Bass Pro Shops   Daveys Locker Sportfishing  Newport Landing Sportfishing   The Fishing Syndicate  Carver Covers  Tight Lines Guide Service  Bob Sands Fishing Tackle 
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 29

Thread: 2015 fish stocking reduced 40-50 percent

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Upland
    Posts
    187

    Default 2015 fish stocking reduced 40-50 percent

    Don't know how many are aware of the fact that the DFW is going to have a huge reduction in the amount of fish stocked for this season in the Sierras... They are going to cut back stocking by 40-50 percent and the fish they do stock will only be 4 ounce in size from the 8 ounce they previously stocked......In my opinion this sounds like a very poor upcoming fishing season and with fish not even big enough to eat.....

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Bishop, CA
    Posts
    2,500

    Default

    First, it's just in my nature to be a glass-half-full kinda guy, so I look at it this way. If you cut the overall poundage by 40% but you reduce the size of the fish by 50%, there may actually be more fish per person stocked this year than we've averaged over the past decade. Clearly it comes at a cost...the size of the fish. Also looking on the bright side for me, this is happening statewide....not just the Eastside, but the westside, socal, norcal etc. Everyone is going to have to get used to fish that size when fishing public water, at least in the short term. If you want to trout fish where the scenery is the best, we're still the best place in California to go.

    However, you as someone who on many...sooo many occasions has stated that you've been fishing the Owens & Rock Creek for 50+ years, you of all people should remember a time when the fish stocked were 4 to a pound or even 5 to a pound. We've become spoiled with the half pounders of recent memory, and even 3/4lb fish average for a minute in the mid 2000's, which my Dad and many of my customers who are of his generation remarked to be vastly larger than what they were used to growing up fishing the area. So while this certainly isn't something I'm happy about personally, it certainly isn't an end to all things.

    Also on the bright side of things, Mono county is looking to greatly increase spending to offset these changes which should mean plenty of bigger model fish to go around for those that know how to catch 'em. For those that would like to see how Mono County is handling the situation - please read this article.

    http://www.sierrawave.net/33409/blac...-remains-open/

    The board of supervisors, fisheries commission, city of Mammoth Lakes are all very engaged and are doing their darnedest to make sure everyone has a satisfying angling experience this year...that will allow the long term strategy to take place.

    If anyone would like to read some comments on the subject from the Inyo County perspective check this link. I will admit that at this early date a concrete plan hasn't been put in place but rest assured, we're working on it.
    http://thesheetnews.com/2015/02/06/s...ish-reduction/

    There are absolutely some questions that need answering...like how the DFW can justify these reductions? Why are they using the drought to hide unjustified budget slashing? Who is going to keep the DFW honest and audit their spending and then take legal action against them? Hopefully these things will come to light soon so we can have all the facts and work on a more sustainable action plan for the future.
    Last edited by Sierra_Smitty; 02-19-2015 at 10:36 AM.

  3. #3

    Default

    Smitty-Problem is...accountability with our State folks has hit an all time low. Witness the Fire Prevention Fee(TAX) CalFire has put around the state raising millions and millions of dollars but not increasing or even maintaining a semblence of Fire Prevention activity in about 85% of the state that is not high visibility to the Sacramento Pols. I pay 5 times in Fire Prevention fees on my properties then what I pay in taxes for our local County Fire Department and Sheriff's Dept. Wish I had an answer for you....all I get from the CalFire folks is recorded messages and boilerplate responses to emails and letters.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Murrieta
    Posts
    3,789

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Viejo View Post
    Smitty-Problem is...accountability with our State folks has hit an all time low. Witness the Fire Prevention Fee(TAX) CalFire has put around the state raising millions and millions of dollars but not increasing or even maintaining a semblence of Fire Prevention activity in about 85% of the state that is not high visibility to the Sacramento Pols. I pay 5 times in Fire Prevention fees on my properties then what I pay in taxes for our local County Fire Department and Sheriff's Dept. Wish I had an answer for you....all I get from the CalFire folks is recorded messages and boilerplate responses to emails and letters.
    Oh but hey, our state's finances are in the black, "so what difference does it make"...

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Upland
    Posts
    187

    Default

    I would like to see a poll of fishermen, perhaps when they buy their license online, on how many would be willing to pay a higher license fee if it guaranteed more stocking... Personally as much as I fish the Sierras it wouldn't kill me if I had to pay 10-15 more dollars But I'm sure the vast majority of fishermen would be against any license increase.

