Jump to content


Brindled Madtoms


37 replies to this topic

#21 Guest_Elijah_*

Guest_Elijah_*
  • Guests

Posted 23 July 2010 - 12:23 PM

I spent hours yesterday at each of 3 locations where there should have been Brindled and Stonecats and didn't find a single one. I tried different parts of the river. Riffles deep and shallow, backwater areas, under large slabs of slate, over gravel, over sand, in places with plants and fallen leaves, soft bottom areas, undercut banks etc. I don't think I missed any place except for possibly some really deep holes. I have come to the conclusion that the 2 rivers (the Chagrin and the Grand) just do not have very large populations of them. Earlier in the week I also sampled a small branch of the Chagrin and found none.

That's a bummer! Those brindleds look pretty cool. I was going to try a lake in NY near Ithaca where there is supposed to be a solid polpulation, but now that is not an option.

#22 Guest_wargreen_*

Guest_wargreen_*
  • Guests

Posted 23 July 2010 - 12:41 PM

Here in the Ozarks I have found most madtoms (including a stonecat) under rocks in small clear creeks that pour into lakes. Have you tried the pools in the creeks from 1-3ft deep?

I spent hours yesterday at each of 3 locations where there should have been Brindled and Stonecats and didn't find a single one. I tried different parts of the river. Riffles deep and shallow, backwater areas, under large slabs of slate, over gravel, over sand, in places with plants and fallen leaves, soft bottom areas, undercut banks etc. I don't think I missed any place except for possibly some really deep holes. I have come to the conclusion that the 2 rivers (the Chagrin and the Grand) just do not have very large populations of them. Earlier in the week I also sampled a small branch of the Chagrin and found none.



#23 Guest_andyavram_*

Guest_andyavram_*
  • Guests

Posted 27 July 2010 - 02:56 PM

Lotsofpets...

I sent you a PM. Stonecats are very common in both rivers you mentioned.

Andy

#24 Guest_Lotsapetsgarfhts_*

Guest_Lotsapetsgarfhts_*
  • Guests

Posted 27 July 2010 - 06:25 PM

Andy,
I got and answered it. I think we know/knew each other. I expressed my real concerns in the PM.

John

#25 Guest_NateTessler13_*

Guest_NateTessler13_*
  • Guests

Posted 27 July 2010 - 07:21 PM

Used to see Brindled in the upper Detroit River regularly. They are now quite rare with only a handful of them being found in the past several years. Presumed (as I have no good data) that the Zebra Mussel and Round Goby where likely the cause for decline for a variety of reasons.

Ironically however now we have an explosion of Northern Madtom, which are a state Endangered species. Seems they have swapped places in the new ecologic system of today.


They're doing fairly well in the Maumee River drainage (Lake Erie tributary). In one of the tribs to the Maumee, I've encountered them in densities of 30 fish per 100 meters. The main stem of the Maumee has quite a few in the upper reaches as well.

#26 Guest_Lotsapetsgarfhts_*

Guest_Lotsapetsgarfhts_*
  • Guests

Posted 28 July 2010 - 08:22 PM

I am beginning to think the lampricide they hit the Grand River with every year is doing some damage to the Madtom population there. I was already beginning to wonder about it when Andy brought it up in his PM to me. I also saw a lot less darters than I have there in the past. I'll be back out to the Maumee in a week or two.

#27 Guest_Elijah_*

Guest_Elijah_*
  • Guests

Posted 28 July 2010 - 09:07 PM

I am beginning to think the lampricide they hit the Grand River with every year is doing some damage to the Madtom population there. I was already beginning to wonder about it when Andy brought it up in his PM to me. I also saw a lot less darters than I have there in the past. I'll be back out to the Maumee in a week or two.

That laopricide stuff is ridiculous! How do they think they can poison the water and not do serious damage!

#28 Guest_Brooklamprey_*

Guest_Brooklamprey_*
  • Guests

Posted 28 July 2010 - 09:47 PM

That laopricide stuff is ridiculous! How do they think they can poison the water and not do serious damage!


It is known fact TFM affects other species, but it is a trade off. Do you allow Sea Lamprey to destroy a fishery or do you accept a certain amount of incidental take? As of now incidental take is acceptable, however this is wearing thin among many. New ideas are being used and tested to eliminate the reliance of TFM for Lamprey control.

