Conference wahoo::fishing-v2

    Can someone tell me about the lamprey eradication effort on Lake
    Champlain mentioned in 118.22 (or .21)?
    
    Who is responsible for it and what are the methods?
    
    Intensely curious.....
    
    John H-C

    
    
    
    
    re: lamprey eradication in lake Champlain
    
    Tore my files apart looking for the info I saved and of course
    can't find anything.
    
    	non-info is that lamprecides were dispensed into some
    	major lamprey spawining grounds (rivers).  There were
    	attempts to block the chemicals (name withheld since I can't
    	find the info).  A Vermont river (Muddy Brook I think) 
    	was blocked from the program since it could kill the non-parasitic 
    	brook lamprey (endangered list I think) .
    
    	the lamprey larvae live in the gravel beds for about 8 years
    	then due to too much TV viewing and twinkees hunger for
    	sucking the fluids out of fish, swimmers and fiberglass boats.
    
    	I'm one of the few divers in this area that haven't seen 
    	a lamprey or had one sucking on their mask.  Figure they're
    	waiting to gang up on me one cold autumn day.
    
    		if I find sepcifics I'll post 'em
    
    					- Ed

    Well, WTH, Ed, as long as we're in the Rathole we parasites can talk
    about parasites, I guess.
    
    How long have they been in Champlain? This is really the first I've
    heard of the Lamprey anywhere but in the Great Lakes. I've never seen
    one. Were they introduced? How? Do you have any idea who is responsible
    for trying to control them? F&G or DEP? Are they in other VT lakes as
    well?
    
    Are you *sure* about the length of the larval period? 
    
    And:
    
    An *endangered* Lamprey? Are you serious? Isn't that a bit like saying
    "endangered carp" or "endangered hagfish?"
    
    C'mon, Ed, you've got some more files somewhere haven't you?
    

    
    John,  To answer some of your questions...  Lake Champlain is the only 
    VT lake that's infested with them.  The F&G are trying to control them
    (have been since the late 70's or early 80's).  It's believed that
    the lamphreys came in on the hulls of boats going to/from the St. 
    Lawrence seaway.  I guess that's how they got into the great lakes.
    
    	They weren't a big problem until VT and NY started Salmonoid 
    restoration.  Early in the restoration effort it was possible to catch
    some decent lakers, but the population of lamphreys exploded.
    Now they're attacking anything - perch, bullhead, catfish, walleye,
    and pike - fish they don't normally(?) prey upon.
    
    	We've pulled lakers and Northern pike through the ice with
    lamphreys still attached.  They usually get chopped up by the spud
    when that happens.  
    
    	As for the chemical applications, a group called "earth first"
    had a few individuals from outta state come up and stand downstream
    from the folks who applied the chemicals....  and as far as the 
    endangered lamphrey goes - they're too small to do any attacking.
    from what I understand, they're about the size of your finger and
    aren't considered a nuisance.  Besides, being endangered makes them
    important.
    
    Maybe Ed will come back with more on the Lamphrey life cycle :'}
    
    - Rob
    

    A little closer to home....
    
    
    The Merrimack river has lots of eels and lampreys (I don't know the
    ratio of American eels versus Lampreys eels) but I had a Lamprey 
    attach to my waders while fishing for shad just below the Lawrence
    dam.   And even though I do a LOT of fishing on the Merrimack, I
    have yet to see any smallmouth or largemouth bass with any signs
    of lamprey attachment.  Perhaps they like the MILLIONS of big 
    carp better then the bass.
    
    Gus-man
    
    

    Gus---
    
    How big was that Lamprey that attached itself to your waders on the
    Merrimack?
    
    The reason I ask is that one day a couple small leach-like creatures
    latched onto the bottom of my fabric-hull canoe last year, and I was at
    a loss identifying them. It never occurred to me that they might have
    been juvenile Lampreys. This was on the Shawsheen River, a Merrimack
    tributary with a severe salmonid problem (as in "why aren't there any
    salmonids on this river anymore?").
    