    But this state has to have the bullet train that probably few people will use..

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Yo' couch!
    Posts
    2,807

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HawgZWylde View Post
    Oh but hey, our state's finances are in the black, "so what difference does it make"...
    ..........
    Quote Originally Posted by HawgZWylde View Post
    Really bad fail. Not worth biting...

  7. #7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by retired96 View Post
    I would like to see a poll of fishermen, perhaps when they buy their license online, on how many would be willing to pay a higher license fee if it guaranteed more stocking... Personally as much as I fish the Sierras it wouldn't kill me if I had to pay 10-15 more dollars But I'm sure the vast majority of fishermen would be against any license increase.

    But this state has to have the bullet train that probably few people will use..
    I've got the same idea about bringing back an old idea. Give people the option to purchase trout and catfish stamps, with 100% of the money must be spent on fish stocking programs. No more of the DFG chasing marijuana growers!!!!!!!!
    Last edited by etucker1959; 02-13-2015 at 01:25 PM.

  8. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sierra_Smitty View Post
    First, it's just in my nature to be a glass-half-full kinda guy, so I look at it this way. If you cut the overall poundage by 40% but you reduce the size of the fish by 50%, there may actually be more fish per person stocked this year than we've averaged over the past decade. Clearly it comes at a cost...the size of the fish. Also looking on the bright side for me, this is happening statewide....not just the Eastside, but the westside, socal, norcal etc. Everyone is going to have to get used to fish that size when fishing public water, at least in the short term. If you want to trout fish where the scenery is the best, we're still the best place in California to go.

    However, you as someone who on many...sooo many occasions has stated that you've been fishing the Owens & Rock Creek for 50+ years, you of all people should remember a time when the fish stocked were 4 to a pound or even 5 to a pound. We've become spoiled with the half pounders of recent memory, and even 3/4lb fish average for a minute in the mid 2000's, which my Dad and many of my customers who are of his generation remarked to be vastly larger than what they were used to growing up fishing the area. So while this certainly isn't something I'm happy about personally, it certainly isn't an end to all things.

    Also on the bright side of things, Mono county is looking to greatly increase spending to offset these changes which should mean plenty of bigger model fish to go around for those that know how to catch 'em. For those that would like to see how Mono County is handling the situation - please read this article.

    http://thesheetnews.com/2015/02/06/s...ish-reduction/

    The board of supervisors, fisheries commission, city of Mammoth Lakes are all very engaged and are doing their darnedest to make sure everyone has a satisfying angling experience this year...that will allow the long term strategy to take place.

    If anyone would like to read some comments on the subject from the Inyo County perspective check this link. I will admit that at this early date a concrete plan hasn't been put in place but rest assured, we're working on it.
    http://thesheetnews.com/2015/02/06/s...ish-reduction/

    There are absolutely some questions that need answering...like how the DFW can justify these reductions? Why are they using the drought to hide unjustified budget slashing? Who is going to keep the DFW honest and audit their spending and then take legal action against them? Hopefully these things will come to light soon so we can have all the facts and work on a more sustainable action plan for the future.
    Thank you! A very rational take on the situation. It's easy for some of us to get worked up on this subject and a better approach is a more logical and rational one.

    Thanks again.

  9. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by retired96 View Post
    I would like to see a poll of fishermen, perhaps when they buy their license online, on how many would be willing to pay a higher license fee if it guaranteed more stocking... Personally as much as I fish the Sierras it wouldn't kill me if I had to pay 10-15 more dollars But I'm sure the vast majority of fishermen would be against any license increase.

    But this state has to have the bullet train that probably few people will use..
    This would work if that legislature DEDICATES the money's involved to an actual stocking program. But alas legislature was passed that included the stipulation of 2.75 lbs. of trout stocked per license fee and it has been largely ignored or at the very least not met.

    Nevada has a trout stamp and I am an annual out of state license holder for Nevada. I don't buy the stamp since I'm after the stripers that eat those fish but I think it's a good plan of attack if it is actually allocated to stocking. Unfortunately this state would earmark those funds to save native species of trout I'm sure and it would backfire on us.

  10. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by etucker1959 View Post
    I've got the same idea about bringing back an old idea. Give people the option to purchase trout and catfish stamps, with 100% of the money must be spent on fish stocking programs. No more of the DFG chasing marijuana growers!!!!!!!!
    Damn I hate it when we agree!

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •