We actually have more scuds in our lake than I've personally ever seen anywhere else .... I imagine the PK Shrimp would be a big bonus for growing bigger fish because the scuds are just so small.
In most cases of species introduction into non-native habitats the anticipated benefit has always been exaggerated and never quite meeting the original expectations. It is very easy to be deluded into thinking that some outcome will definitely occur with no consequences. Generally, these deductions are supported by facts but the problem with the facts is that they pertain to a separate ecosystem with its own variables. This risk you face is that the outcome is just the opposite of what you expect. PK shrimp are omnivorous and will prey on scud young. The scuds are small, but abundant, and easy to see for any trout. It will all depend on whether the trout are able to consume enough of PK shrimp to make a difference for the trout.
In Alabama, treatments of Gambusia significantly outperformed PK shrimp in terms of BG production. A number of factors contributed to this but what is remarkable is that Gambusia never achieve high standing weights like PK shrimp demonstrated they could in those trials. There was much food available to the BG in the PK shrimp treatments so it is worth asking why the PK shrimp didn't help the BG to gain more?
Jpsdad - I am a gambling man!!
OK. It's your choice. Probably won't be a big risk from a local ecology perspective ... although I have no facts to support that proposition. Just keep in mind that it isn't just your asset that may be affected. It is possible for the project to fail in your lake but for progeny to flourish downstream where they are unwanted.
