|
|
Posts: 82
| Ever fish the longest stretch of free-flowing river in the Midwest for muskies?
A few weeks ago two big fish were caught back to back a 45" and 47" by a walleye fishermam, the first released and the second kept and in its stomach a 17" redhorse. I have fished this stretch of river for 20 years and absolutely love the scenery, limited pressure (canoes on weekends) and trophy potential that exists but have never fished for muskies. The past 5 years, particularly at Sauk and Prairie Du Chien, reported musky catches have been on the rise and anglers targeting them more, these two areas notably due to accessibilty and limited hazards on the water. From the last dam at Prairie du Sac to its confluence with the Mississippi River at Prairie du Chien, the Wisconsin River free-flows a total of 92.3 miles, only problem is 85 of those miles are shallow sand and rock laiden water that poses challenges to the angler and props as water depths average 3 feet. Given the forage available could this stretch of river produce the "one"?? We catch huge northerns in the winter in the backwater and sloughs of this stretch of water that inspired Frank Lloyd Wright, I am inspired to catch that 60 incher that has traveled from Vilas Cty. to make its home here. Is it possible?? | |
| | |
Posts: 3518
Location: north central wisconsin | There are no doubt, fish down there. It should only get better witht he stocking taking place on flowages to the north such as Lake WI and others even further north. Being as free flowing as it is, there should be some decent natural reproduction in that area too. | |
| | |
Posts: 1168
| Reef Hawg sums it up nicely. Some good potential, and fish throughout the system but they need to be protected. Having a size increase put in place on some stretches recently is a huge huge plus. The WI River truly is an amazing thing...not just for skis but for nearly everything else...carp, catfish, etc. Absolutely amazing considering how bad the water quality was just a short time ago. | |
| | |
Posts: 82
| Jason, has there been much effort to push for a larger size limit below Castle Rock? I believe the minimum is 34 after Castle Rock all the way to the Mississippi. Efforts to protect the northern is evident with the 32" minimum as well as all the walleye research?? What strikes me as interesting is for the past 10 years the lower wisconsin riverway has imposed different species limits than waters north of Sauk, most notably walleyes 18" minimum, catfish seasonal limits, and to my knowledge standard state musky limit. I know the walleye limit has its share of advocates and opponents and the past few years spring hearings have been heated in debate with opponents wanting evidence of the limit success.
It is encouraging you think fish in this stretch are naturally reproducing, since they have got the hard part down (reproduction) we ought to advocate the size limit as you and others successfully implemented on points of the river north. It only makes sense to be proactive and consistent with this great stretch of water, with the forage base and miles to roam these will be, are, huge. | |
| | |
Posts: 3518
Location: north central wisconsin | I agree that one needs to be proactive with it, though I am neither familiar enough with the fishery there, the bilogy of it, or the pressure and or catch a kill ratio of any existing fish. My hunch is that a higher size limit would help the fish that are there get bigger than they would now, and that protecting them now would be better than trying to make repairs in the future. That said, there are probably plenty of people that don't want a target on certain stretches of water, that size limits inevitably bring. I respect that too. I'd like to hear from someone more familiar with the population down there, and would be willing to help study it further if needed as well. Good luck! | |
| |
|
Lower Wisconsin River