Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 08:49:24 -0600, Del Cecchi
wrote:


Lloyd Sumpter wrote:

On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 11:08:48 +0000, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:



On Wed, 09 Mar 2005 18:18:09 -0800, Lloyd Sumpter
wrote:



Hi,

We're having a fish-in in April targeting the (illegally-stocked)
largemouth bass in the Vancouver area.

I've never fished for bass befo any hints? And do I need a 225hp
boat and do I need to dress like a NASCAR driver?

No, you need a 300 hp boat and since you asked, no - you don't have
to dress like a NASCAR driver. Bra, crotchless panties, fishnet
stockings and black stiletto heels are the secret to catching large
mouth bass - the pros only wear the branded clothing when they are on
TV.

Just out of curiosity, what's the point of the fish-in?



OK, here's the Story: Bass are not native to BC. Somebody has illegally
dumped them into several lakes in the area. Now, bass compete with trout
and salmon, which ARE native, and we spend lots of tax dollars every year
enhancing the stocks with hatcheries.

So - we want to publicize this problem and try to reducs the bass stocks
and give the trout a better chance. And have some fun fishing while we're
at it!

And yes, bass fishermen are kind of a joke around here. I mean, do you
REALLY need that much HP to get around a lake thats only 1/2 a mile wide??
(The lakes we'll be targetting have no boat launch, and are restricted to
electric motors only)

Lloyd


Use Live Bait. The pros don't because it is not allowed by rules of
tournaments. Trolling is also effective.

Now, is there really evidence that the bass are adversely impacting the
trout? Or is this really just snobbery? Are Salmon native to those
lakes? You aren't stocking the non-native german brown trout? Here in
Minnesota, the only native trout are really char.... the lake trout and
the brook trout. Browns and Rainbows are imports.


Not to be argumentative, but the only true fresh water "trout" in the
US is the golden trout.

No joke - I read about this a couple of years ago. It exists no where
else in the world and some biologists have done comparison DNA studies
against other species of trout developing the theory that this is
actually the only trout that existed in North America prior to the
introduction of other trouts by what ever means they made it here.

If that convoluted sentence makes any sense at all. :)

I'm searching around in my libarary to find the article. I can't
remember which magazine it was in.

I'll find it.

You do that. But Brook Trout and Lake Trout were here when the
Europeans arrived. I don't know if the aboriginal people carried them
across the land bridge and stocked lake Agassiz. But of course they are
char and not true trout, which are taxonomically different.

del cecchi