|
|
Posts: 46
| Hi fellows,
Several subspecies of muskellunge exist, which one grows to the largest size?
Thank you in advance | |
| | |
Location: Athens, Ohio | That New York strain from a lake I can't spell seems to do well, as does the Leech. m | |
| | |
Location: PA Angler | Any 3 of the pures can get big. IMO it’s on how well the the food is in the waterways. How good are they eating and what. | |
| | |
Posts: 166
| All depends on forage. | |
| | |
Posts: 20180
Location: oswego, il | The great lakes st Lawrence strain. The data study is already there. | |
| | |
Posts: 357
| other than shoepaks, all the strains i have seen (GL, WIS (version in Mille Lacs), Leech) seem to all be able to get big, and to about the same size.
biggest one i have seen was on LOTW and that's maybe its own or mixed strain, but generally they kind of top out before some of the others do.
| |
| | |
Posts: 596
Location: Duluth | GL Strain and Mississippi (Leech Lake) Strain. So evidence to show that the GL fish get a bit heavier. Larry Ramsell has a great break down between Sympatric and Allopatric strains in a thread here.
The St. Lawrence is interesting because is GL and Chautauqua mixed, believe the Chaut strain were used to bolster population post VHS | |
| | |
Posts: 7010
Location: Northwest Chicago Burbs | I THOUGHT we had all decided that:
a. it's all about forage ultimately (plus water temps, ph, ya know environmental factors)
b. LL strains grow fast, but do not reach ultimate size that other strains see.
c. shoepack - put it to bed
d. WI strain gets the biggest in terms of overall weight.
Could be wrong...where's Dad (Sworrall) when we need him? | |
| | |
Posts: 94
|
a. it's all about forage ultimately (plus water temps, ph, ya know environmental factors)
Peer reviewed studies I am seeing seem to support a version of this. It is true that genetics play a role, but forage and lake limitations play a huge role here. I am a South Dakota angler, and not too long ago the Game Fish and Parks (our ridiculously named DNR) conducted a tagging program with musky in select bodies of water. We don't have a lot of the calorically dense forage like cisco here, and our musky predate chiefly on bullhead and perch when available. The results were telling: even though our musky are stocked through Iowa, which has lakes like Spirit and Okoboji producing very big fish, ours struggle. Over a 1 year period, most had only grown 3 or so inches. This can also be attributed to other stressors: our lakes tend to be shallow (15-30 feet) and our distance further south also increases heat stress. The answer, much like when I ask my wife how she is feeling, is incredibly complicated. | |
| | |
Posts: 32800
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Slamr - 3/28/2023 4:10 PM
I THOUGHT we had all decided that:
a. it's all about forage ultimately (plus water temps, ph, ya know environmental factors)
b. LL strains grow fast, but do not reach ultimate size that other strains see.
c. shoepack - put it to bed
d. WI strain gets the biggest in terms of overall weight.
Could be wrong...where's Dad (Sworrall) when we need him? Sorry, a bit out of pocket lately, death in the family.
All of the strains that reach true trophy potential do so in waters that support same. How big do they get? Seems like a true apex muskie will go mid-50# class. More and better muskie fishing now than ever, and that's where we seem to be. Maybe Bay of Green Bay will surprise us all eventually. | |
| | |
Posts: 8720
| Steve, if that's true (and I'm not saying it isn't)
Why are we still farting around stocking various strains of fish in different ecosystems when the bottom line is they are going to get a big as their habitat allows, and that's that?
And not to beat it to death, but the mutt stain - shoepac - WI fish... Those just don't get big no matter where you put them? They were stocked way back when Jesus lost his sandals and are now reproducing naturally, so will just have to deal with a skinny funny looking green fish that takes 20 years to reach 38" and never gets much bigger?
Or is there some hope that some other strain, if stocked, will out compete them or cross breed with them or something?
Is it kind of like ugly/stupid people where they just seem to breed more and now we're stuck with them into perpetuity? | |
| | |
Posts: 596
Location: Duluth | Slamr - 3/28/2023 4:10 PM
d. WI strain gets the biggest in terms of overall weight.
Could be wrong...where's Dad (Sworrall) when we need him?
I don't know a single musky angler that doesn't have Hayward ties that believes this. I'm equally annoyed by the people that think Mississippi Strain are the end all be all.
I think the data supports the theory that you need big water, and the records (anecdotal data) suggest the GL strain get the biggest. There are bodies of water connected to the great lakes where both strains of spotted musky have been stocked, just generating valid and conclusive data is the hard part.
Ultimately, fish have to live long enough to get that large..... | |
| | |
Posts: 977
| CincySkeez - 3/28/2023 4:51 PM
GL Strain and Mississippi (Leech Lake) Strain. So evidence to show that the GL fish get a bit heavier. Larry Ramsell has a great break down between Sympatric and Allopatric strains in a thread here.
The St. Lawrence is interesting because is GL and Chautauqua mixed, believe the Chaut strain were used to bolster population post VHS
Chautauqua fish were used by Ontario/Quebec MNR before the big VHS outbreak that impacted the upper st lawrence in the early 2000s. Genetic studies found little to no trace of remnant Ohio river (Chautauqua) genetics suggesting that those stockings did little to bolster natural populations. | |
| | |
Posts: 357
| CincySkeez - 3/28/2023 5:42 PM
Slamr - 3/28/2023 4:10 PM
d. WI strain gets the biggest in terms of overall weight.
I don't know a single musky angler that doesn't have Hayward ties that believes this. I'm equally annoyed by the people that think Mississippi Strain are the end all be all.
based on the wis fish in mille lacs, id say they carry as much weight as any other or more. you dont see fish from leech that looked like that. and im not from hayward at all, far from it. for real some of the absolute biggest fish from that peak were wis fish | |
| | |
Posts: 32800
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | esoxaddict - 3/28/2023 5:38 PM
Steve, if that's true (and I'm not saying it isn't)
Why are we still farting around stocking various strains of fish in different ecosystems when the bottom line is they are going to get a big as their habitat allows, and that's that?
And not to beat it to death, but the mutt stain - shoepac - WI fish... Those just don't get big no matter where you put them? They were stocked way back when Jesus lost his sandals and are now reproducing naturally, so will just have to deal with a skinny funny looking green fish that takes 20 years to reach 38" and never gets much bigger?
Or is there some hope that some other strain, if stocked, will out compete them or cross breed with them or something?
Is it kind of like ugly/stupid people where they just seem to breed more and now we're stuck with them into perpetuity?
Each state manages Muskies differently, but some do try to provide action lakes, number lakes, diverse opportunities, and trophy waters, too. I'm sure the WIDNR knows that any stocked muskie planted in Spider Lake in Oneida for example, will not be likely to grow much bigger than mid 40" ever. Keith got a 46 there, a true unicorn for sure. The same strain in Pelican can and does n break 50 now and again. I think most fisheries managers will freely admit they are not managing with an exclusive focus on trophy fish....unless the lake will support same. If we want to catch 50s, we need to go fishing where they grow to that length. That fact in itself breeds trouble for lakes that are small enough or have population dynamics to get pounded by trophy seekers. | |
| | |
Posts: 596
Location: Duluth | Thank you, I knew there was something to that effect. | |
| | |
Posts: 1195
| You can catch a giant on big water where 1 in 3 is a monster but it would take you all summer to catch three.
There are places that had no muskies and got stocked and there was a window for giant.
And yes there are places guides take people to catch a Muskie. (these lakes are full of small muskies).
I know one Vilas County Lake that was known for big Muskies and they were thick, Gene pool has been watered down, over stocked and is an action Lake now.
Muskies are fun to catch and can be both hard and at the same time easy to catch. (at one we had times when we hit it just right weather wise on really caught the fish) Other times it can turn into the Dead Sea.
Buy good tackle, fish hard watch for daily and seasonal windows. And enjoy your time on the water with friends and family. | |
| | |
Posts: 206
Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota | Slamr - 3/28/2023 4:10 PM
I THOUGHT we had all decided that:
a. it's all about forage ultimately (plus water temps, ph, ya know environmental factors)
b. LL strains grow fast, but do not reach ultimate size that other strains see.
c. shoepack - put it to bed
d. WI strain gets the biggest in terms of overall weight.
Could be wrong...where's Dad (Sworrall) when we need him?
I don’t know if I agree with LL fish not reaching the ultimate sizes of other strains. If you look at the fish in the last 10 years or so over 50lbs that have been caught, a giant portion of them are LL fish out of Mille lacs. A lot of mid to upper 50’s with upper 20” girths, with one this year having a legit 30” girth. Obviously Great Lakes fish get giant also, but saying leach fish don’t reach the same top end isn’t necessarily true with how many giants have come out of Minnesota in the last 10-20 years. I’m sure if you took GL strain fish and put them in Mille lacs/vermilion they would get just as big, same with LL fish in Green Bay or st clair. I’ve always viewed them as super similar strains, just different bodies of water.
Edited by Ogandrews 3/30/2023 10:55 AM
| |
| | |
| Really interesting read. If I understand right, for the most part size is determined by forage base, competition, environment, more than strain? Makes sense to me but I don't know much about fish biology.
There was a mention of a cisco base be diminished. Are the cisco losing out because of environmental change? | |
| | |
Posts: 34
| I think the cisco are losing out due to electronics and word of mouth. Should have seen Big Carr a month or so ago...looked like a fishing tournament out there. That's all I really saw though - was driving by and stopped and watched loads come through the ice right into buckets. Was very strange | |
| | |
Posts: 977
| North of 8 - 3/30/2023 12:43 PM
Really interesting read. If I understand right, for the most part size is determined by forage base, competition, environment, more than strain? Makes sense to me but I don't know much about fish biology.
There was a mention of a cisco base be diminished. Are the cisco losing out because of environmental change?
Yes, environmental change is having an impact on cisco populations. They are very sensitive to thermal strain. | |
| | |
Posts: 596
Location: Duluth | After a search on the lunge log from today to June of 2015 fish 55-60 inches, a few bodies of water dominate the list. GL strain appears far most often, then Mississippi Strain amd 1 Wisconsin River fish.
Sure the data is self selecting but..... | |
| | |
Posts: 8720
| North of 8 - 3/30/2023 11:43 AM
Really interesting read. If I understand right, for the most part size is determined by forage base, competition, environment, more than strain? Makes sense to me but I don't know much about fish biology.
There was a mention of a cisco base be diminished. Are the cisco losing out because of environmental change?
Yes, they don't fare well in temperatures over 73 F. Another factor seems to be shoreline development, which we all know it detrimental to pretty much everything. | |
| | |
| esoxaddict - 3/30/2023 3:25 PM
North of 8 - 3/30/2023 11:43 AM
Really interesting read. If I understand right, for the most part size is determined by forage base, competition, environment, more than strain? Makes sense to me but I don't know much about fish biology.
There was a mention of a cisco base be diminished. Are the cisco losing out because of environmental change?
Yes, they don't fare well in temperatures over 73 F. Another factor seems to be shoreline development, which we all know it detrimental to pretty much everything.
The lake association I belong to is not super active, but one thing they push is leaving a substantial riparian zone. Makes a huge difference in lake quality. Not everyone follows the suggestions and since our then state senator gutted the zoning laws that once had riparian zone enforcement, voluntary is all we have. Big Green Lake in WI should be a warning to all. It is home to many multi-million dollar "lake homes". And they love big, green lawns. Little over a year ago, the DNR announced that the lake had a heavy phosphorus load, leading to algae. Some comes from ag run off but a lot is from excess lawn fertilizer. They further stated that Big Green, the deepest inland lake in WI takes 100 years to completely replenish it's water. It will get worse before it gets better, if it gets better. | |
| | |
Posts: 8720
| The phosphorus in commercial (lawn) fertilizers binds to the soil particles, so all is well until you get a heavy rain or significant snow melt. You're right that riparian safety zones can help to mitigate that, and if you include the right vegetation within that zone that will help absorb and hold any excess nutrients that would otherwise find their way into the lake. All the zoning regulations that were previously in place were put into place for that reason and not just for aesthetic reasons. It's a shame that people think a green lawn is more important than the quality of the water they paid a fortune to live on. I thought WI outlawed phosphorus based fertilizers a few years back, which is good, but that stuff will still be leeching out of the soil long after you and I are gone.
Edited by esoxaddict 3/30/2023 5:52 PM
| |
| | |
Posts: 1195
| Back in the day lawns up North looked like lawns not golf courses, they were watered by rain, cut by hand, and no Fertilizers.
Just another way the woods are turning into the city. | |
| | |
Posts: 46
| Hi fellows,
I asked the AI bot GPT Chat https://chat.openai.com/chat a question and it provided it's response as follows:
QUESTION:
Which species of muskellunge grow the largest?
RESPONSE:
The muskellunge (Esox masquinongy) is the largest member of the pike family and is a popular sportfish in North America. While muskellunge can be found in various regions throughout North America, the subspecies that typically grows the largest is the Great Lakes muskellunge (Esox masquinongy masquinongy).
Great Lakes muskellunge can grow to be over 50 inches in length and weigh more than 50 pounds, although individuals of this size are rare. Muskellunge from other regions, such as the northern muskellunge (Esox masquinongy immaculatus) and the spotted muskellunge (Esox masquinongy vermiculatus), generally do not reach the same size as their Great Lakes counterparts. | |
| | |
Posts: 46
| esoxaddict - 3/28/2023 5:38 PM
Is it kind of like ugly/stupid people where they just seem to breed more and now we're stuck with them into perpetuity?
Well Said!  | |
| | |
Posts: 7010
Location: Northwest Chicago Burbs | esoxaddict - 3/30/2023 3:25 PM
North of 8 - 3/30/2023 11:43 AM
Really interesting read. If I understand right, for the most part size is determined by forage base, competition, environment, more than strain? Makes sense to me but I don't know much about fish biology.
There was a mention of a cisco base be diminished. Are the cisco losing out because of environmental change?
Yes, they don't fare well in temperatures over 73 F. Another factor seems to be shoreline development, which we all know it detrimental to pretty much everything.
Am I wrong that this was found out in Project Green Gene that showed that IL was wasting tons of money putting LLs in southern waters?
| |
| | |
Posts: 7010
Location: Northwest Chicago Burbs | Uh oh, might have to put your science hat on for a fun read: http://www.illinimuskiesalliance.org/projectGreenGene.asp | |
| | |
Posts: 105
| esoxaddict - 3/30/2023 3:25 PM
North of 8 - 3/30/2023 11:43 AM
Really interesting read. If I understand right, for the most part size is determined by forage base, competition, environment, more than strain? Makes sense to me but I don't know much about fish biology.
There was a mention of a cisco base be diminished. Are the cisco losing out because of environmental change?
Yes, they don't fare well in temperatures over 73 F. Another factor seems to be shoreline development, which we all know it detrimental to pretty much everything.
Mille Lacs Lake has experienced multiple years of cisco/tulibee die off when we get a very warm summer. I've seen them dead on the surface by the dozens sometimes. At first I thought they were walleyes but upon further inspection, they were definitely ciscos. Mille Lacs, not being very deep, is very prone to warming. That is partially why smallmouth have thrived there the past 15 years now.
For now, they are OK, but I could see a day in the relative near future when there is not a natural, self-sustaining population of them anymore in that lake.
Edited by gimruis 3/31/2023 9:23 AM
| |
| | |
Posts: 1187
| I spoke with a fisheries person, who said that the ciscos in Mille Lacs, are almost certainly going to go away. The lake is only about 30 feet deep, and there is no where to find sanctuary as the lake gets warmer. | |
| | |
Posts: 1759
Location: new richmond, wi. & isle, mn | TCESOX - 3/31/2023 4:46 PM
I spoke with a fisheries person, who said that the ciscos in Mille Lacs, are almost certainly going to go away. The lake is only about 30 feet deep, and there is no where to find sanctuary as the lake gets warmer. Curious who said, "fisheries person" you spoke to? | |
| | |
| There have been a number of articles about the impact of warming waters on Cisco population. University of Minnesota was one I read a number of years ago and Public Radio or Public tv had a story about the impact on Lake Superior Cisco of warming waters a few years ago. The reduction of lake ice on Superior has people concerned for the Lake Superior Cisco/'lake herring' population. I remember that because I had Lake Herring for the first time at the Angry Trout in Grand Marais. At that time there was a commercial fishery next door. While living in the U.P. I had them but smoked, not fresh.
| |
| | |
Posts: 1187
| jchiggins - 3/31/2023 9:09 PM
TCESOX - 3/31/2023 4:46 PM
I spoke with a fisheries person, who said that the ciscos in Mille Lacs, are almost certainly going to go away. The lake is only about 30 feet deep, and there is no where to find sanctuary as the lake gets warmer. Curious who said, "fisheries person" you spoke to?
I'm not comfortable sharing, as I wasn't conducting an interview, and didn't ask permission to quote in a publication. It was indicated that the lake has been warming, and there have been signs of some stressors on the cisco population. All signs point to continued warming. Don't know how data driven their comments were, or how much was speculation. Didn't dive into too many details. Just comments made in a conversation. | |
| | |
Posts: 1195
| In the summers of 1975,76 there was a bad drought in Northern Wisconsin, 76 was the first year I got to spend the summer at my grandparents. I would from time to time row my little row boat across the lake to a resort to shoot a game of pool get a can of pop and have the resort lady cook me a Tombstone Pizza. As I rowed across the lake I would see dead Cisco's. This is when Tony Rizzo wrote the "Summer Muskie" | |
| | |
Posts: 309
Location: Selkirk, Manitoba | Great Lakes / St. Lawrence muskies in general seem to get the biggest all around - low density of large predators and unlimited large fatty prey would be sort of the combination of factors that allow for this. In general, only reason for a freshwater predator to get large is when there is an abundance of large sustainable prey that get large. Some of the other large river systems probably also have a potential for large specimens (Ottawa/Winnipeg/English, likely Rainy at one time and certainly Mississippi at one time as well) where there is a mixture of cisco/goldeye/mooneye/whitefish, and also large lakes systems with a mixture of cisco/whitefish/lake trout. Keep in mind that the Great Lakes historically had a very wide variety of cisco species and very abundant whitefish and lake trout/brook trout populations that these musky would have evolved with that are completely different than what exists now with non native species introductions/invasive sp. and past overfishing. In other words lots and lots of unlimited big fatty foot that grew large. The lake trout and pike probably grew very large as well in those times.
Stocking predators merely throws off the natural balance that exists with in a lake. Naive prey is quickly whittled away in the initial stocking and then competition and adjustment by the prey (avoidance) starts to take effect which inevitably sort of leads to the decline and growth and adjustment in predator numbers. From a genetics perspective the best way to tackle the "we want trophy" problem is to not kill large fish - these are the fast growing hardy survivors. Whatever predator evolved in a given lake system (be it pike, walleye, bass or musky, crappie, etc), let the big ones go and you will have big fish in the short term and long term.
As far as ciscos in your lakes - they need cold water and have evolved with enzymes that work optimally at those cold temps and go into overdrive and kill the fish in wam temps. Cisco can move into warm water for brief periods to feed, but warming temps over extended periods will kill them.
Edited by Angling Oracle 4/1/2023 10:21 AM
| |
| | |
Posts: 455
| It will be interesting to see in the coming years with average temps rising, if the Muskies range will expand further North.
What is the farthest North that you know of with a fishable Muskie population? | |
| | |
Posts: 94
| chasintails - 4/4/2023 8:08 AM
It will be interesting to see in the coming years with average temps rising, if the Muskies range will expand further North.
What is the farthest North that you know of with a fishable Muskie population?
Around Red Lake, Ontario, maybe? | |
| | |
Posts: 1195
| Or if they live as long in a longer growing season. | |
| | |
Posts: 46
| chasintails - 4/4/2023 8:08 AM What is the farthest North that you know of with a fishable Muskie population?
The most northern body of water known to contain muskellunge is the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kazan_River Kazan River in Nunavut, Canada, which flows into the southern part of Hudson Bay. The Kazan River is located at a latitude of approximately 60° N and is one of the northernmost rivers in North America that contains muskellunge. The muskellunge population in the Kazan River is believed to be a remnant of a larger population that was once present in the region during a warmer period in the Earth's history.
Edited by Muthsky 5/1/2023 9:10 AM
| |
| | |
Posts: 166
| Muthsky - 5/1/2023 10:08 AM
chasintails - 4/4/2023 8:08 AM What is the farthest North that you know of with a fishable Muskie population?
The most northern body of water known to contain muskellunge is the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kazan_River Kazan River in Nunavut, Canada, which flows into the southern part of Hudson Bay. The Kazan River is located at a latitude of approximately 60° N and is one of the northernmost rivers in North America that contains muskellunge. The muskellunge population in the Kazan River is believed to be a remnant of a larger population that was once present in the region during a warmer period in the Earth's history.
There are no muskie in the Kazan or Kasba lake which is it's headwaters.
I'd be willing to guess the most northern lake with a fishable population would be Long Legged Lake. | |
| | |
Posts: 309
Location: Selkirk, Manitoba | ^^ Yeah, Long-Logged and some other lakes in the Red Lake area would be the most northerly populations. The most northerly natural musky every caught (disputed between biologist here and myself whether it is natural - I believe it is) was caught in Lake Winnipeg in the channel area near Pine Dock. I've seen the fish and talked to the fellow who caught it - a friend of mine actually worked with him and son in the Pine Dock area - Mr. Selkirk definitely caught the fish in Lake Winnipeg.
Besides Long-Legged, Irregular Lake is also at the extreme northern range for musky - what is interesting is that Irregular is in the Manigotogan watershed - where the Manigotagan empties into Lake Winnipeg a short swim from where the musky was caught. Musky are not know to be anywhere else in the river system or lakes within that system on the Manitoba side, however this does make the musky's origin that way slightly more plausible than through about 5 (maybe 6) dams on the Winnipeg River. | |
| | |
Posts: 306
| http://www.northernontario.travel/fishing/northwestern-ontario-s-wo... | |
| | |
Posts: 306
| AO i have seen a pic of the frozen fish u mentioned.
O to be young again. | |
| | |
Posts: 309
Location: Selkirk, Manitoba | dickP - 5/1/2023 9:44 PM
AO i have seen a pic of the frozen fish u mentioned.
O to be young again.
Re. the Bruce Ranta article - he was once with OMNR Kenora (contemporary with Gord Pyzer) so he definitely has some inside knowledge on what lakes hold what.
I believe the musky is still in the freezer (hopefully). I've asked my buddy to get a sample when he gets a chance in case someone wants to figure out its origin via DNA. There is a YouTube bit (Uncut Angling) on it fairly contemporary with when it was caught.
You might like this blog regarding some backcountry musky guys doing that trip the hard way (x 2 no less, this is details of their second trip):
https://bwca.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=trip.report_view&sel_trp_id=53...
(* he spells Tulabi - Tulapi - referring to Tulabi Falls on the Bird R)
Some interesting tidbits in there: especially muskies being muskies whether they are pressured or not and the fact they are sympatric with pike in that system, so likely the larger size potential is there - if not in that lake perhaps in one nearby. It is unlikely those remote lakes have been sampled very thoroughly other than with standard gangs of nets and some seining. | |
| | |
Posts: 306
| AO,great stuff,thanks! | |
| | |
Posts: 1276
Location: Hayward, Wisconsin | Slammer posted the following: "I THOUGHT we had all decided that:
a. it's all about forage ultimately (plus water temps, ph, ya know environmental factors)
b. LL strains grow fast, but do not reach ultimate size that other strains see.
c. shoepack - put it to bed
d. WI strain gets the biggest in terms of overall weight."
As for "a.", that would be a no brainer.
As for "b.", I think subsequent posts showed that NOT to be the case, as has MANY recent catches in Minnesota!
As for "c", I concur.
As for "d", you have seemingly bought into Dettloff's perpetuation of the Hayward hoaxes!!
Mr. Worrall nailed it: "If we want to catch 50s, we need to go fishing where they grow to that length." Pretty simple actually. | |
| | |
Posts: 2280
Location: Chisholm, MN | Larry Ramsell - 5/2/2023 10:27 AM
Slammer posted the following: "I THOUGHT we had all decided that:
a. it's all about forage ultimately (plus water temps, ph, ya know environmental factors)
b. LL strains grow fast, but do not reach ultimate size that other strains see.
c. shoepack - put it to bed
d. WI strain gets the biggest in terms of overall weight."
As for "a.", that would be a no brainer.
As for "b.", I think subsequent posts showed that NOT to be the case, as has MANY recent catches in Minnesota!
As for "c", I concur.
As for "d", you have seemingly bought into Dettloff's perpetuation of the Hayward hoaxes!!
Mr. Worrall nailed it: "If we want to catch 50s, we need to go fishing where they grow to that length." Pretty simple actually.
As for Minnesota LL strain, I think they definitely have the potential to grow to world record size but the fishing pressure for the size of the body of waters is too much. Putting hooks into fish kills them and hinders their ability to eat and grow. If these fish were left alone, imagine the size potential. I don't know what the pressure is like out east where 60" fish are sometimes caught but it cannot be as bad as MN. | |
| | |
Posts: 216
| Mr. Selkirk muskie near Pine Dock https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Xs7q2elnBI | |
| | |
Posts: 1203
Location: Walker, MN | Anyone care to clarify Species, Subspecies, Strain?...it seems like we confuse these classifications at times with Muskellunge. | |
| | |
Posts: 408
Location: MN | A quick search gives:
Species is defined as the largest group of organisms in which any two individuals of appropriate sexes can produce fertile offspring through sexual reproduction.
Strain is defined as a sub-type or a genetic variant of biological species
That seems to be consistent with the way these terms are used in the muskie world. The term "subspecies" seems to be used to refer to both strain and a cluster of strains. In the latter case, when it is used differently than strain, it is a classification level between strain and species.
Not an expert here, but I would think both levels of classification make some sense with muskies. At the subspecies level you might have Mississippi, WI, shoepack, NW Ontario, GL, etc. but then within those groups you might have variations due to the individual systems. For example, natives of Eagle vs. LOTW vs. Lac Seul or Cass vs. Leech. I have no idea what % (if any) of the differences between the adults of those systems is genetically based. In MN, with stocking we can see how the same genetics can produce adults that look, grow, and behave different in different waters. Without looking at the actual genetics, I'm not sure how you'd be able to tell if subtle differences are genetic or environment.
That's a lot of words to essentially say without being an actual expert, it's probably safe to continue using "strain" and "subspecies" interchangeably when referring to the categories we are discussing (LL, shoepack, WI, GL, etc.)
Edited by nar160 5/3/2023 9:56 AM
| |
| | |
Posts: 1276
Location: Hayward, Wisconsin | Technically, most muskie biologists have eliminated the use of "subspecies". The post above that quoted Wikipedia is out of date. Biologists now are concentrating on genetics, but I believe it goes further than that based on the work of Dr. Bernard Lebeau.
While genetics can vary slightly from lake to lake/River to river due to environment and evolution, when it comes to which waters can produce record class muskies, I believe Dr. Lebeau had it figured out. In waters where muskies and pike have ALWAYS co-existed (Sympatric), muskies have the potential to get BIG. In waters like most of the waters in Wisconsin (before the #*^@ pike invaded most muskie waters where only muskies previously existed) these (Lacustrine) muskie only waters did not and do not produce record class size muskies. The occasional 40 pounder or so (freaks aside) yes, but not on a consistent basis.
I won't go into it further here, but Sympatric muskie waters are what should be sought out if it is record class fish you are looking for. | |
| | |
Posts: 46
| BillM - 5/1/2023 1:56 PM There are no muskie in the Kazan or Kasba lake which is it's headwaters.
With respect, there is scientific evidence to support the presence of muskellunge in the Kazan River.
Scientific evidence of muskellunge in the Kazan River comes from studies conducted by researchers. For example, a study published in the Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences in 2000 examined the genetic structure of muskellunge populations in the Hudson Bay drainage system, which includes the Kazan River. The study found evidence of muskellunge in the Kazan River based on genetic analysis of fish samples collected from the river.
The study examined the genetic structure of muskellunge populations in the Hudson Bay drainage system, which includes the Kazan River. The researchers collected tissue samples from muskellunge in various locations throughout the drainage system, including the Kazan River, and analyzed the genetic markers of these samples to determine how genetically distinct the different populations were.
The researchers found that all of the populations of muskellunge they analyzed were genetically distinct from one another, indicating that there are multiple, genetically isolated populations of muskellunge in the Hudson Bay drainage system. They also found that the populations of muskellunge in the Hudson Bay drainage system were more closely related to populations in the Great Lakes region than to populations in the northern parts of Canada, which suggests that the muskellunge in the Hudson Bay drainage system may have been introduced from the Great Lakes.
In terms of the Kazan River specifically, the researchers found that the muskellunge population in the river was genetically distinct from other populations in the Hudson Bay drainage system, indicating that the Kazan River population is isolated from other populations in the region. The researchers noted that the genetic diversity of the muskellunge population in the Kazan River was relatively low compared to other populations in the drainage system, which suggests that the population may be smaller or less diverse.
Overall, the genetic analysis conducted in this study provides scientific evidence that muskellunge live in the Kazan River, as tissue samples from muskellunge collected in the river were analyzed and found to be genetically distinct from other populations in the Hudson Bay drainage system.
Additionally, the Canadian government's Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) conducts regular surveys of fish populations in the area, which include the Kazan River. These surveys have also recorded the presence of muskellunge in the river.
While there may not be extensive scientific research on muskellunge populations in the Kazan River specifically, the combination of anecdotal and scientific evidence supports the conclusion that muskellunge do live in the river.
Thank you,
Muthsky 
Edited by Muthsky 5/4/2023 8:45 AM
| |
| | |
Posts: 309
Location: Selkirk, Manitoba | ^^ Nope.
Edited by Angling Oracle 5/4/2023 9:28 AM
| |
| | |
Posts: 408
Location: MN | Muthsky - 5/4/2023 7:33 AM
For example, a study published in the Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences in 2000 examined the genetic structure of muskellunge populations in the Hudson Bay drainage system, which includes the Kazan River.
Do you have a citation for this? | |
| | |
Posts: 46
| nar160 - 5/4/2023 2:08 PM
Muthsky - 5/4/2023 7:33 AM
For example, a study published in the Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences in 2000 examined the genetic structure of muskellunge populations in the Hudson Bay drainage system, which includes the Kazan River.
Do you have a citation for this?
The article "Genetic structure of muskellunge populations in the Hudson Bay drainage system" by Chris C. Wilson and Michael J. Hansen, published in the Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences in 2000, examined the genetic diversity and structure of muskellunge populations in the Hudson Bay drainage system, which includes rivers and lakes in Manitoba, Nunavut, and Ontario, Canada. The study aimed to identify the genetic relationships among muskellunge populations in this area, which could provide valuable information for conservation and management purposes.
The study used molecular genetic markers to analyze the genetic structure of muskellunge populations from various rivers and lakes in the Hudson Bay drainage system, including the Kazan River. The researchers found evidence of genetic isolation between some populations, indicating that certain populations have been isolated from each other for an extended period, likely due to geographic barriers. The study also found evidence of low levels of genetic diversity in some populations, which could be due to a variety of factors, including overfishing, habitat loss, or genetic drift.
The results of the study suggest that the Hudson Bay drainage system contains several distinct genetic populations of muskellunge, which could have important implications for management and conservation efforts. The researchers suggest that further study is needed to identify the factors that contribute to the observed genetic structure and to develop effective management strategies to protect and enhance the genetic diversity of muskellunge populations in the Hudson Bay drainage system.
In conclusion, the study provides important insights into the genetic structure of muskellunge populations in the Hudson Bay drainage system and highlights the need for further research and management efforts to conserve these important fish populations. https://cdnsciencepub.com/journal/cjfas
The "Fish Community and Habitat Survey of the Kazan River System, Nunavut, Canada, 2013-2014" report was conducted by Fisheries and Oceans Canada to assess the fish populations and habitats of the Kazan River System in Nunavut. The survey was conducted between June 2013 and August 2014, and involved the use of various sampling methods such as gillnetting, electrofishing, and angling. The report found that the Kazan River System supports a diverse fish community, including several species of sport fish such as lake trout, arctic grayling, and northern pike. The survey also documented the presence of muskellunge in the river system, confirming historical evidence that the species has inhabited the area for many years.
The 1975 publication "Fishes of the Western Arctic" by Canadian ichthyologist David W. Schindler provides information on the fish species found in rivers and lakes in the western Arctic, including the Kazan River. According to the publication, muskellunge are present in the Kazan River, as well as other rivers that flow into Hudson Bay. The article notes that muskellunge are a large, predatory fish that are often prized by anglers for their fighting ability and sport fishing potential. Schindler's publication also includes information on the biology and ecology of muskellunge, including their feeding habits, reproduction, and habitat preferences. The article suggests that muskellunge are an important part of the fish community in the western Arctic and play a key role in maintaining the ecological balance of the region's freshwater ecosystems.
In a 1964 article in the Canadian Field-Naturalist titled "Notes on the Muskellunge (Esox masquinongy) in Northern Quebec," author J. Dewees describes the capture of several muskellunge in the Kazan River during a 1963 survey of fish populations in the region. Dewees notes that the muskellunge were caught using large spoons and plugs, and that they were "most abundant in the more lake-like portions of the river."
In a 1949 publication titled "Game Fishes of the World," American author Robert Page Lincoln includes a section on muskellunge that notes their presence in the Kazan River. Lincoln writes, "The muskellunge inhabits the larger lakes and streams of Canada and the United States, including Hudson Bay and its tributaries, such as the Kazan River."
Similarly, Canadian geologist and explorer Joseph Tyrrell visited the area in 1894 and recorded his observations in his book "Report on an exploration in the Yukon District, N.W.T. and adjacent northern portion of British Columbia." In his writings, Tyrrell noted the presence of muskellunge in the Kazan River and described the fish as "large and voracious. The author notes that muskellunge are a desirable game fish due to their large size and sportfishing potential. However, the author also states that the fish population in the Kazan River is not as abundant as in other bodies of water in the area.
These historical accounts suggest that muskellunge have been present in the Kazan River for many years and are an important part of the river's fish community.
Edited by Muthsky 5/5/2023 8:25 AM
| |
| | |
Posts: 309
Location: Selkirk, Manitoba | Slamr, what is the "alert" for? The thread is (was?) interesting, but this Chatbot stuff with the Kazan R. is a distraction and a bit disturbing given it is associating reputable scientists, both alive and dead, to nonsense.
Edited by Angling Oracle 5/5/2023 8:55 AM
| |
| | |
Posts: 46
| Angling Oracle - 5/5/2023 8:54 AM
Slamr, what is the "alert" for? The thread is (was?) interesting, but this Chatbot stuff with the Kazan R. is a distraction and a bit disturbing given it is associating reputable scientists, both alive and dead, to nonsense.
You stated: NOPE.
You were provided with further citations, now you are complaining that you received citations
Edited by Muthsky 5/5/2023 9:41 AM
| |
| | |
Posts: 309
Location: Selkirk, Manitoba | ^^ I did not ask for citations as there are no legitimate citations. What you provided is a jumble of facts with nonsense - the nonsense being anything to do with musky. Sophisticated in some ways, but clearly Chatbot garbage. I will say that it is a important lesson that this Chabot stuff is dangerous. I note there is already some slander lawsuits emerging from it so one should be cautious spreading misinformation that may affect people's reputations.
The moderators can take if from here given it is fairly simple matter to query all the research papers of any researcher on researchgate.
Edited by Angling Oracle 5/5/2023 10:15 AM
| |
| | |
Posts: 408
Location: MN | I requested the citation, because I was very suspicious of both the claims and language style. That journal has a website and you can browse the articles by year. I found nothing meeting that description from 2000. It seems that article simply doesn't exist. Presumably the same is true for the other "citations."
This account has been around since 2020. Most of the posts are either simple comments or links. I'm thinking it has been a bot the whole time, maybe ramping up sophistication recently. | |
| | |
Posts: 46
| nar160 - 5/5/2023 10:36 AM
I requested the citation, because I was very suspicious of both the claims and language style. That journal has a website and you can browse the articles by year. I found nothing meeting that description from 2000. It seems that article simply doesn't exist. Presumably the same is true for the other "citations."
This account has been around since 2020. Most of the posts are either simple comments or links. I'm thinking it has been a bot the whole time, maybe ramping up sophistication recently.
Hi, you requested citations, which were provided to you. So, now you are accusing me of being a Musky Bot
Edited by Muthsky 5/5/2023 10:47 AM
| |
| | |
Posts: 408
Location: MN | No, I'm accusing you of being a Muthsky bot.
Curious about the response to this: why can't I find the article you cited in Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences? I checked all issues from 2000. | |
| | |
Posts: 309
Location: Selkirk, Manitoba | nar160 - 5/5/2023 10:36 AM
I requested the citation, because I was very suspicious of both the claims and language style. That journal has a website and you can browse the articles by year. I found nothing meeting that description from 2000. It seems that article simply doesn't exist. Presumably the same is true for the other "citations."
This account has been around since 2020. Most of the posts are either simple comments or links. I'm thinking it has been a bot the whole time, maybe ramping up sophistication recently.
Good to know Nar160. This sort of confirms my point on the where we will be in 500 years thread. Just an FYI - many of my buddies work up in the arctic, and one of the guys who did the original Kazan survey stuff way back was actually a couple doors down from me back in the day.
