I remember hearing several years ago that DEEP was evaluating additional northwestern CT lakes for potential walleye stocking following the failed attempt at Tyler Lake. I was wondering if DEEP would consider Stillwater Pond for wallleye stocking?

While smaller than the typcial CT Walleye lakes, I believe that Stillwater meets alot of the criteria necessary to make for a successful Walleye fishery, which are highlighted below:

1). Adequate depth and I believe suitable holdover conditions;

2). Abundant structure and plenty of forage fish;

3). I don't believe there is an overabundance of pickeral, which I heard was the downfall of the Tyler and Rogers Lake programs;

4). The influent Naugatuck River may provide suitable spawning habitat;

5). The lack of alewives may allow for successful natural reproduction (lack of the protein that blocks reproduction);

6). Stillwater is not a historic or trophy trout or salmon lake and lacks conditions for large populations of holdover trout. Stillwater is largely a put and take trout fishery, so there should be little opposition to stocking a predatory fish;

7). DEEP already has an adequate boat ramp that will allow for night fishing;

8). The lake typcially has safe ice every winter and adequate public access;

9). I bevlieve the water quality would not effect fish consumption (i.e. Lake Housatonic), and

10). Stillwater would fill the geographic void of "public" walleye lakes in the northwestern corner.

I would be interested to hear DEEP's opinion on this pond and whether there are any plans to expand the Walleye and Pike stocking programs in CT. I feel that there are alot of lakes and ponds that have traditionally been stocked with trout as put and take fisheries that have little to no potential to hold the fish over the summer months. In this ecconomy, I think it makes financial sense to consider stocking fish that can tollerate lake and pond conditions and offer multiple years of angling success versus species that are guaranteed to die off every summer if not harvested by a fishermen.

Thanks for your time and all you do.
Mike

I agree they should be put in there. I'd like to see a responce to this as well.

I also am interested as to what the response is going to be. We could always use more walleye fisheries.

John.

If you mean trout obass it might have to do with all those 8 and 9lbs trout floating belly up in the heat last summer. Or its just too expensive to try and stock such a big lake. Just guessing thou

Flipper,

I wouldn't say excess, but I would say abundant. Plenty of stunted yellow and white perch, various panfish and a strong golden shiner population. I imagine a similiar forage base as Batterson and Coventry.....