|
|
| My question for you gentelmen is the Chippewa Flowage just not the trophy producer it use to be because of......
1) Being classified as a class A muskie lake.You can not motor troll legally and water is not near as easy to cover.
2) It is simply past it's prime and the pinacle of this water will never be met again because of the lake/river muskie gene or whatever you want to refer to as the moster fish it produced from 20 to 30 years after the flowage was made.
3)That just historicly people fished deeper like 20 to 30 feet deep.And now a days people fish in alot shallower water like most people fish in 15 @ the deepest.(and if you think that the big ones are not in 25+ ft then you should take up golf)
These are just the top 3 things that came to mind.
P.S. There is doubt in my mind that the Chip has plenty of world class muskie in it's water there is just to much water,forage, and good genes not to. | |
| | |
Posts: 103
Location: Miller time Wisconsin. | The big chip is over rated. Forget all that L. Spray stuff and his aleged 69# musky. The problem is the expectations for that body of water. Meaning expectations are, at times, too high. (see preasure)
If'n ya wanna look towards a trophy musky water, start lookin at Green bay or Minnesota.
Why the "anonymous" post? | |
| | |
Posts: 354
| This is an interesting set of ideas you touch on. First, I think it would help if you more clearly defined what your idea of trophy fishery might be. Are you talking numbers? Size or potential trophies? It seems like people want every one to be catching lots of large fish. Is this reality?
I checked the Indian Trials board for this past year and that resort alone had 7 30lb.+ fish registered this past season. That was just one resort and only what was reported. One fish was a couple ounces shy of 40lbs. Every year the Chip produces several very large fish. So is it numbers? Many people who have fished the Chip for many years will tell you that the Chip was never a numbers lake. Many of the old timers report that as well. If you want that try Wildcat in Vilas Co. or LOTW. I'm just suggesting that assumptions about what a place was like many years ago can be inaccurate. Don't mix up huge fish caught with images of it being action water.
So it seems people want their bodies of water to have lots and lots of fish. They also want there to be big, trophy fish. This way every one can catch one rather easily. This will make this whole experience better because....? The hunt in musky hunting is what makes this activity so special. Great fisheries are desirable and I see nothing wrong with improving them. I just wonder if people and their expectations are realistic. Each body of water is also unique. You cannot necessarily take one body and make it like another. That sounds ridiculous or obvious but you still see people suggesting it all the time.
I have fished the Chip only five times. It was a great experience. It is still a beautiful body of water that local citizens and the state of Wisc. have done a lot to protect. It is a real treasure. I hope that I haven't offended anyone. Just some thoughts
Bill C. aka the greenduck | |
| | |
Posts: 1046
| I have to agree with greenduck and to as I have said many times before, maybe some should be blaming the way they fish, instead of the water they pick! | |
| | |
Location: The Yahara Chain | The Chip is not a numbers lake, never has been. It does have a lot of big fish. It is a very complicated body of water, that I have enjoyed learning about. I make sure I fish it at least once every year. There is not a lot of pressure. I really enjoyed the "dead sea" talk in the mid '90's. There was no pressure. | |
| | |
| I have fished the Chip my entire life, and there are certainly very big fish in there, but few are caught. Some large fish that are caught (or speared) are not widely reported. It is a big body of water and somewhat hard to pattern. Right now MN gives you the best chance at a big fish other than Canada, but the Chip is still worth fishing. | |
| | |
Posts: 691
Location: nationwide | An interesting post to say the least, and while I will try to keep the reply short it is going to be difficult. First my disclaimer, I am by no means an expert on the flowage and do not even remotely claim to be, I also have no background in genetics or fisheries. But it is where most of my “on the water” time per year has been spent for the last 20 years, at about 1500+ hours per year and every year there are times I feel like it is my first time fishing it, but that is the nature of the beast in musky fishing, regardless of the body of water.
For the term “trophy” I am figuring this to mean overall weight of fish, not numbers, and the potential to grow large specimens.
Motor trolling: I believe if the Chip was open to trolling the numbers of large fish, over 30 pounds, would increase. I am talking about trolling the original lakes and river channels, or for the flowage what I would consider deep water which in reality is 18-28 feet deep. I believe it would give us better access to some larger fish that prefer to stay in the deeper water areas. Would it guarantee a world record fish . . . I really doubt it . . . . but I would think a trollers average size would be larger than a casters and my average size per year for the last 12 years is almost always between 39 and 42 inches.
Past it’s prime: Based off what I have read for research on California bass lakes where they give a lake “x” amount of years to peak, then stay at peak, then go into a decline I would have to say yes the flowage is past its’ prime. If there was a “super gene” out there have we diluted due to indiscriminate stocking, yes I believe we have but is it enough to decline the fishery for its’ trophy potential, not sure. Is there such a thing as a “super gene” or is it more of the “freak of nature” type of incident, not sure there either.
Fishing deeper: This is interesting because I believe with all the technology available today to go fishing we are actually fishing more pin point areas than used to be fished. Without depthfinders guides knew that a hump or flat or whatever they were fishing was there, but not to the exactness we do today. Therefore they often were fishing over deep water and did not even know it. They may have been onto something back then and just never knew it. I have backed off on how I start many areas because of this theory and at times it does put fish in the boat.
Over-rated: I believe there is a misconception about the flowage in that is it loaded with big fish, and it is easy to fish. But a lot of that comes from the tourism industry in general regardless of the area. Think of how many big fish you see from any lake or area, then think of all the people that fished there that season and all the “angler hours” put in. You are probably better off winning the lottery. Does the Chip use the world record as a marketing tool . . . . . yea you might say that . . . . is it wrong . . . not my call.
Forage: The flowage has literally tons and tons and tons of forage base. Does this help the angler . . . no . . . . does it help the trophy potential . .. I would think yes. I know I seem to get bigger with a lot of food around!!!!
Fishing pressure: At times there seems to be a lot. But if you are up there during the week it is not bad, and in the fall it can be pretty desolate. So it does get fished, and certain areas get fished very hard. Do I think the fishing pressure has effected the trophy potential . . . . .no. Do I think boating traffic and higher speed boats has effected the trophy potential . . . . no. I do believe the boating traffic has pushed fish deeper and off the bars . . . . .maybe. I say maybe because some of the bars get driven over all day long and there are still active fish there to be caught while people are driving over them.
The flowage has good years and bad, like every place else, and it is a tough body of water to learn and every year it changes so every year it’s like starting over in some respects.
Do I believe all of the catches, or stories of catches or near misses from the flowage . . . . . no way. Do I believe that Sprays’ fish was legit in length or weight . . . . . as much as I would like to think so . . . . no way, for any number of reasons. Was it a big fish? Sure. As big as claimed . . nah.
Do I believe there are 40 pound, 50 pound, 60 pound, over 60 pound fish in the flowage? On a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being a high confidence level. 40 pounders I say 10, 50 pounders I say 10, 60 pounders I say 3 and over 60 pounders I say 1/2. For quantities of those fish in the flowage I would say this, 40 pounders maybe 10, 50 pounders maybe 3, 60 pounders maybe 1 but doubtful, over 60 pounders . . . . kinda doubt it. And that is based off my belief that the fish just plain do not get that large on a regular basis. We know a male 30 pounder is just as rare as a female 40 pounder, maybe even more so. And if you figure half of the fish are males you just cut your chances in half for a trophy. Then you have to find it, and find it hungry, and get it to hit, and get hooks into it, and keeps hooks into it, and land it, all without an equipment failure too. And the chance of the stars and planets aligning for you to have this happen in your boat are a few decimal places to the right of the dot.
So much for keeping this short and there is a lot more that could be looked into but maybe another time.
Sorry for being long winded.
Corey Meyer
| |
| | |
| The Chip is special. I’d rather catch a 25 pounder there than a 50 incher in Canada. It’s a tougher lake to fish, but I enjoy the challenge. I have places on LOTW and the Chip and can go to either whenever I want. I usually end up spending more time on the Chip, it feels more like home to me. Call me crazy... | |
| | |
Posts: 59
Location: WI | I fish the Chip a couple of long weekends a year. It is a beautiful experience every year. Sunsets, scenery, wildlife, as well as the camaraderie of other musky fishermen. Every so often I even catch one as a bonus. A 50.5", 35# class fish once. I'm going back.
| |
| | |
| I must agree that the Chip is truly one of the most beautiful places to spend time. Can't wait for the warm weather... | |
| | |
| Hello:
Is the Big Chip overated? This depends on what you are looking for! Although I have only fished it a dozen times, I still rank it my first choice for trophy muskie water. It has unlimited structure and the fishing pressure has never been a problem for me. There are way too many excellent spots to try - just not enough time. Are there big fish in the Chip? You bet. Is it a numbers lake? "No" However, considering the quality of the fishery, the solitude is there if you want to find it, and big fish opportunities, I will be back every chance I have to try for that 40-50 pound muskie. If you want to increase your chances on the Chip, hire a guide. They spend untold numbers of hours on this lake and can greatly increase your knowledge of the lake and a chance for a trophy fish.
As Always,
Dennis Draker | |
| | |
Posts: 532
Location: Chicago, IL | I would have to agree with the above posts, the Chip is definately a special place and it has some huge fish in it, definately not a numbers lake but just an amazing fishery. The history of the Chip is just unreal and I do have to agree with the above post on saying that I would rather catch a 25lb. out of the Chip vs. a 50" in Canada. Not saying anything against Canada at all, but when you have a true appreciation of the Chip it's hard to match that feeling of accomplishment of a nice catch. It's always changing and to me part of fishing for this species is the challenge and then the reward of success. But to say over rated is not a good explanation of any fishery of muskies no matter how many numbers and how many big fish are caught. It's all opinion. It is truly hard to match that feeling of being out on that water. Obviously I love the Chip, but being fair to all fisheries there is no such thing as overrated. | |
| | |
Posts: 620
Location: Seymour, WI | Can anyone that knows the history of the Chip talk about how they think the introduction of N Pike has changed the flowage?
I've only been fishing the flowage for about 10 yrs so I didn't know it before it had pike in it. But my Dad says there were no pike in there 20 yrs ago. When I fish it now I catch lots of pike. Have the pike changed the musky fishery for the worse?
Grass, | |
| | |
Posts: 532
Location: Chicago, IL | Grass,
The best explanation I have heard to explain the affect of Northen Pike on the Chip is that its the best excuse for a bad day of fishing. As far as I look at it (and I'm sure some of the other posters can give a better explanation), they co-exist in so many lakes, yes it was a mistake when they stocked them but those pike are also forage and I have seen some gorgeous Tigers come out of the Chip. Not a problem as far as I'm concerned, it's just an old timer complaint. | |
| | |
| I have sort of a love-hate relationship with the Chip. Early in the season, I have to learn the whole lake over again. The baitfish are relating to different areas, the weeds are strong in areas they weren't even in the year before, and the ice could have removed some structure itself. It usually takes a couple weeks to get the whole scheme of things down. This is where it's tough for the average person to come up to the Chip and consistantly produce fish.
Is it a trophy lake? Every year I see a fish over 50 pounds and usually boat at least one in the upper thirty to forty pound range. Does that make it a trophy lake? I would think so, but that's up to the angler asking the question.
Is it an action lake? Most definitley. I've had weeks where we've caught 20 fish or better. It happened to us in '04. But, it doesn't happen all season long. The fish seem to be affected by cold springs more than some of the natural lakes that I fish.
It's a timing game any time you are on the Chip. Time of year, time of day, it all adds up. I love the lake, but I can see why people get frustrated with it. I have the luxury of being on the lake enough to get patterns down where I don't get frustrated.
Ty | |
| | |
Location: The Yahara Chain | Ty, what is the largest fish you have scene on the Flowage?
What is the biggest fish you have lost on the Flowage?
I love fishing up there, I just don't get to do it very often anymore.
I have scene a couple fish that I would estimate at 45-50lbs.
Troy Schoonover/Bytor | |
| | |
Posts: 5
Location: Belleville, WI | Beautiful place.
| |
| | |
Posts: 3518
Location: north central wisconsin | mmeyer, great post! | |
| |
|
The Big Chip