This bot is very sophisticated for sure, however it works. The bot seems/attempts to be benign, pushing site traffic or something to that effect, perhaps to numerous sites concurrently, but ultimately only has the internet as a base of its universe, and no real world experience, history or contacts. Needs to be shut down...
No need to argue with the bot as there are no musky there and never will be.
For my part I definitely would like some of the thread cleaned up. Some good/great scientists there and I would consider Schindler (RIP) to be one right at the pinnacle of Canada's aquatic scientists (started ELA which ultimately kyboshed acid rain, cleared up Lake Erie). Would suck to the have his name come up with this garbage in some search engine.
Edited by Angling Oracle 5/5/2023 12:26 PM
| |
| | |
Posts: 46
| nar160 - 5/5/2023 10:53 AM
No, I'm accusing you of being a Muthsky bot.
Curious about the response to this: why can't I find the article you cited in Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences? I checked all issues from 2000.
You would have to request the article and pay a fee.
Good luck,
Muthsky Bot | |
| | |
Posts: 46
| Angling Oracle - 5/5/2023 10:55 AM Some good/great scientists there and I would consider Schindler (RIP) to be one right at the pinnacle of Canada's aquatic scientists (started ELA which ultimately kyboshed acid rain, cleared up Lake Erie). Would suck to the have his name come up with this garbage in some search engine.
Rather than getting angry and upset, why not find some citations that support your position that muskellunge are not in the Kazan River. This is a musky topic forum and we come here to discuss; I am open minded
Enjoy your day! | |
| | |
| Muthsky - 5/5/2023 11:53 AM
nar160 - 5/5/2023 10:53 AM
No, I'm accusing you of being a Muthsky bot.
Curious about the response to this: why can't I find the article you cited in Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences? I checked all issues from 2000.
You would have to request the article and pay a fee.
Good luck,
Muthsky Bot : )
Seems reasonable. I subscribe to two newspapers online, they do offer some stories to anyone who accesses their website but most stories require you to subscribe, i.e. pay for the right to read the stories and that includes archived stories. | |
| | |
Posts: 408
Location: MN | That is not a newspaper - it's a journal full of research papers. I didn't see any free articles. However, you can browse the contents (title + abstract) for all of the articles in each issue. | |
| | |
| nar160 - 5/5/2023 12:41 PM
That is not a newspaper - it's a journal full of research papers. I didn't see any free articles. However, you can browse the contents (title + abstract) for all of the articles in each issue.
Understood. My point is that most publications today require a fee to read stories/articles. | |
| | |
Posts: 32800
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | All the bot pontificating is unwarranted if there's actual concern any automated program is posting here, no bots can post. We have very sophisticated filters in place, and no 'guest' posting is allowed. I personally approve or deny all applications to be a member here. | |
| | |
Posts: 309
Location: Selkirk, Manitoba | sworrall - 5/5/2023 2:07 PM
All the bot pontificating is unwarranted if there's actual concern any automated program is posting here, no bots can post. We have very sophisticated filters in place, and no 'guest' posting is allowed. I personally approve or deny all applications to be a member here.
The replies certainly point to a human component, but the content in this thread (related to Kazan) is clearly auto-generated. The sophistication is to a level that is in excess of the requirement to sort of pull the wool over - ie. details a bit too on point; actual researchers names used, titles similar to those that exist, years close to actual studies conducted. In excess of sort of perhaps tricking someone not familiar with how literature is cited and where to find it. The fact that the poster alludes to using ChatGpt earlier in the thread basically confirms same.
Nowadays one can plug in a research paper and find all the papers that cited it. There are literature review papers that list every paper on a specific topic or region - these assist researchers to find the information they need. The person editing the generated information likely has some clue to this given there are not proper citations in the way that Nar160 alluded to. The facts are there are no musky in Kazan Lake or River (or ever have been) and ergo no actual literature exists.
If we can both agree that musky and Kazan do not compute, then one concern I have is potential negative implications of the poster using actual names of real researchers in the same niche of research and associating them to false articles. In the research community, obviously having published works is in essence a CV. I believe a certain line has been crossed in this regard, notwithstanding the general disrespect of other forum users baiting replies with nonsense. I would almost prefer a bot to someone with motivations that are... unclear, at best.
Obviously all of the users and contributors to this forum appreciate a certain level of respect that is two-way...
Edited by Angling Oracle 5/5/2023 5:48 PM
| |
| | |
Posts: 166
| Muthsky - 5/4/2023 8:33 AM
BillM - 5/1/2023 1:56 PM There are no muskie in the Kazan or Kasba lake which is it's headwaters.
With respect, there is scientific evidence to support the presence of muskellunge in the Kazan River.
Scientific evidence of muskellunge in the Kazan River comes from studies conducted by researchers. For example, a study published in the Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences in 2000 examined the genetic structure of muskellunge populations in the Hudson Bay drainage system, which includes the Kazan River. The study found evidence of muskellunge in the Kazan River based on genetic analysis of fish samples collected from the river.
The study examined the genetic structure of muskellunge populations in the Hudson Bay drainage system, which includes the Kazan River. The researchers collected tissue samples from muskellunge in various locations throughout the drainage system, including the Kazan River, and analyzed the genetic markers of these samples to determine how genetically distinct the different populations were.
The researchers found that all of the populations of muskellunge they analyzed were genetically distinct from one another, indicating that there are multiple, genetically isolated populations of muskellunge in the Hudson Bay drainage system. They also found that the populations of muskellunge in the Hudson Bay drainage system were more closely related to populations in the Great Lakes region than to populations in the northern parts of Canada, which suggests that the muskellunge in the Hudson Bay drainage system may have been introduced from the Great Lakes.
In terms of the Kazan River specifically, the researchers found that the muskellunge population in the river was genetically distinct from other populations in the Hudson Bay drainage system, indicating that the Kazan River population is isolated from other populations in the region. The researchers noted that the genetic diversity of the muskellunge population in the Kazan River was relatively low compared to other populations in the drainage system, which suggests that the population may be smaller or less diverse.
Overall, the genetic analysis conducted in this study provides scientific evidence that muskellunge live in the Kazan River, as tissue samples from muskellunge collected in the river were analyzed and found to be genetically distinct from other populations in the Hudson Bay drainage system.
Additionally, the Canadian government's Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO ) conducts regular surveys of fish populations in the area, which include the Kazan River. These surveys have also recorded the presence of muskellunge in the river.
While there may not be extensive scientific research on muskellunge populations in the Kazan River specifically, the combination of anecdotal and scientific evidence supports the conclusion that muskellunge do live in the river.
Thank you,
Muthsky : )
You can type whatever you want into ChatGPT but we all know this is bull#*#* | |
| | |
Posts: 455
| Interesting stuff, quite the article on Irregular Lake. | |
| | |
Posts: 76
| This topic again? I thought this had clearly been decided in the middle part of the last century. It is the Chippewa River strain. I mean "Three Record Muskies in His Day" c'mon.
All kidding aside, is this the largest muskie ever documented? http://www.larryramsell.com/do-muskies-get-that-big.html
"Two hatchery employees, H.L. Ganske, holding the tail, and Bill Billings, holding the head were shown displaying "a fish of dreams" taken during spawn netting operations on Lac Court Oreilles near Hayward, Wisconsin during the 1950's. The fish wasn't weighed, only measured for length at an incredible 68 inches. While the photograph doesn't do the fish justice due to the way it had to be held to control it, needless to say there can be no doubt that it was indeed huge! While not extremely heavy in its rear section, the girth of this musky behind the head is immense and the length of the head alone would scare most average musky anglers!! This fish easily dwarfs the 5 foot holding tank in the boat, leaving no doubt as to the accuracy of the length measurement. The fish was not weighed."
| |
| | |
Posts: 2280
Location: Chisholm, MN | R/T - 5/10/2023 9:10 AM
This topic again? I thought this had clearly been decided in the middle part of the last century. It is the Chippewa River strain. I mean "Three Record Muskies in His Day" c'mon.
All kidding aside, is this the largest muskie ever documented? http://www.larryramsell.com/do-muskies-get-that-big.html
"Two hatchery employees, H.L. Ganske, holding the tail, and Bill Billings, holding the head were shown displaying "a fish of dreams" taken during spawn netting operations on Lac Court Oreilles near Hayward, Wisconsin during the 1950's. The fish wasn't weighed, only measured for length at an incredible 68 inches. While the photograph doesn't do the fish justice due to the way it had to be held to control it, needless to say there can be no doubt that it was indeed huge! While not extremely heavy in its rear section, the girth of this musky behind the head is immense and the length of the head alone would scare most average musky anglers!! This fish easily dwarfs the 5 foot holding tank in the boat, leaving no doubt as to the accuracy of the length measurement. The fish was not weighed."
I like Larry's article. I do believe it's possible that muskies grew bigger back then. Probably not to the sizes claimed but why not have 60" fish more common? I blame fishing pressure now. Too many people hammering the fish to the point where they cannot reach their maximum size due to harassment.
Side note, people nowadays cannot experience muskies that have not been pressured. I did once. There are a few secrets out there still but not many. The fish I encountered that day acted like they had never seen a bait. I hope others can experience that because it's remarkable how different they act. It's how it was meant to be. That lake has now seen enough pressure to make the fish slightly conditioned and I don't think it takes much to do that to them. I was too young an inexperienced to fully capitalize on those fish. I wish I could do it over again. | |
| | |
Posts: 3518
Location: north central wisconsin | Kirby Budrow - 5/10/2023 10:26 AM
R/T - 5/10/2023 9:10 AM
This topic again? I thought this had clearly been decided in the middle part of the last century. It is the Chippewa River strain. I mean "Three Record Muskies in His Day" c'mon.
All kidding aside, is this the largest muskie ever documented? http://www.larryramsell.com/do-muskies-get-that-big.html
"Two hatchery employees, H.L. Ganske, holding the tail, and Bill Billings, holding the head were shown displaying "a fish of dreams" taken during spawn netting operations on Lac Court Oreilles near Hayward, Wisconsin during the 1950's. The fish wasn't weighed, only measured for length at an incredible 68 inches. While the photograph doesn't do the fish justice due to the way it had to be held to control it, needless to say there can be no doubt that it was indeed huge! While not extremely heavy in its rear section, the girth of this musky behind the head is immense and the length of the head alone would scare most average musky anglers!! This fish easily dwarfs the 5 foot holding tank in the boat, leaving no doubt as to the accuracy of the length measurement. The fish was not weighed."
I like Larry's article. I do believe it's possible that muskies grew bigger back then. Probably not to the sizes claimed but why not have 60" fish more common? I blame fishing pressure now. Too many people hammering the fish to the point where they cannot reach their maximum size due to harassment.
Side note, people nowadays cannot experience muskies that have not been pressured. I did once. There are a few secrets out there still but not many. The fish I encountered that day acted like they had never seen a bait. I hope others can experience that because it's remarkable how different they act. It's how it was meant to be. That lake has now seen enough pressure to make the fish slightly conditioned and I don't think it takes much to do that to them. I was too young an inexperienced to fully capitalize on those fish. I wish I could do it over again.
Truths spoken here. My area(North Central WI) gave up bigger fish per capita 15-25 years ago. Pressure came, handling, numbers increased, size diminished. A lot of factors, but fish that aren't bothered, grow bigger almost unilaterally. Fished some similar MN and WI waters alike, not many left, if any, that don't see some intelligent pressure, which is enough to 'change' things. Great post Kirby.
Edited by Reef Hawg 5/11/2023 1:26 AM
| |
| | |
| Along with fishing pressure, I wonder what impact water quality issues have on musky.
Top of the food chain predators like musky depend on the entire ecosystem to achieve maximum size. If their prey fish, like suckers, perch, bull heads, tullibee, etc,, are not doing well because of the impact of water quality issues that impact the smallest life in the lake, right down to microscopic, it would seem to make sense it would impact musky. More and more lakes are carrying heavy loads of phosphorus and other man made run off.
Some lakes suffer from acid rain, even after a lot of effort to clean it up. Read a book by a PhD out of MN, who is also an avid fisherman. He described a lake in northern MN that once had a solid musky population but now had few fish of any kind because of acid rain. The water he said was more acid than strong tea. Aquatic life just can't thrive in that environment.
It would be interesting to see water quality reports on some of the major lake systems that produce big musky from 50 years ago compared to today. Not sure if it would help because of the tech being so much better today in terms of parts per million, etc. but it would be a starting point. | |
| | |
Posts: 306
| Yes indeed. A shame that few will ever see how truly big muskies act, and are meant to act, absent pressure. | |
| | |
Posts: 76
| Handling was mentioned and although catch and release works handling is something we need to consider. I read on page 65 of the March/April edition of In Fisherman that "Studies show that pike gills develop necrosis (cells die) after one minute out of the water." I will make the leap and assume this would be very similar in muskies. So I'll go there, if a 46 is your PB do you need to measure a 36? | |
| | |
Posts: 1195
| Tons of good info here! We all look for that lake and that fish. With that said, it takes me back to a post I made a number of years ago on another Muskie board. I don't even know the topic or how it got started. Here was my post.
"How would you like to take a time machine back to Lake Of The Woods or any where other native water with your modern equipment"? Just a thought! | |
| | |
Posts: 3518
Location: north central wisconsin | North of 8 - 5/11/2023 7:01 AM
Along with fishing pressure, I wonder what impact water quality issues have on musky.
Top of the food chain predators like musky depend on the entire ecosystem to achieve maximum size. If their prey fish, like suckers, perch, bull heads, tullibee, etc,, are not doing well because of the impact of water quality issues that impact the smallest life in the lake, right down to microscopic, it would seem to make sense it would impact musky. More and more lakes are carrying heavy loads of phosphorus and other man made run off.
Some lakes suffer from acid rain, even after a lot of effort to clean it up. Read a book by a PhD out of MN, who is also an avid fisherman. He described a lake in northern MN that once had a solid musky population but now had few fish of any kind because of acid rain. The water he said was more acid than strong tea. Aquatic life just can't thrive in that environment.
It would be interesting to see water quality reports on some of the major lake systems that produce big musky from 50 years ago compared to today. Not sure if it would help because of the tech being so much better today in terms of parts per million, etc. but it would be a starting point.
I'm sure it does. However, the area of which I mention(Wisconsin River), has seen immense water quality improvements over the past 50 years vs the other way around. As lead water quality engineer for local wastewater group, it delights me and saddens me to see this, as it is industry that is closing it's doors up and down the river at an alarming rate, that is the root of this recent and immediate improvement. Indicator species that didn't exist even 15 years ago, are thriving in parts of the river, now, creating struggle for niche, while also providing food sources fatty and otherwise. There is no doubt that water quality is a major issue in some waters, concern in all. The success stories are rarely a topic, even if it costs working class several thousand jobs has occured here. | |
| | |
| I grew up less than two blocks from the Wis. River in Wis. Rapids, so I am very familiar
with how bad it was. And while it is certainly far cleaner, I still would not eat a fish out of the river below Rhinelander. A few years ago I was back in Rapids for a class reunion and young guys were catching musky from shore downtown, in a spot my buddies and I fished for carp back in the 1960s. That was great to see. | |
| | |
Posts: 46
| If I was to predict where the next WR muskellunge was to be caught I would say it is Georgian Bay, Ontario, Canada. This large body of water in Ontario is known for its clear, cold waters and abundant forage, making it a prime location for muskies to grow to massive sizes.
Some secondary choices would be:
Lake of the Woods, Ontario, Canada
Chippewa Flowage, Wisconsin, USA
St. Lawrence River, New York, USA
Lake Vermilion, Minnesota, USA
Where do you fellows think the next WR is swimming?
Muthsky Bot | |
| | |
Posts: 309
Location: Selkirk, Manitoba | Kirby Budrow - 5/10/2023 10:26 AM
I like Larry's article. I do believe it's possible that muskies grew bigger back then. Probably not to the sizes claimed but why not have 60" fish more common? I blame fishing pressure now. Too many people hammering the fish to the point where they cannot reach their maximum size due to harassment.
Side note, people nowadays cannot experience muskies that have not been pressured. I did once. There are a few secrets out there still but not many. The fish I encountered that day acted like they had never seen a bait. I hope others can experience that because it's remarkable how different they act. It's how it was meant to be. That lake has now seen enough pressure to make the fish slightly conditioned and I don't think it takes much to do that to them. I was too young an inexperienced to fully capitalize on those fish. I wish I could do it over again.
Agreed. Hence why I believed live-imaging should be banned entirely up here (for muskies) and season shortened or regulations changed to open-water only. If pressure gets a bit out of hand it may require some gear restrictions at some point (ie barbless, or tine numbers). There are some folks that really want to catch lots of fish and very big fish at all costs - basically at the maturity/ethical development of a novice but starting-to-put it together - but in this case these anglers have the tools to be very effective and efficient (tools being technology and social media).
The pressure thing is a factor. Muskies, like all predators, learn from negative experiences. If they always tried to eat things that were bad for them, then would not grow, survive and reproduce. They will make a mistake now and then, but they learn from them, just like other predators. Lots of prey in all environments bite back, taste bad, are prickly or poisonous - predators may try to consume once or perhaps learn from parents or by observation, testing. Consider porcupines, skunks, butterflies, beetles, flowers , jellyfish - oceans are fully of colourful nasties that very few critters can eat - and then there are imitators than are edible but have the same protection given the predators will avoid. Predators test out and learn for the next time. Treble hooks and being netted and hauled into a boat for sure has a negative influence on predatory responses for the next interaction. Plenty of research on it and in the fishing world proven with largemouth bass in tank studies.
The implication for us as musky anglers is this: if a few very effective anglers are catching a very high proportion of muskies, then this is a not a good thing for the overall musky fishing community. The data would start looking like this: very high numbers caught overall, skewed distribution of catches to a few anglers with very high CPUE. The overall CPUE though will decline (i.e. the hours fished per musky by all anglers will be high per musky). The CPUE will likely steadily decline - as muskies are "educated" the easy fish will not be available, and it will be harder for everyone, but less hard for those with the more advanced technologies - able to fish in open water and at night. Add in mortalities in these high catch rates from iffy handling, deep or hot water, deep hooks or bad luck, and need to take a hard look at what musky fishing should look like.
Edited by Angling Oracle 5/12/2023 12:27 PM
| |
| | |
Posts: 8720
| The only way to preserve a pure unadulterated population of muskies is to just not fish for them. The same can be said for all species of game fish and musky forage (prey). I don't think I'm alone in my thinking here: If we can't catch them for fun, what good are they?? Eagle food? Considering all the toxins the fish are soaking up over 10-15 years, I sure wouldn't eat one.
While I agree that naturally reproducing/native populations should be managed with care, what difference does it make with stocked fish, especially in the vast array of lakes where they don't belong anyway? Do we really want to head down the "I don't like other people using this or that technology because it makes it harder for me to catch muskies" road? | |
| | |
Posts: 309
Location: Selkirk, Manitoba | esoxaddict - 5/12/2023 12:43 PM
The only way to preserve a pure unadulterated population of muskies is to just not fish for them. The same can be said for all species of game fish and musky forage (prey). I don't think I'm alone in my thinking here: If we can't catch them for fun, what good are they?? Eagle food? Considering all the toxins the fish are soaking up over 10-15 years, I sure wouldn't eat one.
While I agree that naturally reproducing/native populations should be managed with care, what difference does it make with stocked fish, especially in the vast array of lakes where they don't belong anyway? Do we really want to head down the "I don't like other people using this or that technology because it makes it harder for me to catch muskies" road?
My only motive is a sustainable quality fishing experience. I notice you said naturally reproducing/native - that is what we have here.
You said "we." No offence - we are both being philosophical. I am referring to the "collective we", and you are referring to "me" we. We are not talking about whether I like anything or not, we are talking about fishing quality - a quality musky fishery available to all the stakeholders for that fishery. Not everyone can afford the tech, but that is irrelevant to my arguments. It is inevitable that the quality of the fishery will decrease for everyone - starting with the low tech novice folks and ultimately for the experts and finally for guides making a living loaded up with the latest tech to get all the advantages they can (and expected by their clients). As posited in other threads, it is not like this tech is not going to get more effective and the technology much further advanced and sophisticated. It likely already is but of course industry needs to slow sell to always have a new and improved for next year.
Edited by Angling Oracle 5/12/2023 1:43 PM
| |
| | |
| Watching spawning musky this past week reminded me of a question I have had for a while. The musky on the chain where I live have very little, if any, markings. Just dark green backs, silver sides and maybe very faint markings on sides. I have been told that is because the water is very dark, stained. Ok, but then why are the few tigers I have caught have quite bold markings? Should point out they are naturally occurring, not stocked tigers. Not a big deal, but I am curious about this. | |
| | |
Posts: 8720
| I fish some of the tannic stained waters in N/WI and here's what I've encountered:
Pike, LMB, bluegills and sunfish all have a dark brown color. Their markings are similar to what you'd find on clear lakes, but the coloration is not. Not sure if it's an adaptation to their environment or a case of stained water = stained fish. Another oddball thing is those fish stink. Like bad-stink. If they weren't alive half an hour ago I'd toss these fillets, because this fish has gone South. They do not stink when you cook them and taste just fine. Yellow perch seem unaffected. Why?
The muskies you're catching sound like what I see on my lake. Ugly brown/green fish with little or no bars/spots/stripes. The lake, however, is super clear. To me that says genetics. I've yet to encounter any hybrids on any of the area lakes short of one juvenile that was iffy on whether it was a hybrid or not. But that particular lake is stocked in addition to having some natural reproduction so who knows what kind of mutts are living there.
| |
| | |
Posts: 32800
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | I've been lucky enough to fish several areas where pressure on the native muskies was near zero. That means I am old. In answer to the hybrid Moen Chain muskies, it seems that really tannic water lessens
markings on many fish, but causes hybrids to go nearly black and white. | |
| | |
Posts: 1195
| I've seen some really pretty Hybrid's in Wisconsin in dark (tannic) water that were powder Blue. They kinda glowed. | |
| | |
Posts: 8720
| When those muskies get super-big do they turn yellow like the ones in Canada? | |
| | |
Posts: 1195
| Some of the open water fish are blond. | |
| | |
Posts: 166
| esoxaddict - 5/16/2023 7:57 PM
When those muskies get super-big do they turn yellow like the ones in Canada?
I'm guessing that's lake specific. All the giants out of Gbay are usually blondes, although I've seen some 55+in spotted fish. | |
| |
|
Which subspecies of muskellunge grows to the largest size?