slang term people on FNN use for lake Perris! Lol (You will see it used again) Everyone who fish's with me know, I use slang all the time to make the conversations more interesting and Fun. (it's also a way to keep me awake on the long drive home after a full day of fishing) My favorite slang of all time is to call Football "Fossball!" In reference to the Adam Sandler movie "Waterboy" which is one of my favorite movies.

p.s. How do I know Egster is a long time FNN personality with so few post? He is my number 1 fishing partner and his real name is Phil. So in my reports when I use the name Phil, "it's Egster in the FNN world!" Lol

[Natural Lefty]

Ah, "Perris in the spring." Coming soon to a lake near me.

[Egster]

Ah, "Perris in the spring." Coming soon to a lake near me.

Ha. It actually look me a moment to wonder why you guys start talking about Paris. It didn't immediately click to me that I made the spelling mistake. Sorry about that. I'll deleted my post to prevent further embarrassment. Please disregard my earlier post since it may still shows in other's reply.

[etucker1959]

Ha. It actually look me a moment to wonder why you guys start talking about Paris. It didn't immediately click to me that I made the spelling mistake. Sorry about that. I'll deleted my post to prevent further embarrassment. Please disregard my earlier post since it may still shows in other's reply.

This is the problem with FNN. People say stupid things to strangers they don't know and often offend them badly!!!!!!!!! A typical response then (from the people who got offended) is they quit posting on FNN!!!!!!! I can't be offended and neither can you know who? We are the only 2 members if we get offended, we just try to make the perpetrator look as foolish as possible! I noticed yesterday their was 532 people viewing FNN at 1 time. Yet only 2 of them were members and the rest were just Lurkers! You know why their is only 2 members logged in and 530 Lurkers?????? Because many of the Lurkers are afraid to post and be ridiculed by other members!

If you only want to read my fish reports and comments from only a handful of people. Write the first dumb thing that comes to your mind after you read other peoples comments. I guarantee if you do that, FNN won't get very much larger in it's participation level!!!!!!

[eah]

etucker1959, well done. Seems like civility has lost its place lately, but I hope it will make a comeback.

[kwin]

Ha. It actually look me a moment to wonder why you guys start talking about Paris. It didn't immediately click to me that I made the spelling mistake. Sorry about that. I'll deleted my post to prevent further embarrassment. Please disregard my earlier post since it may still shows in other's reply.

To answer your questions on your deleted post...CDFW did and do announce the week a lake is scheduled to be stocked. Day of and pounds stocked isn't going to happen. There were 25-30 signs posted around the lake advertising there were tagged trout with $10 reward tags in them and all of the information on what to do if a tagged fish was caught. The survey clerks also handed out 3x5 cards to anglers with everything needed to return the tags except a stamp and an envelope to mail them in.

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.

5310453103

[FISHISH]

Ha. It actually look me a moment to wonder why you guys start talking about Paris. It didn't immediately click to me that I made the spelling mistake. Sorry about that. I'll deleted my post to prevent further embarrassment. Please disregard my earlier post since it may still shows in other's reply.
I'm sorry if I offended you egster.

[DarkShadow]

There were 48000 lbs of trout stocked 2009-2011 when the surveys took place. Lots of trout to be caught, little effort expended to catch them & few trout returned to creel. Not a difficult concept to grasp.

Kwin,

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if i'm reading what you wrote right, did the DFW base their decision to not stock trout at Perris on a 3 year data set whose last set was gathered in 2011? Almost a decade ago? Is the DFW really basing the decision to no longer stock trout at Perris in 2021 on numbers that were last crunched when we killed Bin Laden in 2011? We've had like 2 administrations since then. I must be missing something here.

Moving on from that, I realize that stocking X number of trout versus Y number of trout being caught is not a difficult concept to grasp. What IS a difficult concept to grasp is these decisions being based on:

1. Angler surveys
2. Angler surveys last done in 2011

If these angler surveys are an important tool in what DFW is basing decision making on, methinks I see a bit of an issue.

In your opinion, do these angler surveys truly capture a good cross section of the bigger picture of what is being caught and what species are being targeted in our waters? If not, isn't this a futile task whose data sets are pretty irrelevant unless you are capturing an accurate cross section of what is actually happening in a lake? You know, the law of large numbers?

