(illegaly) introduce pike into a trout fishery

[elkfriend]

I remember that sundance had trouble a few years back with all the little perch in lake sundance, I recall that this issue was likely a result of illegaly introduced perch.

QUESTION (looking for your input):

Imagine a man made lake in a big city. Its stocked with trout annually, but many survive the winter and they actually spawn too, lots of small trout fry between the rocks. Lots of good and great size trout too and excellent ice fishing.

What would happen if someone introduced pike into the lake, lets say 5-10 small-medium sized specimen? They would likely not feast on the stocked trout, they are too big, but go after the fry, after themselves and small bugs and stuff?

Would it ruin the fishery or complement it with another species?

....this is a theoretical question....I always wondered what would happen if the sundance problem happened with pike.

[Gust]

Originally Posted by elkfriend

I remember that sundance had trouble a few years back with all the little perch in lake sundance, I recall that this issue was likely a result of illegaly introduced perch.

QUESTION (looking for your input):

Imagine a man made lake in a big city. Its stocked with trout annually, but many survive the winter and they actually spawn too, lots of small trout fry between the rocks. Lots of good and great size trout too and excellent ice fishing.

What would happen if someone introduced pike into the lake, lets say 5-10 small-medium sized specimen? They would likely not feast on the stocked trout, they are too big, but go after the fry, after themselves and small bugs and stuff?

Would it ruin the fishery or complement it with another species?

....this is a theoretical question....I always wondered what would happen if the sundance problem happened with pike.

Well, I always bring up Glenmore Reservoir which is really a great trout fishery within a great pike fishery,, and it vascilates,, though the trout are far bigger than the pike and the pike fry get gobbled by the Browns. But I think it's an anomaly,, though there are lakers and pike that get along just dandy up north. I think too that pike are just thought of as scavengers and trout just win the argument because they're prettier or sumthin?? but we never point a finger at them and say "Bad Trout".

[chubbdarter]

Originally Posted by elkfriend

I remember that sundance had trouble a few years back with all the little perch in lake sundance, I recall that this issue was likely a result of illegaly introduced perch.

QUESTION (looking for your input):

Imagine a man made lake in a big city. Its stocked with trout annually, but many survive the winter and they actually spawn too, lots of small trout fry between the rocks. Lots of good and great size trout too and excellent ice fishing.

What would happen if someone introduced pike into the lake, lets say 5-10 small-medium sized specimen? They would likely not feast on the stocked trout, they are too big, but go after the fry, after themselves and small bugs and stuff?

Would it ruin the fishery or complement it with another species?

....this is a theoretical question....I always wondered what would happen if the sundance problem happened with pike.

imagine a man made city pond that has sucessful trout spawning???????

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by chubbdarter

imagine a man made city pond that has sucessful trout spawning???????

x2
rofl.....

Lc

[Gust]

hypothetical;; come on,,, what if?,,, i know chub thinks it can be created.

i say this thread will get 13,000 reads,, taking bets now

[chubbdarter]

Originally Posted by GustavMahler

hypothetical;; come on,,, what if?,,, i know chub thinks it can be created.

i say this thread will get 13,000 reads,, taking bets now

well i guess if Carburn is connected to the Bow...this scenary already exists

[Kokanee9]

Originally Posted by GustavMahler

hypothetical;; come on,,, what if?,,, i know chub thinks it can be created.

i say this thread will get 13,000 reads,, taking bets now

Title alone should be good for 3500.

[elkfriend]

scooped a bunch of fry up the other day, put it in a pint glass and showed it to my kids.

unless they stock it with 1 inch long mini trout, they have to come from somewhere.

but....rather than mocking the title or my post, how about some constructive thoughts on my question?

[chubbdarter]

Originally Posted by elkfriend

scooped a bunch of fry up the other day, put it in a pint glass and showed it to my kids.

unless they stock it with 1 inch long mini trout, they have to come from somewhere.

but....rather than mocking the title or my post, how about some constructive thoughts on my question?

Carburn is your reality

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by elkfriend

scooped a bunch of fry up the other day, put it in a pint glass and showed it to my kids.

unless they stock it with 1 inch long mini trout, they have to come from somewhere.

but....rather than mocking the title or my post, how about some constructive thoughts on my question?

Likely those are fingerlings that got in during the stocking....or they are sticklebacks or some other bait minnow. I would be astounded if they were fish that ended up in the pond due to spawning of resident stocked trout.....just sayin.....

LC

[elkfriend]

no sweat, maybe they are not trout, I could be wrong.

I will take some pics, post "em and we will have another interesting thread.

back to the original question....

[BeeGuy]

Each scenario is unique. In the east, in watersheds where there were no pike historically and they have now been introduced they have annihilated the native brook trout which is one of the few native fish remaining in those systems.

Out here it's different. I'd be surprised if there was a lake fishery south of ED which hasn't been completely transformed by the introduction of species; pike, browns and rainbows especially.

As for your question, "would it ruin the fishery?" I think it is very relative. What was there originally? Was it a healthy trout fishery or was it another 'put and take' fishery?

I personally hold browns in the same regard as pike. They are voracious predators which will eat just about anything. Perhaps it depends what kind of colouration you like on the side of your fish. I think pike fight better. They get bigger. However browns can be pretty beautiful.

Would it ruin the fishery? Overall, No. It would just change the fishery.

My opinion, cheers.

[Lefty-Canuck]

Well the hypothetical question is just that.....What body of water? how big is it? does it winter kill? are there only trout in there or are there others? (suckers, baitfish, etc.)

If you were to dump 5-6 pike in a trout pond they would likely eat well......and then winterkill with the rest of the fish if thats what kind of pond it is.....You are assuming the 5-6 pike would spawn and setup shop in the pond.....again it would take many years and no winterkill to sustain a pike population IMHO......

Remember pike will eat fish that are over half their length....they are very predatory.....in theory a 12 inch pike could eat a 5-6 inch (stocking size) trout.

LC

[chubbdarter]

Stonehill was once a awesome trout fishery with incredible growth rates.......pike ruined that fishery

[BeeGuy]

hows the stonehill pike fishery?

[Gust]

Originally Posted by BeeGuy

Each scenario is unique. In the east, in watersheds where there were no pike historically and they have now been introduced they have annihilated the native brook trout which is one of the few native fish remaining in those systems.

Out here it's different. I'd be surprised if there was a lake fishery south of ED which hasn't been completely transformed by the introduction of species; pike, browns and rainbows especially.

As for your question, "would it ruin the fishery?" I think it is very relative. What was there originally? Was it a healthy trout fishery or was it another 'put and take' fishery?

I personally hold browns in the same regard as pike. They are voracious predators which will eat just about anything. Perhaps it depends what kind of colouration you like on the side of your fish. I think pike fight better. They get bigger. However browns can be pretty beautiful.

Would it ruin the fishery? Overall, No. It would just change the fishery.

My opinion, cheers.

BeeFeller, I know you're new on the forums but there is a couple of words that must remain unnamed,, just this once I will say it then we must forever hold out tongue, ok here goes (cringe) "Put & Take".

As for Browns, they are even with Pike in they're opportunism,, I use lures for Browns bigger than those for Pike.

I saw a pike at Badger Lake take away an undersized pike that was poorly released, the undersized was 60cm.

[chubbdarter]

Originally Posted by BeeGuy

hows the stonehill pike fishery?

dont know, stopped going there

[Gust]

Originally Posted by GustavMahler

BeeFeller, I know you're new on the forums but there is a couple of words that must remain unnamed,, just this once I will say it then we must forever hold out tongue, ok here goes (cringe) "Put & Take".

As for Browns, they are even with Pike in they're opportunism,, I use lures for Browns bigger than those for Pike.

I saw a pike at Badger Lake take away an undersized pike that was poorly released, the undersized was 60cm.

bad me,,, I meant to say "in that they're opportunistic",,,

but back to your thread,,, why do perch and pike and walleye cohabitate just fine?? Have trout ever ruined a good pike fishery?

[ishootbambi]

Originally Posted by chubbdarter

imagine a man made city pond that has sucessful trout spawning???????

ummmm....yeah......

[TyreeUM]

In a small lake that supports pike reproduction and not trout reproduction, pike will always win. In a system that supports natural reproduction in both, or you a trout species that will prefer to occupy a different location within the lake most of the year, then yes it can work, but it is not ideal. Mature trout can be incredibly mean. I have seen a 25 inch or so rainbow chase a good 10 pound pike right out of his pool in the frenchman river.

[Dust1n]

Originally Posted by GustavMahler

Well, I always bring up Glenmore Reservoir which is really a great trout fishery within a great pike fishery,, and it vascilates,, though the trout are far bigger than the pike and the pike fry get gobbled by the Browns. But I think it's an anomaly,, though there are lakers and pike that get along just dandy up north. I think too that pike are just thought of as scavengers and trout just win the argument because they're prettier or sumthin?? but we never point a finger at them and say "Bad Trout".

most of the pike there are small but theres pike in there that push 20lbs caught on smelts and a bober

[catnthehat]

We have some good sized pike in Borealis Pond, they came in through the big pumps when the pond was flooded using river water.
cat

[Toirtis]

Originally Posted by chubbdarter

Carburn is your reality

I tend to agree. Pike in a lake like Sundance (Arbour lake, Lake Bonavista, etc) would soon see the trout replaced entirely with pike...and god help whomever did it if the community assoc ever found out.

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by elkfriend

I remember that sundance had trouble a few years back with all the little perch in lake sundance, I recall that this issue was likely a result of illegaly introduced perch.

QUESTION (looking for your input):

Imagine a man made lake in a big city. Its stocked with trout annually, but many survive the winter and they actually spawn too, lots of small trout fry between the rocks. Lots of good and great size trout too and excellent ice fishing.

What would happen if someone introduced pike into the lake, lets say 5-10 small-medium sized specimen? They would likely not feast on the stocked trout, they are too big, but go after the fry, after themselves and small bugs and stuff?

Would it ruin the fishery or complement it with another species?

....this is a theoretical question....I always wondered what would happen if the sundance problem happened with pike.

