|
|
| I keep reading articles that Mille Lacs has pasted its prime. In-Fisherman presented an article that stated Mille Lacs was past its prime and Rob Kimm ( a well repsected musky fisherman) keeps saying that Mille Lacs peaked in 1998. These articles make it sound like the only fish swimming in Mille Lacs are 55" fish and soon they will die from old age, and with poor natural reporduction this lake is on the downfall. I got to thinking about this topic and the fish I boated this year from the lake and wonder how this lake is on the downfall when the majority of the fish boated are between 42" - 48"? Of course, you are only going to hear about the monster fish, because mid-40" fish are so common, but my feeling is that this lake is still loaded up with mid-40" fish that are going to grow up someday to be monsters, and if the majority of the population is mid-40", how is this lake on the downfall? Am I wrong to think that the vast population of Mille Lacs muskies are in the mid-40" range? If I am wrong, you all need to tell me your locations where all the fish are 50" and bigger... Am I missing something here??? Also if this lake truely is on the "downfall" is the DNR doing something to assure that this lake remains a world class fishery for muskies? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 3147
| I get to attend alot of muskie functions in the state and get to hear some very inteligent people,,,quite a few predict there could be a second and third generation fall off in Minnesota stocked lakes has far has quality size fish based on 'ideal size' forage,,when the first generation fish get stocked they get to gorge on all the prefered species and prefered size and they grow fast and big,,I dont know that were not seeing a size fall off in a couple metro lakes now, these lakes were jam full of bullheads and now we hardly ever see them anymore,,You would think that the ciscoe based lakes like mille lacs would be affected less,,ciscoes,world class smallmouths,carp, perch,,Mille lacs has alot of large size forage to keep the quality
Edited by happy hooker 6/6/2007 8:36 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1243
Location: Musky Tackle Online, MN | Rob’s assessment that Mille Lacs peaked in 1998 is based on the total number of fish in the lake, not in the size of the fish. I think in terms of size we’re seeing that peak right now or maybe a year or two ago.
In terms of seeing a major downfall…I saw some numbers recently that if accurate, were amazing. But at the same time, it’s the reason for the concern of the lake seeing a major downfall. But don’t be mistaken, I’m sure Mille Lacs will always be a phenomenal musky fishery. But what we’re seeing in recent years is not something that will continue.
The most telling statistic that I’ve seen is that there are more female muskies in Mille Lacs OVER 49” than under right now. This is almost hard to believe. I don’t know if it’s more amazing that there are that many big fish out there or that there are that FEW small females. But if this is the case, this is clearly the reason for concern. With all of these 40” to 48” people are seeing, what if 90% to 95% of them are males? Even though there might be good numbers of those fish, that doesn’t do much for natural reproduction if that’s the case.
Aaron |
|
| |
|
| AWH,
Thanks fr the input... I could be completely wrong, as I am not a biologist, but it was my understanding that males basically do not grow past 42"... Like I said, I don't know where I aquired that information or if it is accurate.. If it is the case, I have seen alot of mid-40" females...
One more question, if the concern is the forage, is there a reason the DNR does not stock tulibees?? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1243
Location: Musky Tackle Online, MN | Males definitely get bigger. From my understanding, upper 40s is where males will typically top out at. But it's not unheard of to have one over 50", just not common. They aren't going to reach the upper 40s nearly as quick as a female the same age. Like you, I'm no biologist. I'm just going off of what I've heard over the years.
Our MI chapter has helped the DNR with spring netting the past number of years. Last year we were on a lake where they netted a 48" male. This is a lake that has had muskies less than 20 years. Definitely a very big male, but not unheard of.
The DNR has been asked the question about stocking tulibees and other forage. Basically, their response was that they just won't do it. I don't want to take their words out of context to the reasoning they gave. But I believe it had to do a lot with the financial feasibility of the whole thing. Although they HAVE stocked tulibees in two lakes that I know of in the last 5 years or so.
Aaron |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1243
Location: Musky Tackle Online, MN | A major thing to take into consideration with Mille Lacs and its musky fishery is the stocking history. Looking at this makes the picture a lot clearer when it comes to looking at the peak of this fishery and the decline that we will see. Again, a decline doesn’t mean a poor fishery. But just not what it is today.
When the musky stocking program first began on Mille Lacs they were pumping a lot of fish in there on an annual basis. It then went to an every other year rotation. In the last 10 years it has only been stocked in 1997, 1999, 2004 and 2006. And the numbers stocked in these years is considerably less than it was when they were stocking it annually.
Aaron
Edited by AWH 6/6/2007 10:36 AM
|
|
| |
|
|
Size distribution on a lot of the newer lakes in MN is definately changing.
There are many more large fish, and fewer smaller ones 40" or less, netted every year for the past 5 years on two particular lakes in my area.
Hooker is right on with his forage base thoughts. Another part of this is with all the larger predators from the intial stockings, futre small stocked muskies are a great forage base. Most of these lakes are now at reduced stocking rates as well as they get beyond the 1st 10 years.
Eventually the population distributions should even out, and become more typical of a natural lake, but in the not so distant future, when many of these big fish die off, there could be a few years of noticably different fishing.
JS |
|
| |
|
Posts: 136
| I think the best is yet to come. What about the 58 incher caught last year?
There are 60 inchers in there. Just wait until we start seeing the fish caught this year. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1245
Location: Madtown, WI | So what your saying, is after the lake "equilibrates" from the initial stocking, growning large etc on prime forage...that the smaller/metro lakes just might fall into a more typical size structure....same similar to WI
Cory |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1243
Location: Musky Tackle Online, MN | C.Painter - 6/6/2007 11:31 AM
So what your saying, is after the lake "equilibrates" from the initial stocking, growning large etc on prime forage...that the smaller/metro lakes just might fall into a more typical size structure....same similar to WI
Cory
You got it Cory, everyone can just go back to fishing WI waters. That's what MN is going to turn into!
Aaron |
|
| |
|
Posts: 3147
| feeder creeks an asset in the metro- keep that bullhead supply going |
|
| |
|
| If Mille Lacs is past it's prime...then why did all the top guides catch their personal best last year....
It is NOT past it's prime...it is PRIME TIME right now!!! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 215
Location: Twin Cities | Just curious, who caught the 58 incher off mille lacs last year, and is there a pick anywhere???
Edited by The Dogger 6/6/2007 2:37 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | this subject came up in the boat last night and although i don't have a ton of experience on mille lac i have caught some nice mid-sized (hard to say that phrase but it's true) ... fish that were at 44-46" length with lots of belly suggesting they would continue to grow. the predation and top of the chain for so long argument for the true horses being caught makes some sense, but to me catching the mid-forties fish and then seeing the volume of feed makes me think too that it's at it's prime and capable of sustaining it for years to come ...
i look forward to the 3 - 5 days a year i get to fish there as much as anything and sure hope that people continue to treat it well. |
|
| |
|
| NO WAY, just look at the number of 50s caught by guides and their clients, mid 30s for one, mid 20s for several others. It is hard to know when these muskies will max out in terms of size for a few more years. |
|
| |
|
|
Nobody is saying Mille Lacs doesn't have big fish in it right now, or that it won't next year.
But 5-10 years from now, the % of big fish of the total population will be much lower than it is at this time.
At least the is the situation predicted by biologists I've talked to.
Doesn't mean there won't be any big fish, but they will be tougher to come by.
JS |
|
| |
|
| MuskyBoy and others, you appear to be missing the point. The point is that there aren't enough little fish to replace the big fish that are making the news today. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32880
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | I believe Mr. Skarie is again 'point on'. |
|
| |
|
| that is the point i got out of all this ....less numbers of big fish....so what is the MN DNR's plan for the future ? Stock more? |
|
| |
|
|
I don't think stocking more is in the plan. This is a natural phenomenon, intial stockings can be very, very successful, with fast growing fish and high survival rates.
Keep in mind, these fish weren't pressured in the late 80's and early 90's, virtual no delayed mortality or intentional killings.
A stocked population will peak, and then usually has a "crash" of some sorts, doesn't mean muskies will be gone, or that it won't always be a good fishery, but what we are seeing now is probably as good as it will ever be.
The DNR knows this happens from the get-go, they expect it. Eventually Mille Lacs will have a population distribution that will be more like Leech, or Cass if everything goes well in the future.
JS
|
|
| |
|
Location: The Yahara Chain | I started a thread similar to this on a different board last year. I believe that Mille Lacs is the premier trophy musky lake in the world, right now. I believe that the lake will crash when all of these big old fish die. The numbers being stocked now are extremely low. The MDNR website shows the stocking records from 1998-2005. In 1999, 3,393 fingerlings were stocked and in 2004, 3000 fingerlings were stocked. 6,393 fish for over 100,000 acres in an eight year period. Figuring in at least a 80% mortality rate for those fingerlings, that leaves about 1,278 fish from an eight year period.
http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/showreport.html?downum=48000200
The NR appears to be low. On the MDNR website they mention that they were going to study the NR levels in the lake during the 2006 season. Does anybody know if this study took place and what the results were... Mr. Skarie or anybody else who has a pulse on the situation???
Don't fool yourself and think all of these mid 40" fish that are getting caught are females and are going to get to 50 plus inches. The majority of them are probably males and are probably already near their maximum size. Directly from the MDNR website they state that males peak out at 45"-49".
I don't think that Minnesota should worry about creating new musky waters, they should focus on trying to maintain what they have.Unless the NR is high on the stocked lakes the whole program is in dire straits. Enjoy the fishing now because there will be a drastic drop off in the near future.
Edited by Bytor 6/7/2007 11:11 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 79
| Last winter I got a survey from the U of M about musky fishing. I filled it out IMO I think we need more musky lakes what we have now is around 80 or so not sure could be wrong. Anyway I think they were trying to figure out how many musky fisher persons are out fishing musky..So we can get more funding to stock more lakes and keep the ones up to Par ..... Don't you think musky waters in MN are already crowded it sure would be nice to add some more and maintain the others. that is we all should join your local Musky inc chapter to raise money to maintain these lakes...... IMO |
|
| |
|
| So lets say a person would really like to keep Mille Lacs as an awsome lake, and from the sounds of it, many people would be willing to donate into stocking efforts. It doesn't sound like the DNR is going to be doing much stocking, can someone coordinate donations for stocking efforts? Do you need permission from the DNR ( I am assuming you do as moving a rock from the shoreline seems to get the DNR fired up on that lake).. I know groups do this type of activity on White Bear, how do we get it going on Mille Lacs?? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 79
| Well I do believe there is a Brainerd Club Maybe some of them guys would start something up and we all could help out maybe a raffle of some sort or maybe everytime there are tourneys for musky a % of the entry fees should go towards the lake stocking NOW these are just some ideas not to get anybody hot and bother..... but it is what we like doing so why not contribute back IMO |
|
| |
|
Posts: 136
| Join Muskie Inc. Volunteerism is the American way to make change. MI deserves a lot of credit for the state of Muskie fishing in MN. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 79
| Yes I agree M.I. is good when your organized you can get allot accomplished .. DNR is all politics .. If you work with them it is allot easier to get things done rather than blaming them.. I am no tree hugger I understand the frustration of how slow things move because you have to study this and ask the lake association blah blah blah... but those are the steps we just have to do IMO again |
|
| |
|
|
A change in the muskie population in Mille Lacs does not mean the sky is falling.
Mille Lacs will always have big muskies, and always be a good lake pending nothing "wierd" happens.
Increasing stocking won't make Mille Lacs a haven for huge muskies like it has been, those circumstances that lead to what is now cannot be duplicated again.
All lakes cycle, even natural ones. Take the good with the bad, there are always lakes on the up, and some on the down, just have to fine the right ones at the right time.
JS |
|
| |
|
Posts: 714
Location: Rhinelander, WI | The sky is not falling for sure the lake will balance, but does it have to? With the goal of the majority of musky fishermen to be large 50”+ fish are there things that can be done to help artificially keep the average size up. Assuming the lake can handle the biomass. Mille Lacs is not the only lake that could be currently going though this process. There was lots of musky stocking in the late 80s and though the 90s on many Mn and Wi musky waters, what does the future hold for these lakes, as far as trophy fish go? Not all these lakes where initial stockings many where supplemental.
This post got me thinking of a topic I started on the Research Page last year. I resurrected that thread with some newer thought. May be of interest as it relates to this topic.
http://muskie.outdoorsfirst.com/board/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=24...
Nail A Pig!