Throughout the year, what percentage of anglers respond (truthfully) to these surveys? 5%? 10%? Would you say it's even less considering California's budget shortfalls the past few years, resulting in less people staffed in government agencies like the DFW to get these surveys done? In essence, if there are 100,000 distinct anglers visits to a specific lake a year, how many of those are answering surveys? Are the surveys conducted year around, or only during certain times of the year? I still know a few wild trout spots that I've visited for the past decade that still have my surveys from 2012 stuffed in the metal bin.

I think its important for anglers to understand the data that the DFW takes into consideration and the fact that that the DFW uses angler surveys as a major tool to dictate enforcement and perhaps fisheries enhancement is very eye opening.

Of course, if these numbers don't accurately represent the real figures.....

[kwin]

As you may have heard, over the last several years our hatcheries have been undergoing much needed deferred maintenance/upgrades (https://cdfgnews.wordpress.com/2018/05/04/fillmore-trout-hatchery-temporarily-closed-to-public-for-scheduled-maintenance/), have had gas bubble disease issues (https://wildlife.ca.gov/Science-Institute/News/stacking-the-odds-to-stock-californias-waters) and most recently have been infected with a novel bacteria (https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=180707&inline) which necessitated the destruction of over 3 million hatchery trout. As a result, the number of trout available for stocking in southern California over the last 3-4 years has been severely reduced. The limited quantity of trout available necessitates allocation to lakes/streams that depend upon trout to provide viable fisheries.
Lake Perris is not one of those places. An angler survey/tagged trout study conducted 2009-2011 at Lake Perris showed that only 3.5-7% of the trout were reported as caught. Catch rates were OK ranging from 0.14 to 0.37 fish an hour (1 fish for every 3-5 hours of effort), however only 17% of the anglers that fished Lake Perris were targeting trout. Bass, panfish and unspecified target ("anything") anglers far outnumbered trout anglers. The dominant pursuit of other species and the poor return rate of trout at Lake Perris does not justify their stocking in lieu of lakes/streams that have much higher trout specific effort and return rates. The smaller County Park lakes and local mountain lakes/streams are an excellent example of waters that meet those criteria.
Additionally, CDFW has completed an extensive habitat mitigation project at Lake Perris to rehabilitate the warmwater fisheries that were affected by the prolonged drawdown necessitated by a dam remediation project (https://wildlife.ca.gov/Science-Institute/News/Tag/lake-perris). This project unto itself, has set Lake Perris far apart from any other fishery in southern California moving forward.
When the disease issues are resolved and hatchery production can again meet the needs of the lakes/streams that depend upon trout to provide viable fisheries, and if there is excess production (which there very well could be), then allocation decisions regarding lakes like Lake Perris will be re-evaluated at that time.

again, see the above

[DarkShadow]

again, see the above

Ok, so....to sum it up:

Our local trout forgot to wear their mask and social distance and caught the Covid and died, and now we have limited amounts of catchable sized rainbow trout to go around.

A study conducted 10 years ago said people don't fish for trout at Lake Perris, thus they are not getting any allotment in 2021.

Gotcha.

My original question, though, is what we're doing using studies from 10 years ago.

And I get it, you're not Google or Amazon. Sometimes agencies like the DFW do not have unlimited budgets and they work with what they're given, thus it is impossible to have up to date metrics and studies on every body of water.

The other question was:

In your opinion, do these angler surveys truly capture a good cross section of the bigger picture of what is being caught and what species are being targeted in our waters? In other words, are these exit polls accurate?


•

(The new habitat structure is exciting, though. Hopefully it spreads out the anglers, and reduces the bass boat armada that gather for their months long convention on top of the tire reef.)

[Natural Lefty]

"Paris in the spring" is just something funny that I like to say about Perris Lake when springtime fishing comes around. I don't think anybody was trying to embarrass anyone.

The tagged trout that I caught must have been one of those in the survey, Kwin, although it was not one of the $10 reward ones. I was happy to return the tag, though.

Dark Shadow, I am still wondering where this new habitat structure is. There is so much brush in the lake now anyway, naturally, that it's easy to get snagged and difficult to know if the snag was put there for fish habitat, or just some of the brush or trees that were covered up when the water level was raised. I do think all of this new habitat is helping the fish population, in any case.

[DarkShadow]

Dark Shadow, I am still wondering where this new habitat structure is.

It's no where near the tire reefs.

;-)

(Just get yourself an OCD bass angler friend who has Lowrance and you'll be able to see every hump and see every bass calling El Chapo's wife)

•

Let's not get Kwin sidetracked though.


I'm still excited for an answer to my question on whether DFW is really using decade's old info tho, Left.

[Misfitdog]

the trout stocking back in 2009-2011 and the survey that was held , I remember when they where posting the sign and handing out the cards. I know personally myself I turned in 3 tags and Got the info on the trout I had caught. most where from 1 week to 3 weeks . They even gave incentive to turn them in with a $10 payout for the tag. Sad most people did not turn them in and it was a deciding factor on the future of trout plants. I hope again someday they will stock Perris again.

Thank you Kwin for the update and information you have provided it is greatly appreciated

[kwin]

It's no where near the tire reefs.

;-)

(Just get yourself an OCD bass angler friend who has Lowrance and you'll be able to see every hump and see every bass calling El Chapo's wife)

•

Let's not get Kwin sidetracked though.


I'm still excited for an answer to my question on whether DFW is really using decade's old info tho, Left.

in a word, yes. We stocked about 16000 lbs each of the years, we put signs all over the lake advertising the tagged trout program and handed out 3x5 cards with all of the info on it to return the tags. It's really not that old since we really haven't had "normal" hatchery production for at least 5-6 of those years.

To answer your other question regarding the validity of angler surveys, nearly all fisheries agencies utilize angler surveys as they are the most direct user based feedback to determine catch rate, target species and harvest rate among other metrics. Our surveys sample thousands of anglers, so yes IMO they are a valid representation of the anglers using each lake.

[Natural Lefty]

I remember the cards and the advertising, Kwin. I think most of the tagged fish didn't have a $10 reward? My fish did not. I figure the differential in return rates between $10 fish and fish with no reward would also give useful information on return rates of the fish, figuring that nearly anyone would return a tag that was worth $10, but perhaps not one that wasn't worth any money.

I presume that when more trout are available, the DFW will begin stocking Perris Lake again.

[DarkShadow]

....I figure the differential in return rates between $10 fish and fish with no reward would also give useful information on return rates of the fish, figuring that nearly anyone would return a tag that was worth $10, but perhaps not one that wasn't worth any money.

And therein lies the problem, Nat Left. If 100 fish are dumped, and 10 of them are tagged, and the only fish reported were the 2 tagged fish are caught, you're getting some pretty misleading data. What data set accounts for the number of trout sitting in people's coolers that were not reported, since they were not tagged, thus removing the incentive to talk to the DFW?

(And at this rate, if the DFW is so confident that there is such a low catch rate of these stocked trouts, tag them all with at $10 reward Something tells me me we see a sudden influx of catch rates then.)

So, essentially, by looking at the data of the 2 tagged trout being reported, anybody can logically state that Perris Lake has a catch ratio of only 2% of the total of fish stocked and nobody can argue that based on the reported numbers.

But is that an accurate representation of catch rates and target species at a lake?

Again, I know the DFW is limited with the amount of real time data they can gather, especially in reservoirs. I wonder if with the advent of technologies like Lowrance's Live Sight and Garmin's Live Scope, if the DFW will add it to their data collection tools to get an even more accurate heart beat of our local fisheries.

[Natural Lefty]

I think your scenario should read 100 tagged trout, 10 of which had $10 rewards, Dark Shadow. If only 2 were returned, and they were $10 trout, the more accurate estimate of the catch rate would likely be 20% rather than 2%. However, as indicated, some people did return non reward tags during the study, including myself and another person who commented on this thread. In any case, ideally every tagged trout should have a cash reward, but that would be much more expensive. So, the argument that you are making is that only the cash reward trout should be counted, essentially, which may be a good point, but there probably needed to be more of them to get an accurate estimate of the catch rate.

The other point that I made, is that I think the trout fishing was better when the water was near full pool than when it was lowered for the dam repairs. I am pretty sure most people who fish Perris Lake agree about that. The lake is larger and deeper when it is full, and thus has better trout habitat and apparently better growth and survival rates for trout after they are stocked. Since the lake is back to being near full pool, the trout should do better now if stocked. The study was done when the water was way down for the dam repairs, so not equivalent to the situation now. Hopefully the lake will be stocked again when enough trout are available.

[Misfitdog]

Yes I do agree with the scenarios provided and we do wish that the trout hatcheries can recover in time. It would be interesting to see the data when we have a full pool scenario and anglers actively participating in the study. I can say that the 3 trout I caugth and that where tagged I did receive $10 for each and all the information I filled in.