Simple question simple answer. If you stock a top predator in the lake they will eat all the trout eventually. Your stocking program would be a pike feeding program. Very expensive and horrible experiment. If they reproduced...that would be even more horrible. I saw a 30 inch pike in the aquarium at Bass pro with a 20 inch brown in its throat. Pike will eat the easiest prey. Trout are easy. In a lake with pike perch and trout...the pike will eat the trout before the perch. A stocked trout lake in the city is not big enough to sustain a pike fishery.

If someone did such a thing they would ruin the fishing. As a kid I fished Hermitage Lakes in Edmonton. Some jerk put some pike from the river into the lakes...ruined the trout fishing very quickly. A medium pike can almost eat an equivalent sized trout...give or take a few inches. Plus every small kid hooking into their first fish will likely get snapped off by a charging pike.

As for baby trout...there are none. You are looking at minnows and I would bet on it. Hatcheries don't sell the tiny trout...no money in it. This time of year likely they are either lake chub or fathead minnows (I am voting Lake chub). Take a pic...note there is no adipose fin...unless you luck into some trout-perch...which is highly unlikely.

As for trout with a wide range of sizes...it is highly likely they just stocked some 10 inchers, 14 inchers, 18 inchers and 24 inchers...rather than having them grow to those sizes. Most lakes such as these are put and take...and few survive multiple years.

There is nothing good to come of your hypothetical idea...but hey...there is nothing wrong with discussing this and helping to educate people so that NOBODY does this now or in the future.

Cheers

Sun

[TyreeUM]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

.there is nothing wrong with discussing this and helping to educate people so that NOBODY does this now or in the future.

I wish...

We have a lake just outside Prince Albert that used to grow 15 pound rainbows. "Somehow" pike got in there and MOE stated it was likely do to highwater and the pike made it in during their spawn...
Oh really? Then explain to me why there are no suckers found in the lake? Surely they would have made it there before the pike in highwater...

[slough shark]

carburn has 3 lakes, I have been fishing there for 25 years, for years only the lake furthest from the parking lot had pike and perch, the 1st 2 lakes had trout. One used to be able to fish in the first 2 lakes and catch trout, some were even decent (around 20 inches). About 20 years ago perch got into the first 2 lakes, they outcompeted the trout for a lot of food and the stopped stocking it for a year or 2. They then tried draining the first 2 lakes and taking out all the perch, they were able to drain the 1st one completely and got all the perch out, they had the water level down to about 2 feet and got most of the perch out(using nets) they then refilled the lakes and started stocking trout. They did that for about 3 -5 years until the perch had come back , as well someone had thrown pike into the 2nd lake. They just stopped stocking trout there as basically all the trout every year were either being caught and kept or eaten by the pike. Trout in a small lake will never do very well in the same lake as pike as they need somewhere to go where they can be safe from the pike(deep water or moving water) and can grow to a size large enough that they aren't a target for every pike out there. putting pike in a small lake is a death warrent on all the trout there.

[densa44]

In Alberta Chestermere lake is an example of what will happen. The pike get very large and eat all the trout, everything else too.

I know that if biologists want to empty a lake with no river out lets (North Ontario has lots) the will introduce a few "Tiger muskies", it is a Northern/muskie hybrid and it is sterile. It will clean up the fish the Biologist doesn't want without poisoning the lake and in the fall the now very large pike are netted out of the lake and the next spring trout are reintroduced.

In slow water trout cannot compete with pike.

[Sundancefisher]

Originally Posted by TyreeUM

I wish...

We have a lake just outside Prince Albert that used to grow 15 pound rainbows. "Somehow" pike got in there and MOE stated it was likely do to highwater and the pike made it in during their spawn...
Oh really? Then explain to me why there are no suckers found in the lake? Surely they would have made it there before the pike in highwater...

You don't need more than an intermittent tributary to allow immigration. I studied that in University. However...I agree...it would be unusual to have pike but no suckers. Still I studied a lake near Fort McMurray...right along the highway that has stunted pike and no other fish.

Suckers are very persistent...but they may not have been able to spawn and any that got in...died off. Whereas the pike spawned successfully.

In the end...illegal introduction of fish is bad news.

[TyreeUM]

Originally Posted by Sundancefisher

You don't need more than an intermittent tributary to allow immigration. I studied that in University. However...I agree...it would be unusual to have pike but no suckers. Still I studied a lake near Fort McMurray...right along the highway that has stunted pike and no other fish.

Suckers are very persistent...but they may not have been able to spawn and any that got in...died off. Whereas the pike spawned successfully.

In the end...illegal introduction of fish is bad news.

it happened within the last 5 years, the closest creek the lake would drain into is a small trib to the north sask, it was an illegal introduction for sure.

I just don't understand why people feel the need to move perch and pike around when there are plenty of places you can catch them already...

[elkfriend]

awesome discussion folks, thanks a lot, I learned a lot

the trout they stock is rainbow, I have seen some very fat bellied ones while diving. the average depth is 25 ft or so, with a couple of spots in the 40ft mark.

anyways, good stuff!