Interesting Article On Trout vs. Suckers

[858king]

Definitely a coarse fish fan (suckers as gamefish anyone?), and am presently smoking a batch of trout and white suckers. In the interests of a little research, found this link:

http://www.nrcresearchpress.com/doi/pdf/10.1139/f91-102

Which basically states that the presence of suckers can destroy or seriously alter the ability of waters to hold trout. So that argument appears settled on at least one front: suckers can destroy trout water.

However, the reason may be surprising, because it's not through eating trout eggs.

It's because trout are almost primarily bottom feeders unless suckers are present -- suckers, having better-shaped mouths, force the trout to feed mid-water, which is an inferior source of energy (faster and less plentiful prey).

So essentially, trout are bottom feeders that get fat off of benthic organisms, unless suckers beat them to it and eat the trout out of house and home.

The main thing I thought remarkable was the proven reality that trout are equally bottom feeders alongside suckers. This shouldn't come as a surprise, given the rank taste they carry from ponds and lakes when high sun causes organic decomposition throughout the water column. You can taste the bottom in them, then.

The question then rises: is it biologically responsible to alter fish habitat away from suckers, who are naturally suited and naturally in most bodies of water in the province, and towards farmed trout, which aren't?

[ducimus]

hmm natural selection?? tough question when nature selects the fish we dont want

[BGSH]

there are not that many suckers in trout holding waters though??

[Gust]

there are not that many suckers in trout holding waters though??

Do you mean stocked ponds, rivers lakes? I don't know about Edmonton way but down south we have plenty of sucker in all of the above waters.

[RisingRainbows]

The question then rises: is it biologically responsible to alter fish habitat away from suckers, who are naturally suited and naturally in most bodies of water in the province, and towards farmed trout, which aren't?

That is an interesting point. Every time we stock any lake, pond, or river we are impacting the ecosystem and possibly harming other species of not just fish. If we didn't stock lakes I sure wouldn't have ate that rainbow trout last night though...

[858king]

That is an interesting point. Every time we stock any lake, pond, or river we are impacting the ecosystem and possibly harming other species of not just fish. If we didn't stock lakes I sure wouldn't have ate that rainbow trout last night though...

Yeah really. Likewise for lunch. Suckers turned out great -- the bones dissolved. Similar to smoked chum salmon (for real). Smoked fish, rice, etc.

There are suckers in virtually every water I've fished, lake, river, or creek, south of Red Deer anyways. Not as much with ponds unless in the inlet or outlet creeks.

I suppose what I think is I don't usually consider stocking fish to be harming anything (pike, goldeye, trout, suckers, whatever -- all fun in the right situation). What it makes me wonder essentially is if Rainbow Trout aren't the manicured lawn of the fish world: nice but rather expensive and not too well suited to their environments.

Some photos of this batch. We caught a couple limits of trout and needed to pull the mud out, although I stashed the suckers (round) from when there was ice still floating: