Muskie Discussion Forums
| ||
| Moderators: Slamr | View previous thread :: View next thread |
| Jump to page : 1 2 3 4 Now viewing page 3 [30 messages per page] Muskie Fishing -> General Discussion -> Musky/Walleye |
| Message Subject: Musky/Walleye | |||
sworrall |
| ||
Posts: 32785 Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Reelwise - 4/17/2018 10:27 PM Arguing motives doesn't clarify your points, which are clearly contradictory. How does one 'debunk' a theory that is based upon assumptions that are without any substance or basis? The whole idea plain doesn't work if applied to any fish population anywhere. The only agenda I have is to reason out what was claimed and see if holds up to scrutiny. Like I said... you apparently disagree and are trying to debunk the theory. The Bluegill thing was merely an example of how predators will mainly eat the fresh, injured fish rather than the fish that have been injured for a long period of time... that are farther along in the process of dying. I don't believe you are looking at the concept as a whole. Any theory can be debated in a way to support your own agenda if you pick and choose a couple things that support your idea. There are plenty of things in the discussion that support the idea... and plenty of things we do as anglers with our lures to trigger fish that relate as well. There's plenty of material covering strike impulse out there, which is what, I believe, you are inferring at some level is actually 'regulating'. I have not seen a single reference anywhere to that concept, so was intrigued, and actually hoped a little I had missed something. I have railed for years against the marketing claim any lure looks like an 'injured minnow' tricking the fish into 'thinking' it's an easy meal, as not one single lure out there look like, acts like, or remotely imitates a real injured bait fish. | ||
| Reelwise |
| ||
Posts: 1636 | You are free to your opinion, Steve. But, you have yet to say anything to prove the theory wrong whether it is or not. Feel free to ask some more questions. | ||
| sworrall |
| ||
Posts: 32785 Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | That kind of response is a clear sign of not having any answers. Actually, EVERYTHING I posted calls the 'regulating' theory into question and is not my own opinion, it's part of the literature on the subject. Might bore to tears, but I read a lot trying to better understand fish behavior. The original argument is that Muskies actually target walleyes. There could be some modicum of truth to that under a situation where walleyes are the single most available prey, but that is almost impossible. Will a muskie eat a walleye if opportunity arises? Sure, so will a pike, a bass or another walleye, just as all the above might eat a smaller muskie. Fact is, walleyes are not what muskies eat regularly in a balanced ecosystem, and that has been proven. So what a muskie MIGHT do can't be used to fight the anti muskie groups. Good, solid science proving out what a balanced ecosystem looks like supporting a healthy population of both muskies and walleyes can. So I find it very important to understand as best as I can how this all works, and as it's obvious here, I do enjoy a good debate. | ||
| Reelwise |
| ||
Posts: 1636 | Like I said... feel free to post something you read, experienced, or observed that debunks the idea. What you have written may call the idea into question... but, it does not prove anything to be untrue. I have had this discussion with many people... including fisheries biologists who are responsible for quite a few Muskie related studies. Not only do they have the discussion without the idea of gaining some kind of personal gratitude of proving someone wrong... they actually agree with the idea - even though it may not apply to every body of water. | ||
| Reelwise |
| ||
Posts: 1636 | I responded before you edited and added to your post... I never said Muskies intentionally go around feeding on Walleyes... and my theory actually says they don't... rather... they will feed on them for different reasons. So, it is apparent we agree and disagree with eachother on several things. I just think it would have been better for us to start this discussion from scratch rather than go off of a few, random comments I made on the subject early on in response to a single comment. Edited by Reelwise 4/17/2018 11:10 PM | ||
| supertrollr |
| ||
| so fish don't ate wounded pray but they will bite on an ugly lure like a suick and anglers (me included ) are catching tons of pike on dead baits. imo fish bites on everything they are far to have the brain of a dr to distinguish the healthy from the sick. | |||
| sworrall |
| ||
Posts: 32785 Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | I listed it already. It's called strike response. For a better reference, see the literal tome "Behavior of Teleost Fishes', linked below. Start a fire in the fireplace first, it's a long read. And, it's expensive. https://www.springer.com/us/book/9780412429309 And there's no 'personal gratitude' in the debate at all, my job here is far to broad to take it to that personal a level and I'm not inclined to anyhow. I'm not trying to 'prove someone wrong', I'm questioning an idea that was forwarded as a theory and asking for counterpoints based upon something solid and asking someone to prove they are right, to at least some reasonable level. That's how good discussion works, and in the end, how discovery takes place. | ||
