Sandy Creek is trib. to Lake Ontario.

http://news10now.com...spx?ArID=114501
http://www.syracuse....d....xml&coll=1

Seems like there had to be other casualties besides the walleyes.

That seems to occur on every now and then throughout the Great Lakes during lampreycide treatments. Most of the time there is no harm done to fish, but on occassion conditions seem to be just right that result in a small fish kill. I can remeber one happening in the Grand or Chagrin River several years ago and Ohio DNR even warning the next year that several fish may be die as a result but large kills are rare. One thousand walleye isn't going to affect anyone's livelihood but it sure is a great way to get a mob going. Thousands and 1,000 to 1,500 hundred aren't the same either, there is no multiple of thousands, just one thousand and several hundreds. How do editors let such blatant things go to print?

It would seem that with the advent of internet articles spelling and grammar are not so religeously checked either. That article has some glaring grammar issues in the 1st paragraph alone.

I just thought it was interesting. What type of chemicals do they use as a lampricide? What could the condidtions have been that resulted in this?

I just thought it was interesting. What type of chemicals do they use as a lampricide? What could the condidtions have been that resulted in this?

I just happen to work with someone who was an applicator for USFW for 7 years

The usual chemical is TFM and potentially Bayluscide (which is a molluscicide).

His comment was that there was massive death among all taxa in a localized space where the walleye died. Our guess is that the site was downstream of a dam or a key spawning habitat for the walleye. Given what little we know about the site, it's hard to say what the extent of the death was, nor if we can really beat up the applicator for the kill (which is what is getting investigated to see if it was laziness, negligence or just chalked up under "it happens".

That said, if he saw walleye start to roll, his pump was turned off and he was on the phone. He would also watch to see if mayflies were emerging or things like emerald shiners were dying, which could prompt him to turn off the pumps. There's a ton of variance in the way its applied, and a good applicator will be paying attention to early signs rather than getting his butt in trouble with dead walleye or bass.

The trouble with application is that you have to get the river to mix the chemical to the right concentration. If he wasn't getting a good mix, he'd change locations, which some guys just won't bother with.

I'm really short on time, else I'd write more about how they do this. I've found it fascinating and have some different thoughts about how and what they do their applications.

In a place like the Grand however, they really shoulda done a phermone treatment. It pisses me off that the snuffbox population wasn't viewed as a tremendous potential cost (it will be this fall!). They could have done phermone in a very cost effective way, and thank godness that dam is there at Harpersfield. They STILL have that option to do phermone in the future after they decide to translocate snuffbox back into that habitat.

So really there's not a black and white answer to this particular situation without more information.

Thanks for posting the link tho... Justin jumped out of his seat, read it, dialed and we yelled some profanity at the "person in charge" voice mail. It was amusing.

Todd

Wow this really is interesting. Even though it may seem like it, 1000 fish isn't that bad. But then again if this happenens everytime the treatment is applied, then there will be a problem. More care should be taken in the future though! Good link thanks for posting it!!!

That's very disappointing Sandy Creek is my favorite and probably the best spot in NY state for Rainbow Darters. It sounds like it was a limited stretch of the creek though. I'll be checking it out in the next few months I'm sure.

Seems like there had to be other casualties besides the walleyes.

I agree, that's what irritated me about the articles. Nobody gives a hoot about the non-game species.

In a place like the Grand however, they really shoulda done a phermone treatment. It pisses me off that the snuffbox population wasn't viewed as a tremendous potential cost (it will be this fall!). They could have done phermone in a very cost effective way, and thank godness that dam is there at Harpersfield. They STILL have that option to do phermone in the future after they decide to translocate snuffbox back into that habitat.

Todd,
When you have time, could you describe the pheromone treatment and how it works?

We should probably contrast the two treatments...

The traditional TFM treatment is a poison that is tolerated by boney fishes because of something to do with the calcium buffering against the effects. In essence, if you have ossified tissues, you're more resilent against the effects of the poison, which the lamprey do not. But I don't think it's hard to extrapolate what this would do to all other taxa in a river reach.

The real trick of it is to get the adults while they're congregated in a certain area to make a significant impact on the population. The delivery is using peristalic pumps that have intakes in the river that can pull more or less chemcial, kinda like what people use to fertilize their grass (the bottles that hook on your hose). Oh and you have variation in the amount of water coming in based on how much crap has accumulated on your intake.

You sorta know how much you're going to put in, but really you don't know for sure, especially without experience. You have to calculate the discharge, be able to see how well the river is mixing itself, and base your amount on that. Downstream, your partner is on a radio with a graduated cylinder testing for ppm of chemical. As I understand it, you're shooting for 4-6 ppm. Over 8 is lethal to a lot of things, mayflies will emerge from burrows, shiners will start to float, mussels will open wide trying to flush as much water as possible. Over 12 and you start rolling large fish like walleye and bass. So you can see the margin of error. Ouch.

However, it doesn't cost that much in chemical, equipment or employee time.

Phermone treatments are phenominal in a small area. Any lamprey immediately adjacent will be attracted, and can be run through a special fyke net. The problem is the price. The phermone is incredibly expensive (I don't have a number or comparison) and it requires quite a few people to operate the netting. And the reach of the treatment isn't that great if there's a lot of small tribs downstream, because it dilutes quickly.

That's why it would work in a situation like the Grand River in Ohio, where there's relatively little habitat below a BIG lowhead dam with only 8 river miles to the mouth. But for places that were depositional (instead of isostatic rebound flooded river mouths like the southern shore of L. Erie, L St. Clair and Saginaw Bay), there's braids going everywhere in channels with smaller tribs coming into each of them.

So you can see where either treatment would be prefereable if your mandate is to get rid of lamprey. And I don't know the answer, especially without more information. What bothers you, bothers me as well. It's only "bad" when a bunch of large predatory fish that we've deemed "good" die. And we probably all agree that's extremely short sighted.

Todd