Would a dugout with fish near a river be considered a tributary of the river?

[sns2]

A friend said he saw pike swimming in a very large dugout that is a few hundred yards away from a river. Who knows how they got there. Anyhow, if a guy were to fish this "pond", would it be considered a tributary or part of the river itself?

Sent from my LG-H812 using Tapatalk

[Gary K]

Originally Posted by sns2

A friend said he saw pike swimming in a very large dugout that is a few hundred yards away from a river. Who knows how they got there. Anyhow, if a guy were to fish this "pond", would it be considered a tributary or part of the river itself?

Sent from my LG-H812 using Tapatalk

Is it a dugout/pond or attached to the river via surface? Stream, ditch, etc?

Id say its atand alone if not. But i honestly got zero idea on the regulations regarding that situation. And cant find em either.

[wind drift]

Not a tributary. Unnamed, non-specified water bodies are covered by the general species regulations for the zone. Fish can move around in surprising ways during floods.

[the local angler]

it most likely got there from the spring runoff where rivers and such crested the banks and then retracted back when the water levels dropped. i have also seen a few places like this.

[FlyTheory]

General regulations would apply. The pond is in the same watershed but not a trib.

[Flieguy]

Originally Posted by FlyTheory

General regulations would apply. The pond is in the same watershed but not a trib.

^^^

[Okotokian]

Originally Posted by FlyTheory

General regulations would apply. The pond is in the same watershed but not a trib.

Do the regs apply to a private pond on private land? I'm assuming we aren't talking about a dugout on public land.

[FlyTheory]

Originally Posted by Okotokian

Do the regs apply to a private pond on private land? I'm assuming we aren't talking about a dugout on public land.

I'd assume so, think of stauffer tribs. Regs still apply even though the land surrounding is owned.
DISCLAIMER: I don't know for sure.

[sns2]

I went out this am with two 13 yr olds. The pond is actually an old gravel pit. Checked Google Earth and there are no creeks that feed it. It is approx 200 yards as the crow flies from the NSR, where there is next to nothing for a bank. Fish would have made their way there when river crested it's banks. Anyhow, my sin caught a 23" pike after a minute of jigging. Two hours, and twenty holes later, no more pike.

We packed up and headed to Wab. Not much action here either.

Sent from my LG-H812 using Tapatalk

[schmedlap]

Originally Posted by sns2

I went out this am with two 13 yr olds. The pond is actually an old gravel pit. Checked Google Earth and there are no creeks that feed it. It is approx 200 yards as the crow flies from the NSR, where there is next to nothing for a bank. Fish would have made their way there when river crested it's banks. Anyhow, my sin caught a 23" pike after a minute of jigging. Two hours, and twenty holes later, no more pike.

We packed up and headed to Wab. Not much action here either.

Sent from my LG-H812 using Tapatalk

Since it is non-permanent, the fish trapped there after the flood would likely have very little natural forage and/or will be winter killed. So removing them and either eating them or moving them back to the river is probably a good thing (?).

[HoytCRX32]

Back in the days we flood irrigated at our place near Brooks we would actually find pike swimming in the flooded field...our dog had a blast chasing them.

[sns2]

It was worth a try with two youngsters.

Sent from my LG-H812 using Tapatalk