| sworrall |
| ||
Posts: 32785 Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | supertrollr - 4/17/2018 11:04 PM so fish don't ate wounded pray but they will bite on an ugly lure like a suick and anglers (me included ) are catching tons of pike on dead baits. imo fish bites on everything they are far to have the brain of a dr to distinguish the healthy from the sick. See the strike response reference, of course fish will eat an injured fish if it's moving enough and if it isn't, if the fish is hungry. As I said, I had tanks with muskies and pike, then bass and then panfish. I kept them well fed. Sick minnows added to an environment where healthy food was always available always ended up floating or in the filter. I was actually surprised initially. Smallmouth would randomly kill about half of the fresh minnows and leave them scattered on the bottom. Those things are flat mean. A 8" smallmouth bass will harass a 15" pike by beating the pike's fins all up until the pike sickens and dies. Saw it a few times, as a somewhat controlled experiment. | ||
| Reelwise |
| ||
Posts: 1636 | I guess it is safe to say that you do not believe in some things you have not personally experienced, observed, or read about it. Thanks for the link. | ||
| sworrall |
| ||
Posts: 32785 Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Reelwise - 4/17/2018 11:03 PM I responded before you edited and added to your post... I never said Muskies intentionally go around feeding on Walleyes... and my theory actually says they don't... rather... they will feed on them for different reasons. So, it is apparent we agree and disagree with eachother on several things. I just think it would have been better for us to start this discussion from scratch rather than go off of a few, random comments I made on the subject early on in response to a single comment. The comments were not random, they forwarded a theory and it intrigued me. As I said, that's how good discussion works, and it all fits into the original poster's commentary and the defense against the anti muskie lobby's insistence that the 'muskies eat all the walleyes', and a proper, effective response. | ||
| Reelwise |
| ||
Posts: 1636 | Seems you are still basing what I have said on sick fish... You can learn a lot by throwing pounders on 100 acre lakes when the fish won't hit any other lure. Many believe the Muskies will hit these lures to kill them (obviously they are not alive)... not to simply eat because they are hungry. Pretty cool to see a 40" Muskie T-bone another 40" Muskie on the end of your line, too. Thanks for the discussion. Edited by Reelwise 4/17/2018 11:26 PM | ||
| sworrall |
| ||
Posts: 32785 Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Reelwise - 4/17/2018 11:20 PM '' I guess it is safe to say that you do not believe in some things you have not personally experienced, observed, or read about it. Thanks for the link. That makes no sense. I think I have been on the water as much or more as anyone, yes? I probably read books more than the average muskie angler, that's a guess, but it's likely, especially these days. I still like reading but can't stand reading books on a 'puter. I like the accomplished feeling of turning the page and watching the left side of the open book get thicker. | ||
| sworrall |
| ||
Posts: 32785 Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Reelwise - 4/17/2018 11:22 PM Seems you are still basing what I have said on sick fish... You can learn a lot by throwing pounders on 100 acre lakes when the fish won't hit any other lure. Many believe the Muskies will hit these lures to kill them (obviously they are not alive)... not to simply eat because they are hungry. Pretty cool to see a 40" Muskie T-bone another 40" Muskie on the end of your line, too. Thanks for the discussion. Nope. What you forwarded in the regulating idea, en total. And you described strike response again. 'Muskies will hit these lures to kill them (obviously they are not alive)' Hit them to kill them but they are not alive....maybe hit them because they provide a strong stimulus and elicit a strong response? | ||
| Reelwise |
| ||
Posts: 1636 | That is great... others can say the same. What most people can't say is they have been everywhere and have experienced everything. I do, however, appreciate other peoples experiences, how they interpret those experiences, and what they pass on as theory and knowledge. It's quite strange when people with lots of experience of their own say someone else is wrong about something they may have not experienced in the same way - nor have they thought about certain things in the same manor. It's even stranger when someone says someone else is full of it if what they are describing is not in a paper or book somewhere. "I probably read more than the average muskie angler, that's a guess, but it's likely, especially now." Yeah... not personal at all. Anyways... you wrote a lot of good stuff... stuff that can actually be applied and used in favor of the theory in question. Edited by Reelwise 4/17/2018 11:46 PM | ||
| Reelwise |
| ||
Posts: 1636 | "Hit them to kill them but they are not alive....maybe hit them because they provide a strong stimulus and elicit a strong response?" It is obvious that animals throughout the animal kingdom respond to certain things for several reasons as well as specific reasons... and the theory in question gives a few reasons why Muskies may respond the way they do when stimulated in certain ways... at certain times... in different places... and under different conditions. Edited by Reelwise 4/17/2018 11:50 PM | ||
| sworrall |
| ||
Posts: 32785 Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Reelwise - 4/17/2018 11:41 PM That is great... others can say the same. --------------------------------------------- What I responded to: I guess it is safe to say that you do not believe in some things you have not personally experienced, observed, or read about it. --------------------------------------------- What most people can't say is they have been everywhere and have experienced everything. I do, however, appreciate other peoples experiences, how they interpret those experiences, and what they pass on as theory and knowledge. It's quite strange when people with lots of experience of their own question other peoples experiences when they have not experienced the same nor have they thought about certain things in the same manor. It's even stranger when someone says someone else is full of it if what they are describing is not in a paper or book somewhere. "I probably read more than the average muskie angler, that's a guess, but it's likely, especially now." Yeah... not personal at all. Anyways... you wrote a lot of good stuff... stuff that can actually be applied and used in favor of the theory in question. You offered a theory, which by the very term begs discussion and interpretation. I wasn't 'bragging' about reading and have absolutely no idea how much you have read on the subject, I was lamenting the loss of popularity of bound paper books and responding to your comment. You missed that somehow?? by the way, have you offered any of your experiences? I just saw the theory. Most appreciate what's passed on, too, but when offered up as a theory, one should expect questions and even challenges. Again, that's good discussion. | ||
| Reelwise |
| ||
Posts: 1636 | You disagree... I got it. But, I do feel that there is more to the picture for you to learn about, experience, and see with your own eyes. Same goes for me. | ||
| sworrall |
| ||
Posts: 32785 Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Reelwise - 4/17/2018 11:56 PM You disagree... I got it. But, I do feel that there is more to the picture for you to learn about, experience, and see with your own eyes. Same goes for me. I believe we all will never stop learning about muskie/fish behavior. If it holds water, a person can take an idea as something to ponder as possibility. Show how an idea holds water, that's pretty much the basis of passing on a theory. Our opposition has forwarded a bunch of total bull#*#* theory in an effort to stop muskie stocking. It's important we respond with facts and forward ideas that are solid as a rock or the debate is lost. Two parties flinging bull#*#* at each other ends up looking suspiciously like politics, and that spells doom for the side with less influence and money. | ||
| Reelwise |
| ||
Posts: 1636 | Here is an experience... On a few lakes in Illinois... it is very rare to catch a Muskie on anything except a pounder during a certain portion of the season. A gold pounder to be exact. White and other color pounders and even mag dawgs matching typical forage species won't or will rarely get hit... but, the large lure that looks like a Walleye or another Muskie... other predators in the system... will get smoked - regularly. Other lures work great at other times of the year on these lakes. I believe the Muskies may be trying to take out another predator for a lot of the reasons I have mentioned. If they were simply eating because they are hungry... why don't other lures or the same or similar lures in a different color work as well? Keep in mind that a lot of the other lures will give off the same or a similar vibe. We have had lots of boats out on the water during this time, several times, and have experimented. Of course there may be other reasons as to why the gold pounders work better than other lures... unrelated to this theory... but, this is one situation I believe supports the theory. Like I said... I do not claim for the "theory" to be 100% true... but, I do not mind arguing it based on what I have seen and how I have thought about it. The pounder is simply a great lure... I just find it odd that it is literally the only thing you can expect to catch a fish on when no other lure is getting a response. One way to argue everything I have said is to bring up a lake like LSC where the pounder usually outfishes everything else... but, other lures will still work out there. LSC is also loaded with forage... these other lakes are not. When you factor in color and how gold is the only color that will work the majority of the time... and sometimes the only color - it gets even more interesting. I understand that at certain times of the year... other, specific lures will outfish others... but, in this case... during this particular time of the year as well as the location/lakes... the situation, conditions, and reasons are much different. It is a time of year where one may believe the Muskies activity level is at its peak and a variety of lures should work based on the idea that they would be hungrier than other times of the season. Edited by Reelwise 4/18/2018 12:34 AM | ||
| Reelwise |
| ||
Posts: 1636 | Just gave away one of the biggest "secrets" to consistently catch very large Muskies in Illinois  | ||
| Reelwise |
| ||
Posts: 1636 | On one of those lakes... we have literally never caught a Muskie on anything except a gold pounder during that time of the year... despite countless hours throwing other colors such as white... along with other lure types. The other colors simply get hit while the gold gets inhaled. | ||
| true tiger tamer |
| ||
Posts: 343 | An interesting debate, but I've fished bodies of water where only a certain lure, size, color is claimed to be the only one that works and unless you try every lure that is available that is not always the case. I've caught muskies during these conditions on lures not even similar to to the claimed only lure that works. Of course I tend to try lures that are not commonly found or available or fish different times of day. Just my uneducated 2 cents. | ||
| sworrall |
| ||
Posts: 32785 Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | I've found the same thing, sometimes the most effective lure for any angler at any time is due to how and where they fish, and other anglers fishing a different pattern do well on something else entirely. | ||
| sworrall |
| ||
Posts: 32785 Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Reelwise - 4/18/2018 12:13 AM Here is an experience... On a few lakes in Illinois... it is very rare to catch a Muskie on anything except a pounder during a certain portion of the season. A gold pounder to be exact. White and other color pounders and even mag dawgs matching typical forage species won't or will rarely get hit... but, the large lure that looks like a Walleye or another Muskie... other predators in the system... will get smoked - regularly. Other lures work great at other times of the year on these lakes. I believe the Muskies may be trying to take out another predator for a lot of the reasons I have mentioned. If they were simply eating because they are hungry... why don't other lures or the same or similar lures in a different color work as well? Keep in mind that a lot of the other lures will give off the same or a similar vibe. We have had lots of boats out on the water during this time, several times, and have experimented. Of course there may be other reasons as to why the gold pounders work better than other lures... unrelated to this theory... but, this is one situation I believe supports the theory. Like I said... I do not claim for the "theory" to be 100% true... but, I do not mind arguing it based on what I have seen and how I have thought about it. The pounder is simply a great lure... I just find it odd that it is literally the only thing you can expect to catch a fish on when no other lure is getting a response. One way to argue everything I have said is to bring up a lake like LSC where the pounder usually outfishes everything else... but, other lures will still work out there. LSC is also loaded with forage... these other lakes are not. When you factor in color and how gold is the only color that will work the majority of the time... and sometimes the only color - it gets even more interesting. I understand that at certain times of the year... other, specific lures will outfish others... but, in this case... during this particular time of the year as well as the location/lakes... the situation, conditions, and reasons are much different. It is a time of year where one may believe the Muskies activity level is at its peak and a variety of lures should work based on the idea that they would be hungrier than other times of the season. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Looks like an added concept that muskies will attack a lure that 'looks like a smaller muskie or other predator fish' to take them out so they have more food/space/something available, adding to your idea they will hit an injured or sick prey species to eliminate them as competition in the food chain. Do I have this right? | ||
| Reelwise |
| ||
Posts: 1636 | It's not an added concept or idea... just one experience that goes along with what I have been describing. The lures appear to be fish that are acting out of the ordinary... not healthy fish acting normal. I never once claimed that Muskies go around eating other healthy, predatory fish on a regular basis. I gave reasons for why they may eat or attack them. The "sick" thing was brought up by you and addict. I did not mean sick or diseased when using the word unhealthy. Apparently, to you, injury has nothing to do with health... unless you went back and deleted or modified your comments where you said that. I said maybe unhealthy was not the best word to use in order to satisfy you... but, physical condition and injury... whether sick or not... is related to health. | ||
| sworrall |
| ||
Posts: 32785 Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Reelwise - 4/18/2018 11:35 AM It's not an added concept or idea... just one experience that goes along with what I have been describing. The lures appear to be fish that are acting out of the ordinary... not healthy fish acting normal. I never once claimed that Muskies go around eating other healthy, predatory fish on a regular basis. I gave reasons for why they may eat or attack them. The "sick" thing was brought up by you and addict. I did not mean sick or diseased when using the word unhealthy. Apparently, to you, injury has nothing to do with health... unless you went back and deleted or modified your comments where you said that. I said maybe unhealthy was not the best word to use in order to satisfy you... but, physical condition and injury... whether