Those doing Lamprey control are very much aware of the issues involving TFM. They are not oblivious to it.

Edited by Brooklamprey, 28 July 2010 - 09:48 PM.


#29 Guest_Brooklamprey_*

Guest_Brooklamprey_*
  • Guests

Posted 28 July 2010 - 09:53 PM

They're doing fairly well in the Maumee River drainage (Lake Erie tributary). In one of the tribs to the Maumee, I've encountered them in densities of 30 fish per 100 meters. The main stem of the Maumee has quite a few in the upper reaches as well.


Well I hope when the time is right they begin to move back up.. We are seeing a few species begin to move back in (Logpearch, Rainbow darter, whitefish for a few) the area so with luck brindled will also.

#30 Guest_andyavram_*

Guest_andyavram_*
  • Guests

Posted 29 July 2010 - 08:35 AM

In Ohio they lampricide the Grand River and I think either Conneaut Creek or the Ashtabula River. I believe current protocal is to do a treatment 2 years in a row and then have a few years (5 maybe?) off before they treat again. This gives some species; Mudpuppies, Madtoms, native Lampreys, etc... a chance to recover. Of course that is not the official reason for the years off (it has to do with the Sea Lamprey life cycle and budgets) but it at least if helps those species. I have also heard the guy who developed the protocal for Lampriciding rivers said there really is no point in even doing it in Ohio and recommends abandoning it altogether.

Those doing Lamprey control are very much aware of the issues involving TFM. They are not oblivious to it.


This is true but I have heard them really understate the levels of incidental take during presentations on the treatments, which I guess helps them justify their jobs. I was at one symposium where the first presentation was on how lampricide works and has very little incidential take and then the following presentation was on how Mudpuppies, along with some other fishes, are hit hard by the treatments. It was a neat ying-yang back-to-back presentations that unfortunately didn't get as heated during the question phase as I had hoped.

Andy

#31 Guest_Lotsapetsgarfhts_*

Guest_Lotsapetsgarfhts_*
  • Guests

Posted 29 July 2010 - 08:55 AM

I realize that what they are doing is nescessary (I support it) and they are aware of the potential side effects. I really enjoy our walleye and steelhead fisheries from the sportsmans point of view. I have to admit I was not targeting darters, but the same riffles I was fishing last week were full of them the last time I was there and I should have caught more than I did. We fished the area on Voorman Road by the park and the area below the Painsville Dam (most of which is gone, probably washed out) so the habitat has changed drastically there, but in the past darters were plentiful there. I did not see many last week. I can only imagine how hard it is to correctly dose the river since the water level is almost constantly changing. If they use too little, it does not work, too much and it works but impacts other species which are not being targeted.

On the other hand almost the entire Cuyahoga River system seems to be continuing to improve. I was recently sampling Sagamore Creek and found fairly large numbers of Steelhead smoults. This really is unusual since they do not stock the Cuyahoga River system (at least I don't think so) and that means they are all the results of stray Steelies reproducing in the creek naturally. I have also seen darters in Tinkers Creek which is probably the worst water quality wise in the entire system. I enjoy good fishing right down the hill and as a matter of fact the bass I am holding in my avitar was caught in the canal near Rockside and Canal Roads a little over a week ago. I would say that it is a very nice bass having come from the canal and that I have only caught a few slightly larger ones from the Cuyahoga River. I practice catch and release unless of course the fish in question are good sized crappies, walleye, or yellow perch. I occasionally keep a steelhead for the smoker (maybe 1 in 50), and all the stray salmon I catch since they will probably die anyway (I average 1 a year, I have never collected a limit here).

#32 Guest_fundulus_*

Guest_fundulus_*
  • Guests

Posted 29 July 2010 - 09:55 AM

Is it truly a good sign that the Cuyahoga has more steelheads? They're just another exotic in the Great Lakes system, one that gets better press than, say, bighead carp.

#33 Guest_andyavram_*

Guest_andyavram_*
  • Guests

Posted 29 July 2010 - 10:36 AM

Is it truly a good sign that the Cuyahoga has more steelheads? They're just another exotic in the Great Lakes system, one that gets better press than, say, bighead carp.


No it is not a good thing, at least ecologically. I cringe everytime I see one of those fish in vernal pools used by salamanders (happens all the time after flooding) and everytime I seine up some smolts.

I realize that what they are doing is nescessary (I support it) and they are aware of the potential side effects.


I completely disagree with you here, but I not a steelhead fisherman.

Bottom line for me, in Ohio at least is this. Sea Lampreys hit the salmonids the hardest. This includes trout, salmon and whitefish. Yes, I know they do attach to other fish also. In the Ohio portions of Lake Erie the native Lake Trout and Whitefish species are pretty much desimated (extirpated?) and all we have left is a put-and-take Orvis-fishery (I know there is some successful reproduction but is there enough to sustain the population if introductions stop? God, I hope not.). So in essense we are killing native Mudpuppies, Madtoms and Lampreys (some of which are state listed) to kill a non-native fish (Sea Lampreys) to save a put-and-take fish (Steelhead).

Not in the least bit necassary.

Andy

p.s.

Just wondering if anyone has ever collected or even come across Brindled Madtoms?


Who would have thought that was such a loaded question?

Edited by andyavram, 29 July 2010 - 10:38 AM.


#34 Guest_fundulus_*

Guest_fundulus_*
  • Guests

Posted 29 July 2010 - 10:38 AM

Yeah, you said what I was getting at, Andy.

#35 Guest_andyavram_*

Guest_andyavram_*
  • Guests

Posted 29 July 2010 - 10:52 AM

I would also like to see some stomach contect analysis of Steelhead in the Lake. In Ohio alone we dump between 500,000 to 750,000 steelhead into the rivers which in turn grow to around 10 pounds and essentially become one of the top lake predators. And then old time fisherman complain that they don't catch the Perch and Walleye like they used to...

#36 Guest_Elijah_*

Guest_Elijah_*
  • Guests

Posted 29 July 2010 - 05:43 PM

He. he. well I had no idea the question was going to go where it has, but an interesting thread in my opinion.

#37 Guest_Lotsapetsgarfhts_*

Guest_Lotsapetsgarfhts_*
  • Guests

Posted 01 August 2010 - 03:52 PM

This is a case ( and a rare one) where I took it for granted that what the state is doing is a good thing. I have to admit after looking at it the other way Andy is probably right. I am very aware of the plight of our salamanders. Ralph Pfingston was my High School Biology teacher. I still find it to be a good indication that the water quality has improved in my area though. No Andy I don't think it will be enough to sustain the fishery if the stocking stops. I guess I'll keep a few more steelhead each year now. I am sure that the steelhead are eating some small yellow perch and walleyes, but yellow perch and walleyes eat yellow perch and walleyes. I suspect they eat a lot of emerald shiners, smelt, and whatever else they come across. As for the old time fishermen complaining, I think you'll find that they are still throwing Erie Dearies tipped with worms, refuse to use a GPS, radio and depth finders. I've been out on the lake twice this year and got 2 limits of walleye , and 1 limit of perch. We only fished for perch on one of the trips out and we did get a few bonus steelheads both times.

Now back to the Brindled Madtoms, I'll looking for them again on Thursday.

#38 Guest_Elijah_*

Guest_Elijah_*
  • Guests

Posted 09 August 2010 - 12:26 PM

This is a case ( and a rare one) where I took it for granted that what the state is doing is a good thing. I have to admit after looking at it the other way Andy is probably right. I am very aware of the plight of our salamanders. Ralph Pfingston was my High School Biology teacher. I still find it to be a good indication that the water quality has improved in my area though. No Andy I don't think it will be enough to sustain the fishery if the stocking stops. I guess I'll keep a few more steelhead each year now. I am sure that the steelhead are eating some small yellow perch and walleyes, but yellow perch and walleyes eat yellow perch and walleyes. I suspect they eat a lot of emerald shiners, smelt, and whatever else they come across. As for the old time fishermen complaining, I think you'll find that they are still throwing Erie Dearies tipped with worms, refuse to use a GPS, radio and depth finders. I've been out on the lake twice this year and got 2 limits of walleye , and 1 limit of perch. We only fished for perch on one of the trips out and we did get a few bonus steelheads both times.

Now back to the Brindled Madtoms, I'll looking for them again on Thursday.

Any Luck?



Reply to this topic



  


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users