[kwin]

over the 3 years...

2195 reward tags went out, 178 were returned...8%
5960 non reward tags went out, 282 returned...4%
that's a 5.6% average.

based upon catch rate and hours fished (weekend/weekday), angler surveys estimated...

3424 trout were caught
95523 were stocked
that's 3.5% of total stocked, tagged or not

At best case scenario, looking at reward tags only it is still less than 10% which is poor.

[Dr. MindBendo]

I think the other thing to take into consideration was that Corona Lake and Irvine Lake were open at that time which I'm sure drew many angler's away from Perris. Especially for Trout. What can we angler's do to start getting Perris stocked again with Trout?

[kwin]

I think the other thing to take into consideration was that Corona Lake and Irvine Lake were open at that time which I'm sure drew many angler's away from Perris. Especially for Trout. What can we angler's do to start getting Perris stocked again with Trout?

Not much right now In my original and reiterated response, the supply of trout is very limited and they need to go where they are needed. Perris isn't one of those places. It's not like a 20 lb bag of bass can be had at Yucaipa lake consistently, if at all. There are not 1-2 lb bluegill swimming all over Rancho Jurupa lake. There are not 15-20 lb catfish swimming around Prado. There are not many (any?) 10 lb bass swimming around Mojave Narrows. There are not quagga mussels affecting the recruitment of juvenile warmwater sportfish in Perris. Perris is not limited in the amount of productive fishery habitat etc. etc.

Bottom line is...if/when the hatchery issues are resolved, if/when all of the lakes that need trout and trout are overwhelmingly sought get what in necessary, and if/when there are fish in excess of that, then it is a possibility that Perris could once again get stocked trout. Until then, it is what it is.

[BassinPLS]

Not much right now In my original and reiterated response, the supply of trout is very limited and they need to go where they are needed. Perris isn't one of those places. It's not like a 20 lb bag of bass can be had at Yucaipa lake consistently, if at all. There are not 1-2 lb bluegill swimming all over Rancho Jurupa lake. There are not 15-20 lb catfish swimming around Prado. There are not many (any?) 10 lb bass swimming around Mojave Narrows. There are not quagga mussels affecting the recruitment of juvenile warmwater sportfish in Perris. Perris is not limited in the amount of productive fishery habitat etc. etc.

Bottom line is...if/when the hatchery issues are resolved, if/when all of the lakes that need trout and trout are overwhelmingly sought get what in necessary, and if/when there are fish in excess of that, then it is a possibility that Perris could once again get stocked trout. Until then, it is what it is.

As always ... Excellent Kwin

[drifter023]

I do not think F&G should even report ahead of time when they are going to stock trout will get out fast enough any how. Plus would probably give the weekend anglers a chance at some fish. Me I really do not care about chasing a stock truck but I can tell when they stock like at silverwood cause you cannot launch boat without people fishing on the ramp and they are not allowed to fish on the ramp really.

[DarkShadow]

I do not think F&G should even report ahead of time when they are going to stock trout...

drifter,

If those trout aren't caught, then there is no incentive to stock them again.

So, in the end, it's a good thing the DFG gives "week of" locations on where they stock. The goal is to take as many as they stock.

[capoisok]

the announcement's are made simply to drum up business
if the fish are planted and caught great
if the fish are not caught great

they don't care very much

this years fish where ordered last year

all has to do with perception and press

why

justification
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ for their future budget request

been lots of discussions over diminished native species and habitat preservation

because of money allocated to hatchery's to enable them to
introduce an inferior product,
product yes because that's all it is

quantity over quality

one virus and it all could be over

that's yours and your children's future

[skunked again]

Hi Kwin, can you tell me what the bass eat in the winter time? Do the gobies live in the rocks or the bottom?

[skunked again]

Threadfin Shad, Inland Silverside, Prickly Sculpin, Shimofuri/Chameleon Goby, Bigscale Logperch are all known species within Perris that could be considered "baitfish". However, Hitch, Sacramento Blackfish, American Shad and Tule Perch all exist in Silverwood where Perris receives its water so it is possible those species could exist within Perris also.
Hi Kwin, can you tell me what the bass eat in the winter time? Do the gobies live in the rocks or the mud bottom?

[kwin]

Hi Kwin, can you tell me what the bass eat in the winter time? Do the gobies live in the rocks or the mud bottom?

all of the above mentioned. Bass are opportunists.