sick or not... is related to health. here's what I said in actual context: 'Most sick, wounded (or whatever) fish will never get consumed by any other fish.' Then you: 'Apparently, to you, injury has nothing to do with health' Hmmm. So, to condense the concept, you feel muskies strike other hooked fish of any species to remove them from the system and take them out of competition for space and food because the struggling fish is acting strangely, and that muskie lures also are targeted for the same reason, as they mimic something in a struggling fish that triggers that response. The gold pounder reference seems to imply that muskies hit that pounder in that water under those conditions because it appears to be another muskie or walleye (predator) acting strangely. You feel this is something genetically encoded, not a decision making process, and stated that this 'regulating' is to ensure the future health of the fish related biomass in general. You have some other stuff salted in I have yet to decipher, but do I have it so far? | ||
| esoxaddict |
| ||
Posts: 8717 | What benefit would there be to taking sick or injured fish out of the system? Once they're compromised to that point they're no longer competing for resources other than the space they take up. Seems to me a muskie would benefit more from letting that fish die and sink to the bottom to provide food for everything else muskies eat. As to why muskies eat lures and hooked fish? Perhaps they appear to be doing the same thing that their prey does, which is trying to escape. | ||
| esoxaddict |
| ||
Posts: 8717 | I spent a fair amount of time as a kid digging crayfish out from under rocks, hauling them out the the end of the pier and then feeding them to the bass that used to congregate around a boat lift. The ones that survived the ordeal were the ones that just sank to the bottom. The ones that darted off usually didn't make it to safety. I believe most of our musky catches are a simple biological response. If it swims, its food. If it swims fast, darts around, etc. it's getting away. That explains why what I'll call "figure 8 trigger points" are so effective. Bursts of speed, changes of direction, a quick rise to the surface at the boat... *whack* Another odd thing I've noticed is that you often see many different types of fish just hanging around together in close proximity. Until one of them eats another... Not sure if its a chemical signal, or a response to the behavior of other surrounding fish, perhaps something environmental. But as soon as that first fish decides to eat, they all start feeding. That's part 2. Thinking about the way we fish jerkbaits, gliders, and minnowbaits. That quick pull/rip followed by a pause. *whack* Now... What does that look like? Some will insist it looks like a dying fish. Horse Hockey. Dying fish just kind of sit there until the end when they're floating on their side trying to stay upright. Those quick bursts of speed followed by a pause look like a feeding fish to me. When a fish is feeding, that's all its doing. It's likely not all that aware of its surroundings, and therefore an easy target for a predatory fish like a muskie. | ||
| supertrollr |
| ||
sworrall - 4/17/2018 11:14 PM supertrollr - 4/17/2018 11:04 PM so fish don't ate wounded pray but they will bite on an ugly lure like a suick and anglers (me included ) are catching tons of pike on dead baits. imo fish bites on everything they are far to have the brain of a dr to distinguish the healthy from the sick. See the strike response reference, of course fish will eat an injured fish if it's moving enough and if it isn't, if the fish is hungry. As I said, I had tanks with muskies and pike, then bass and then panfish. I kept them well fed. Sick minnows added to an environment where healthy food was always available always ended up floating or in the filter. I was actually surprised initially. Smallmouth would randomly kill about half of the fresh minnows and leave them scattered on the bottom. Those things are flat mean. A 8" smallmouth bass will harass a 15" pike by beating the pike's fins all up until the pike sickens and dies. Saw it a few times, as a somewhat controlled experiment. do you have a pict of that tank? it must be a really big one. debate are fun when it's made with respect ,that's how we learn new things.about your sick minnows i think that behavior can change from one species to another . when we see a bass follow ,we have to stop reeling, with musky that's another story. during ice fishing the minnows that are near death bring less fish like percidae species than the fresh one that are always in movement. did you noticed some feeding difference according to a different barometric pressure or temp change ? | |||
| sworrall |
| ||
Posts: 32785 Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Might have a picture somewhere on here, we have discussed fish tank experiences here over the past. Sometimes a barometric change coupled with a major made the fish tank light up, others, nothing. Just like on the water, I guess. Temps were held at a consistent 70 or so, so nothing to report there. Pike were the most fun, walleyes very hard to keep alive. The most beautiful fish I had was a pound and a quarter or so pumpkin seed. That fish loved minnows. | ||
| Jump to page : 1 2 3 4 Now viewing page 3 [30 messages per page] |
| Search this forum Printer friendly version E-mail a link to this thread |
Copyright © 2024 OutdoorsFIRST Media |