Mike
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 3147
| Our TC chapter along with Paul hartman stock whitebear and get the permits,,,However the DNR normally dosent let you stock and exceed lakes that have met their yearly/biyearly stocking quota wanting to stay witin that 1 per litorial acre trophy managed stance ,, Also they dont really want to see stocking on lakes with known Natural repo,,Weve really tried hard to get some fish stocked in 'Big Winnie' but dnr dosent want to mess with the natural repo,,,I think Mille lacs gets its stocking quota |
|
| |
|
Posts: 734
Location: Watertown, MN | Just send your check to Me. The Twin cities has a separate fund that is just for fish stocking, money donated to the Stocking Fund goes for just stocking fish and maintaining our nets for pulling our ponds. None of those funds go into other activites. John Newman leads that committee. We are currently holding a boat raffle right now that all profit goes directly to fish stocking.
We stock fish were the DNR allows, the have set stocking criteria and we help supplement any short coming. Most of our fish have gone to the White Bear and Tonka, both great fisheries. Also yes we are working on more water but that is a game of politics and we are pressing forward. Thanks to the people who called the DNR a few week ago on the post about Pokegama, look like things could move forward on the lake, we will wait and see.
Mill Lacs, several years ago was a phenom, yes still tons of big fish, but the lake was called the Aquarium, if you didn't see 20 fish it was a slow day. Talk to some of the people who fished it early, I have heard of some 20 fish days. what! yes 20 fish days. The lake is maturing due to pressure and increased size structure on the lake, and the fishery will depend on the ciscoes and how they faired last summer, massive die off, DNR does not know the impact that could lead to. Will wait and see what happens, the DNR are on top of things and are working to a plan and so far they have been doing a good job.
Troyz
|
|
| |
|
| If it needs stocking support, we'll see what we can do if the MDNR allows |
|
| |
|
| Hiya -
Whether or not Mille Lacs has 'peaked' depends on which peak you're talking about. I don't have the copy in front of me, but I'm pretty sure the quote from Tom Jones (the Large Lake Specialist) was something like "In terms of overall population [emphasis mine] the population has already peaked." He said 1998 was probably the peak year. In other words - there are less muskies in Mille Lacs now than there were in 1998... Hard to argue that based on the DNR's survey data. In terms of ultimate size and age, it may be peaking, or may not... That's a far more debatable question. Ultimate size and age can vary dramatically from system to system (see "Growth and Ultimate Length of Muskellunge from Ontario Water Bodies," Cassleman, Robinson and Crossman). Even within the potential range of maximum size, there are always outliers - fish that exceed (or conversely, fail to reach) the theoretical average ultimate size. The average American male is 5'10" tall - but there are still 5'2" guys - and 7 footers - walking around. With the huge initial stockings Mille Lacs received, the odds are better that those fish may appear in the population as they reach their ultimate size and age, siomply because there are more fish there in the first place... But again, who knows what the ultimate size and age are on Mille Lacs? As far as the long term population goes, I do think John Skarie (he and I have talked about this a number of times, and seen it on other bodies of water) and Aaron are right when they suggests that stocked waters go through a predictable cycle of peak and decline before settling into a fairly stable fishery. That may happen with Mille Lacs, or may not. It's such a unique body of water in so many respects that predicting what it will do is pretty sketchy. What is certain is this: stocking levels have been lower since the initial stocking of the lake. That's typical for a muskie introduction in MN - annual stocking for 5 years, then switching to every other year. In addition, the DNR introduced a gap in the stocking sequence (skipped a scheduled stocking, so no fish were stocked for 3 years) to create a year class gap that will help them assess the level of natural reproduction in the lake. Knowing that will help them determine stocking levels going forward. One thing Tom Jones was pretty clear on - maintaining the population in Mille Lacs at its peak level isn't a realistic goal. It's still going to be a good, trophy fishery, but there won't be as many fish as there have been. Long story short - has Mille Lacs peaked? Yes, and maybe not. Yes in terms of overall population numbers, perhaps not (likely not, IMHO) in terms of growth. Cheers, Rob Kimm |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2089
| "Prides of Muskies"- Ron Lindner |
|
| |
|
Posts: 906
Location: Warroad, Mn | All fisheries come and go depending on a multitude of environmental factors. No doubt Mille Lac and most lakes will go through these cycles, both stocked and from natural reproduction.
I don't know anything about Mille Lac, but it sounds like the next few years will be very good for very large fish given the large number of big female fish in the population
Doug Johnson |
|
| |
Mille Lacs past its prime??