5/18 shelburne

[Crayfish]

Thanks for responding and for the information, Brad! I've seen fish leeches before and thought they were baby lamprey, as well. My son caught a 16" brown a few years ago that was loaded with them! Pretty gross looking.

[keithm87]

Hi Guys, a friend sent me this topic and asked me to comment. The parasite is indeed a "fish leech". Pretty common. It's a parasitic worm (true leech), not a lamprey (parasitic fish). It's technical name is Piscicola geometra - http://www.pond-life.me.uk/fishhealth/piscicolageometra
Remember, lamprey are not parasitic until they get to be at least 6-8 inches long. Lamprey smaller than that (larvae) live in rivers until they mature. Then they exit to the lake to become the parasites we see on fish. Anything smaller than about 6 inches (typically 8) can't be a lamprey.

Regarding lamprey wounds on lakers.... Remember that wounds can heal and you may see many "old" wounds on fish. Just because you see a lot of wounds on a laker doesn't mean that the population of lamprey is up this season. Only fresh (actual holes or bloody wounds/scars) are indicative of this year's crop of lamprey. The status (freshness) of the wound matters in determining levels of current wounding. That being said, rest assured, we know there is still work to do and we're on it. We're upping our game again this year and adding efforts to further reduce lamprey wounds.

thanks for the reply. When I mention wounds I am strictly talking about new open wounds. The rates seem very high this year in the areas I fish. I had never seen wounds on pike until this year and they were bad in Maquam and Campbells, and we got a laker with 3 giant lamprey that came off at the hole in march out front of shelburne ice fishing. I have only caught a dozen lakers so far this year that had any size to them but they all had recent or attached lamprey.

[fishy1]

Hi Guys, a friend sent me this topic and asked me to comment. The parasite is indeed a "fish leech". Pretty common. It's a parasitic worm (true leech), not a lamprey (parasitic fish). It's technical name is Piscicola geometra - http://www.pond-life.me.uk/fishhealth/piscicolageometra
Remember, lamprey are not parasitic until they get to be at least 6-8 inches long. Lamprey smaller than that (larvae) live in rivers until they mature. Then they exit to the lake to become the parasites we see on fish. Anything smaller than about 6 inches (typically 8) can't be a lamprey.

Regarding lamprey wounds on lakers.... Remember that wounds can heal and you may see many "old" wounds on fish. Just because you see a lot of wounds on a laker doesn't mean that the population of lamprey is up this season. Only fresh (actual holes or bloody wounds/scars) are indicative of this year's crop of lamprey. The status (freshness) of the wound matters in determining levels of current wounding. That being said, rest assured, we know there is still work to do and we're on it. We're upping our game again this year and adding efforts to further reduce lamprey wounds.

thank you brad for that valuable information.

[Greenhorn]

Great information Brad, thank you. I heard the life cycle of the lamprey at one of the salmon seminars in Burlington. This tiny "lamprey" didn't fit the description, but did look like a tiny lamprey. I feel much better that they are not lamprey because I have seen a lot of them on fish I have caught this winter and spring.

Most of the lakers I caught through the ice in the button bay area this winter had fresh wounds and/or big lamprey attached. I think you guys do a fantastic job keeping these menaces in check. I just think it has been a while since you have hit the button bay area. On earlier posts, it was explained that there will be about 5 areas in that part of the lake that will be treated this year. I am sure their numbers will take a big hit. Keep up the good work and if you need extra hands when treating for lamprey, ask for help on this forum. I suspect you will get more volunteers that you can use!

[Captain Paul]

we have been seeing a pretty good number of Lake Trout with no wounds from Lamprey at all probably close to 50 percent which seems much better than the past but there are still a lot of fish with new wounds on them

[USFWS Lamprey Guy]

Thanks for the support guys and the kind words. It's always good when we can contribute some information that you all can learn from and more importantly, share with others. I hear you guys. Wounding frequency seems to vary with no rhyme or reason. Lamprey move all over the lake and so do their host-fish. So there is no way to say "why" a certain area is seeing more wounding than another. Where lamprey are born unfortunately does not have anything to do with the wounding rate in an area of the lake. So we have to just keep controlling them everywhere.

Having seen the questions about what we are doing where, I thought it would be good to share this map. This shows where we will be doing lamprey control and when. Take note that we only treat every 4 years with lampricide because the life cycle in the larval stage is that long. That treatment frequency kills all 4 year classes in a particular river before any can exit and become parasitic. More frequent treatments would not mean fewer lamprey. We're already killing them all before they can leave.

[malchom]

I'm thinking trout-perch, but would need a better photo (including view of dorsal) to be positive. Pretty common in Lake Champlain. Usually 3-4 inches, maximum is 6 inches. Looks like a cross between a perch (spiny ray fins) and a trout (adipose fin). See p.239 in Fishes of Vermont, or go to fishbase.org

https://www.fishbase.de/summary/Percops ... aycus.html
https://www.fishbase.de/photos/Pictures ... s&TotRec=5

--Mark Malchoff, Lake Champlain Sea Grant

One laker came up spitting bait fish, which were a species I have never seen. We took a pic of one which we thought was a baby trout till we noticed it being full of eggs. Anyone know what this is?[/quote]