    This is all horrible news to me. Any more information would be much
    appreciated.
    
    Thanks.
    
    John H-C

    John,
                                       
    	The eel in question was about 1.5 - 2 feet long, maybe more, and at 
    least 1.5 - 2 inches in diameter.  I was walking into the water,
    in about 2 ft. of water in a moderate current, rocky bottom.  I saw
    the eel and thought it was an American eel, and since it was on the 
    bottom, not moving, I also thought is was dead.  I dropped the shad
    dart I was using down and snagged it to take a look at.  I brought over
    to the shore and dropped it on the land, where it proceeded to let out 
    a gasp or sorts, and rolled over.  That's when I saw that it was a
    Lamprey ( the mouth or 'sucker' gave it away).  Another guy was there 
    talking to me so I wasn't paying attention to the eel.  When I looked
    down, it was no longer on the shore, but in the water next to me 
    ATTACHED !!!  Pretty much scared the sh*# outta me.  One swift, 
    involuntary  kick of the leg, and the sucker (no pun intended) was
    airborne.  The eel was more brown in color than the american eels
    that I used to catch when I was a kid, which were usually green
    in color.  All in all it was one ugly-Legend-like-creature, less
    the metal.
    
    Gus-man
    

    
    	The juvenile lamphreys live in the bottom sediment for 3-17+ 
    years before heading out to the lake (darn kids are always playing
    in the mud)....

    And the color of the juvenile Lamprey is...?

    John,
    	The lamphrey is brownish-black as Gus says in .56 - whether
    juvenile or adult.
    
    - Rob

    $h*t!
    They're all over the place. Shawsheen and Concord Rivers are full of
    them. I haven't seen any adults, but I've seen quite a few juveniles.
    I'm basing this on the assumption that Lamprey juveniles lack the
    apparent segmentation of a leach's body.
    I'll verify.

    Is this really a rathole issue?  Seems like a legit (and serious)
    topic of conversation.
    
    John, you must be getting so used to ending up in the rathole you 
    you just head straight there?    8^)
    
    Rick

    Well, Rick, you're absolutely right. I just naturally head here when I
    have a single off-the-subject question. Maybe the mods think this
    string should be moved to its own topic?
    
    I've just made a search through my references, and the situation is
    more confused now.
    
    The Brook Lamprey is non-parasitic. As an adult, it has no developed
    digestive tract. It spawns and dies. The juveniles spend 3-4 years in
    the mud digesting organic matter (what they mean by "organic matter" in
    this context I am not sure).
    
    The Silver Lamprey is a freshwater parasite. It has suffered from
    pollution in recent years and is considered rare.
    
    The Sea Lamprey seems to be an unknown quantity. (This is probably a
    flaw in my reference books rather than in the scientific community, but
    I've reached the conclusion in the last two years that when it comes to
    aquatic ecosystems, the scientific community ain't all it's cracked up
    to be.)
    
    None of the descriptions I've read in the last hour describe the
    creatures I've seen in the Shawsheen and the Concord, so I am still
    wondering what those are.
    
    I'll put some in a sample jar next time I'm on or in the river and haul
    it to one of the friendly labs.
    
    Maybe BC has some information on this?
    
    John H-C

    	All that I can add until I do some more digging myself is that if
    you want to see a lamprey up close just go in the front door of the
    New England Aquarium, go left, and look in the small tanks at about
    knee level.  They've got a tank with several dozen small (4-6 in.)
    Lampreys in it.  You can even get a good look at the business end of
    them cause they're stuck all over the glass!
    	Also John, if you see them swimming, they swim like any other eel
    where a leech uses vertical undulations to swim.
    	Some of the Great Lakes fishermen should be able to help us out
    here also.
    					B.C.

    
    
    
        John,
     
            If ya wanna see one get me your phone # and I will send you one 
    this summer since they are very common out here.
      
          They do a real number on the fish, lakers are the worste hit
    because they are so lazy its easy for the lampeys to attach., the brown 
    I got on friday had a 3 X 6 inch scar on the side from a lamprey. I
    hate to see the scars. 
    
    
                                   Lee
    

    Looking around for more information over the weekend, I came across the
    information that Lampreys were for a long time considered culinary
    delicacies, even here in New England. Several books made the same
    observation, so I tend to believe it. Now I'm waiting to hear what one
    of you thinks it tastes like..... <grin>
    
    John H-C

    
    
    
    from:	The Fresh & Salt Water Fishes of the World
    			Edward C. Migdalski and George S. Frichter
    
    Order Petromizontiformes
    
    "The jawless, eel-like lampreys are just as ugly as their hagfish 
    cousins in form and feeding habits;"
    
    "Hags are strictly marine, while lampresys are either totally freshwater
    inhabitants or, if they live in the sea, they return to freshwater
    rivers to spawn.  Lampreys have no prominent barbels on their snout;
    their eyes are well developed in the adult and visible externally;
    there are 7 external gill openings on eash side; the nasal opening
    is on the upper part of the head; the mouth opens as a funnel or disk
    and is armed with circular rows of horney teeth.  Lampreys are usually
    parasitic.  The lmaprey attaches itself to the side of a live fish
    by using its suctorial mouth; then, by means of its horny teeth,
    it rasps through the victim's skin and scales and sucks the blood
    and body jiuces.  The lamprey's mouth glands produce anticoagulating
    secretions, thereby assisting the flow of blood.  After exhausting the
    blood supply of its weakened or dying host, the lamprey seeks another
    fish to attack.
    
    Great lakes has 3 species - silver, chestnut and sea lampreys which 
    prey on fishes.  The northern brook lamprey and the American brook
    lamprey are non-parasitic (the adults do not have a digestive tract
    and does not feed mbut lives until the next spawning season, when it
    reproduces and expires.
    
    Most parasitic species gain a length of about 12".  The marine
    species are larger, max of 27" on Pacific and 36" Atlantic.
    
    Lampreys spawn in the spring, they ascend streams where the bottom is
    stony or pebbly  and build shallow depressions by moving stones with
    the aid of their suctorial mouths.  The parents die after spawning.
    After several days the young appear and drift downstream into quiet
    water where they settle down and burrow into the bottom to spend
    several years as larvae (ammocetes) feeding on materials that they
    strain from the bottom ooze.  "
    
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    I think we have as our problem - sea lampreys, Petromyzon marinus,
    and they mention a breed of dwarf landlocked lmprey in lake Onterio
    and surrounding waters.

       All rivers tat empty into the oceans of the world have a potential
    if not actual infestation of sea lampreys. What made them a disaster in
    the Great Lakes is similar to why the South American "Walking Catfish"
    is such a pest in Florida, and why cottontail rabbits are a terrible
    plague in Australia. Simply put: the Sea Lamprey is not a native to the
    Great Lakes and as such has not predatory controls. Therefore, it found
    the fish natives to be easy prey, and has done a lot of damage to the
    gamefish populations...especially the Lake Trout. Lampreys aren't much
    of a problem in the oceans, and in fact, most Manta Rays have a few
    attached to them which provide sort of a cleaning service to the Rays.
    
      Many eels---including the Sea Lamprey and many fresh-water species as
    well---are good eating. However, it does take some intestinal fortitude
    to cope with some of them. I also believe that I read somewhere that
    the average salt water eel is good to eat. The problem is the looks for
    one...more like a snake than a fish...and the copious amounts of
    absolutely yukky, slimey mucous that they exude when removed from the
    water and agitated. If you aren't willing to get that stuff all over
    you, your boat, your dog, etc.., then I'd advise you to see if you can
    find a fsh merchant that has the nerve to clean and sell them.
    When I was a kid in Minnesota, the local commercial fishermen used to
    have eels for sale now and then. As far as what they are like for
    eating....they are very fatty compared to normal fish, but are very
    tasty if rolled in egg, then in cracker crumbs, and fried until crispy.
    They have on bones---only the cartiligenous backbone which is not a
    true bone.. But this is a matter of taste.. Hey, lots of folks think
    that the average Catfish is some sort of monster, but many others think
    there isn't a better eating fish in the water...and I have a tendency
    to agree pretty much... I think eels are also very tasty...but to each
    his own...  (Hell, I even think CARP are good eating...but with some
    restrictions...water's gotta be clean, must be early spring in the
    northern U.S. before the water gets too warm or they'll get mushy-soft
    and useless. Carp's also very tasty smoked slowly over an apple-wood
    fire..)
    
     John Mc

>Lampreys aren't much
>    of a problem in the oceans, and in fact, most Manta Rays have a few
>    attached to them which provide sort of a cleaning service to the Rays.

 Manta Rays (and sharks) have remoras attached to them, not lampreys. The
remoras have a sort of "suction cup" on the top of their head which allows
them to attach to the larger creatures and "hitch a ride." Lamprey mouths
also use suction, but the key difference is that they eat using the same
structure. Remoras do not suck fluids out of mantas and sharks; a key
difference between remoras and lampreys.

    I can't resist. I'll join the Doktah in this nit-picking session.
    Lampreys are not eels. They are much more closely related to the
    hagfish, which is the eel-like creature that exudes copious amounts of
    mucous far out of proportion to its size.
    
    Eels actually have spines, fins, and gills. The lamprey has no true
    spine. It has seven holes rather than gills. The apparent fin that runs
    along the upper and lower tail end of its body is really just extruded
    skin that contains no muscle or cartilage.
    
    As nearly as I can tell, next to *nothing* is known about lampreys in
    their saltwater environment, just as next to nothing is known about
    their closest relative, the hagfish. Both are encountered almost
    exclusively when they are caught with the host they are parasitizing.
    (Though the hagfish is really a scavenger rather than a parasite.)
    
    There. Enough of that nit.

    Even though I am at the New England Aquarium at least once a month, I
    seldom visit their displays. (Reasons for my semit-negative attitude toward
    the NEA can be had for the asking....)
    
    Anyway, BC told me last week that the NEA had some lampreys on display
    in their current temporary exhibit, so I went to see them yesterday.
    
    Funny thing. I seem to have somehow escaped the apparently
    genetic/cultural fear of snakes and the concomitant revulsion for eels
    (which were on display in the tank right over the lampreys), but the
    sight of the lampreys nearly turned my stomach. These were little ones,
    only about 6-8 inches long, and several were clasping the glass in such
    a way that you could study their mouths at your horrified leisure.
    
    Gruesome.
    
    John H-C

      Re .19/.20
     
       While I'll conceed that I blew it on the Remora/Lamprey thing,
     I can't find anywhere in .18 where I stated that the Lamprey and Eel
    were the same...sorry I mislead you that way... All I was trying to
    indicated was that they do exhibit some very strikingly similar
    characteristics...(1)Snake-like appearance.
                      (2)Copious amounts of mucuous
                      (3)One "bone" or lack of it..(freshwater eels'
                         "backbone" is cartilage...not real bone..)
                      (4)Fatty, but edible and tasty flesh.
                      (5)No scales...skin which is easily removed.
                      (6)The ability to make a total mess out of a boat,
                         dog, you, etc...
    
      Not having any idea about the genetic origin of either species, I
    don't rememeber ever coming into contact with a creature other than
    these two that fall into these categories...makes one wonder about
    their evolution.....
    
    JM

    G'day from Downunder
    
    Coming in late on the conversation.....
    
    
    
    re -.a_few about Lampreys being tasty....
    
    
    A King of England - one of the early Henrys, I think it was, is
    reported to have died for having eaten ' a surfeit of lampreys'.
    
    
    That's posh English for 'he ate too many'...
    
    Derek
    

    How far upstream in the Merrimack River have any of you folks seen
    lampreys?
    
    The subject has come up in relation to an ongoing effort to have two
    dams removed and fishways constructed on two other dams on two
    different tributaries to the Merrimack.
    
    Thanks.
    
    John H-C