This prospect was sufficiently frightening that despite public outcry and dramatic protests, the entire lake was poisoned in October, 1997. Even though officials had suspended the five fish limit prior to the poisoning, allowing anglers to take home as many fish as they could, the number that floated or washed up along the lake's 30 miles of shoreline was staggering- rainbow trout from fingerlings to over ten pounds, largemouth bass, yellow bullheads, and yes, pike. Just not ALL the pike. The poison was so strong that the DFG had to delay restocking the lake for several months, until tests showed that the toxins had broken down sufficiently to allow trout to survive. Pike are a lot tougher than trout, though, and apparently tougher than just about anything with fins, because they were again noticed in the lake in 1999. Yes, despite the huge number of other gamefish wasted, the millions of dollars spent on the operation and millions more paid in reparations to area businesses that depended on visiting fishermen and boaters, the pike are still there.

Did they wait in upper reaches of the tributary creeks then drop back down? Did they seek out the lake's underwater springs, where they found enough untainted water seeping out of the lake floor to survive, or did the "rogue anglers" strike again? Nobody knows, but the pike numbers are increasing rapidly. State personnel removed 600 pike from the lake in 2000, and last year the number soared to 6,300.

The persistence of these fish is apparently matched by the resolve of the California DFG, though, because this year they will be conducting a three-pronged attack in another attempt to wipe out the pike. In addition to blasting, pike will be netted and electrocuted in shallow water. How they expect to selectively target the pike, and to kill every one in a lake this size without killing the trout again, is yet another unanswered question in the Lake Davis pike conundrum.

According to senior DFG biologist Ivan Paulsen, "The goal is to get the pike out of here. We don't want them." Yes, they are a threat to California's other fisheries, so let's kill them, but if there's one lesson to be learned from the 1997 poisoning debacle, it's that we should never expect to actually kill them all, only to reduce their numbers. Maybe the answer lies not in such an absolute (and I believe unattainable) goal, but in a simple shift in perspective, and a little public relations. Instead of grandiose eradication programs, let's just call it what it is, pike population control. If you never actually claim that it's possible to remove all the pike, not only will you spare yourself having to remove your foot from your mouth later, but you'll probably be less likely to resort to things like truckloads of poison and explosive charges. In that this will be an ongoing process, let's give it a positive spin, to help the local community that has already suffered so much in the pike wars- " Welcome to Davis Lake . Please use hearing protection and turn off all two way radios. Trout fishing derby today from 8 to 2, pike blasting at 3:30, followed by the all-you-can-eat cream of pike soup-feed!" Maybe a sponsor could even be found, to help underwrite the cost of the blasting- "Davis Lake Naval Ordinance Testing Site and Recreation Area."

Seriously, there has to be a better idea than blasting. Netting and electrocution make some sense, since trout can be released from the nets, and electricity can be used to stun the fish rather than kill them. The DFG currently uses this technique anyway, to gage fish populations. The stunned fish float up, and pike could be killed while trout are left in the lake. The only way to sort out species after blasting is part by part. Netting and electrocution were used prior to the poisoning, though, and were not effective enough by themselves. So what's the answer? Clearly even the experts don't know, but as we're waiting for them to develop the perfect solution, let's try to keep the explosives and poisons to a minimum. It also seems to me that the DFG is not properly utilizing its most potent fish killing weapon: ANGLERS. Put a bounty on pike- say three dollars a fish. Distribute literature on pike-fishing methods and hold pike-derbies. Give the winners jobs as professional pike-hunters. Compare the cost of these strategies and number of pike taken by anglers with the cost of a government-run bombing campaign, and you'd probably find that we'd be getting more for our tax dollars. Hell, I have a friend back in Vermont who enjoys the sport of pike-shooting, which is legal there. Every spring, he stalks the shoreline of Lake Champlain and pops huge pike in the shallows with a deer rifle. I bet you could get four or five Vermont rednecks to do the same here for the cost of one DFG biologist.

Until next time, remember, never stand in a canoe!
Mark Wiza
Email Me!